Second Presidential Debate

[AGDee]

Originally Posted by UGAalum94

Well, except that wealth may be different than having a high earned income for a short number of years.

I like to think that if we earned 250,000 or more, my husband and I would accumulate real wealth, but I think it would take a while. (First get out of debt. . .)

Who is richer? (For that matter, who is richer: John McCain married to Cindy or the Obama's pre-book deal? Looking at income only tells one story.)

Any tax based on income ignores this difference in accumulated wealth.

That's very true. I'm ALL FOR taxing us on our net worth since I still owe more on my house than all of my assets put together My net worth is negative.

I guess we also have to consider that there are people who have essentially no income but lots of assets.

[UGAalum94]

Originally Posted by AGDee

That's very true. I'm ALL FOR taxing us on our net worth since I still owe more on my house than all of my assets put together My net worth is negative.

I guess we also have to consider that there are people who have essentially no income but lots of assets.

I have complicated feelings about if and how we ought to tax actual wealth, but focusing on income isn't really the whole picture.