Rewards productive investment
A recurring charge on passive holdings nudges capital out of speculation and idle assets and into the productive economy.
- 6 sources
- 1 person
- 1 evidence
The case for taxing wealth, argument by argument.
A recurring charge on passive holdings nudges capital out of speculation and idle assets and into the productive economy.
Britain's wealth boom is not the reward for saving and enterprise. UK household wealth jumped from around three times national income in 1980 to roughly seven times by 2019, and the majority — about 53% of the rise since the early 2010s — came from passive gains such as rising house prices, not from active saving or investment. A recurring charge on these idle, unearned windfalls can't discourage enterprise that didn't create them; it targets exactly the speculative, untaxed gains that crowd workers off the wealth ladder.
“there's not a lot of places in the world other than sort of the football pitch where a kid like me from nowhere can come in and compete with all of these multi-”
“I want people who work hard to make money. Unequal societies are not meritocracy. They are societies in which people from rich families get all the assets.”
“rich people very rich families would know that they can't simply sit on huge amounts of wealth and grow it over time they have to sell that which means that wea”
“once rich people have a lot of cash they can invest that … they will speculate, do all those things, and that money will then return more money to them”
“someone who makes a living from developing properties you know doing them up and then selling them at a profit what is that doing to the market”
“I don't think it's right me just sitting here making money on the world being terrible”