When Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Elizabeth Warren first proposed an annual wealth tax, she claimed it would be just "a little piece," "a little portion" of the "bazillion" they've made.

New evidence from her own economists revealed that her constitutionally-challenged two percent (or higher) annual wealth tax would take far more than a little. Try half or more.

Bloomberg reported on Sept. 10, that if a wealth tax like it had been implemented in 1982, the government would have confiscated more than half of Bill Gates, Warren Buffett and Larry Ellison's wealth by 2018. Since taxes rarely disappear from existence, it begs the question of how long it would take for the government to take it all.

So much for just taking a bit off the "tippy top."

In spite of that shocking estimate, Bloomberg's story framed things favorably for Warren when it wrote: "The calculations underscore how a wealth tax of just a few percentage points might erode fortunes over time and presumably reduce wealth inequality."

The only acknowledgment of problems with her plan was an oblique reference to unnamed "critics" who "have charged that the tax would be hard to administer and easy to avoid. They've also questioned its constitutionality."

Although proponents of Warren's wealth tax idea view the potential for seizing vast amounts of wealth away over time as a good thing, rather than recognizing it's immorality or harm to the overall economy. Others see it...

Continue Reading

on Long Room