Hacker News Reader

Comment by idbehold | Hacker News Reader

Not really. Go look at the tax-rates of the 1950's. The only way he was able to acquire that much money was because of the infrastructure paid for by tax revenue. The only reason he wasn't robbed by someone else was because of the law enforcement paid for by tax revenue. I could go on, but I think you get the point. His wealth is built upon the shoulders of tax revenue.

View on HN

After you look at the tax rates of the 1950's, go look at the tax code. The nominal rates were higher, but there were many more ways to shelter your money.

In 1958, the top 3% of taxpayers earned 14.7% of all adjusted gross income and paid 29.2% of all federal income taxes. In 2010, the top 3% earned 27.2% of adjusted gross income and their share of all federal taxes rose proportionally, to 51%

https://www.wsj.com/articles/SB10001424127887324705104578151...

Worth noting that he'd likely have netted about the same in the 1950s. Despite the constant assertions of those who fondly reminisce about the days of 90%+ income tax rates, there were so many more deductions that it all basically came out the same, while disincentivizing the outright hiding of wealth.

Moreover, the law enforcement that prevents him from being robbed is paid for by tax revenue, but not federal tax revenue, and the amount he's paid is in addition to the $593 million he paid in income tax (assuming that doesn't account for state income tax - the actual article isn't available for me to read right now due to server load).

FBI? Also, who mentioned federal tax revenue or income tax? It wasn't me.

I'm not sure I understand the point. Are you asserting that the FBI is keeping muggers and highwaymen away from Elon Musk's money?

Edit, to respond to your edit, which added "Also, who mentioned federal tax revenue or income tax? It wasn't me."

The title of the article we are ostensibly discussing.

It's funny that you mention highways since they wouldn't exist w/o tax revenue.

You clearly aren't aware of the many and myriad forms of highways we've had in America, including private toll highways, and the National Road, which was funded by the federal government, but predates the federal income tax by more than 100 years.

Again, I never mentioned income tax. Secondly Merriam-Webster defines a highway as "a public way" (e.g. not private).

By that definition, there are many government-run highways that must be excluded from the definition. Further, privately owned does not mean publicly inaccessible.

If your assertion is that you're referring to all forms of tax revenue, then your original post should probably not refer to tax rates. Otherwise, if you're just arguing in favor of all taxes, then it seems overly broad for a discussion on income tax revenue.

Either way, we've had public ways that existed without having been funded by any forms of taxation. Unless you're specifically attempting to pick the only definition of the word that bolsters your argument, while ignoring all other definitions, then it remains a truism that highways themselves do not exclusively originate from tax revenues, and are in fact capable of existing without taxes altogether... and it remains true whether or not one considers taxes to be universally good, bad, or anywhere in between.

> Are you asserting that the FBI is keeping muggers and highwaymen away from Elon Musk's money?

Assuming some keeps some share of his money in US banks, or invested in firms which keep their money in US banks, absolutely. Well, "bank robbers" instead of "muggers and highwaymen", but I'm assuming that Musk doesn't carry enough cash on him that the latter are nearly as important as the former in terms of risk to his money, though they might be a bigger threat to his personal safety.

https://www.fbi.gov/investigate/violent-crime/bank-robbery

> the law enforcement that prevents him from being robbed is paid for by tax revenue, but not federal tax revenue

Not only are his financial institutions protected by federal law enforcement, but state and local law enforcement recieves federal funds, so the above claim is false on several grounds.

There was no income tax in the US prior to 1913. Did people go around murdering and stealing? Was everyone poor?

Traditionally, all the things you mention are NOT paid for by income taxes even now.

> There was no income tax in the US prior to 1913.

Did I say income tax revenue or just tax revenue?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com