← All arguments

Against a wealth tax economic

Living standards are at an all-time high

Living standards have never been better in human history, so there is no need to raise any taxes — including a wealth tax — at all.

The counter

Spending rises as living standards fall Even granting that spending is too high, decades of austerity have not stopped living standards and incomes from falling; as wages drop and asset prices rise, spending must increase to keep people from hardship. Spending falls durably only by reducing the need for support — enabling home ownership, affordable essentials, secure families, and debt-free education — which is an investment in society.
Copy-paste rebuttal Drop a sourced reply where this argument shows up

Reddit / long form

You're making the "Living standards are at an all-time high" argument against a wealth tax — but the data says the opposite. The IFS finds median real household income rose just 6% from 2009–10 to 2022–23, about a fifth of the long-run trend, the worst period for income growth in generations. NIESR finds real disposable income growth collapsed from 2.6% a year to 0.6% since 2008, leaving households nearly £2,000 a year poorer than the pre-crisis trend. Living standards aren't at a high — they're stagnating while wealth concentrates at the top, which is exactly what a wealth tax addresses.

Learn more: https://wealthtax.now/arguments/living-standards-high/

X / Bluesky / short form

You're making the "Living standards are at an all-time high" argument against a wealth tax. The IFS finds the worst income growth in generations and NIESR finds households ~£2,000/yr poorer than trend — standards are stagnating. https://wealthtax.now/arguments/living-standards-high/

Backed by

Where it's been said