Will capitalism survive?

The examples you are giving are not "capitalism". They seem more closely related to socialism.

One of the things I think we'll see in the near future (20-30 years) is a shift away from income taxes. You simply can't keep raising tax levels as the income earning population declines and the population collecting benefits iuncreases without tipping the divide between rich and poor even farther.

I think instead of an income tax we'll see a "wealth tax" where you'll be taxed on the total value of your assets instead of what your earned/unearned income in a given year. That doesn't really effect "capitalism" in any way other than how the results of that capitalism are taxed.

That's understood, but that's the evolution of capitalism. That's the reason I'm posing the question.

I don't think that'll be a consideration for the republicans. They don't want a shift in wealth from the rich to the poor.

Neither do the Democrats. They're more than happy to raise the income taxes rates on someone making $30K/yr who can't afford any assets as it is while increasing benefits for senior citizens who control the overwhelming majority of the wealth in this country.

I will note that there is already a movement underway in CA to institute a wealth tax.
http://www.lao.ca.gov/ballot/2008/080587.pdf

c.i. posted :

"I don't think that'll be a consideration for the republicans. They don't want a shift in wealth from the rich to the poor."

ditto for the canadian conservatives , though they now permit "income equalization" for seniors' pension income - which is of biggest advantage to high income pensioners .
hbg

It ain't gonna fly; the state legislature can't even approve an annual budget on time.

Whether or not it passes at this point or not is irrelevant. The issue is being recognized and addressed. As more people become aware of it more people will favor it. Right now the idea probably hasn't even occured to the majority of U.S. citizens. As the CA proposal gets publicity more people will hear of it and people who hadn't considered it in the past will take a stand one way or the other. Those who favor it will start similar initatives in other states.

Many, many state level initatives don't pass their first time out. Some go on to get passed on the 2nd, 3rd or 4th try.

At some point people are going to recognize that the dispartity in wealth between rich and poor isn't entirely a matter of their annual income.

A "wealth tax" is not going to pass the conservatives in either the state or federal level. Talk is "cheap."

What's cheap is your parroting of urban myths that have no basis in reality. When things like facts and rational logic get in the way of your predeterminded ideas you can always be relied on to fall back on your urban myths.

When it comes around the conservative voters will, by and large, be for it as a replacement for the income tax. Wealth is almost entirely centered in the major cities in this country - the home territory of your fellow Democrats. It isn't out there in the farmlands and open spaces of the red states.

In California, a democratic state, the budget is still not approved because the republicans will not approve a sales tax increase. What makes you think it's all urban myths?

How can it not be c.i.? All your info has come from Media which is the voice of the megalopolis howling its shallow worship of glamour, celebrity and delusion.

Capitalism is over with. Matters are now too complex to be left in the hands of enterprising individuals.

The wealth tax has existed for almost 2 centuries. Some people just decided to rename it the "death tax" so they could eliminate it.

Really? So you file an annual estate tax return with the IRS listing your entire net worth and pay taxes on it? What IRS Form is that filed using?

Some people never can "get it." Taxpayers do not file an annual death tax form.
Just smart arses think they know everything.
*********

Estate tax in the United States
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

The estate tax in the United States is a tax imposed on the transfer of the "taxable estate" of a deceased person, whether such property is transferred via a will or according to the state laws of intestacy. The estate tax is one part of the Unified Gift and Estate Tax system in the United States. The other part of the system, the gift tax, imposes a tax on transfers of property during a person's life; the gift tax prevents avoidance of the estate tax should a person want to give away his/her estate just before dying.

In addition to the federal government, many states also impose an estate tax, with the state version called either an estate tax or an inheritance tax. Since the 1990s, the term "death tax" has been widely used by those who want to eliminate the estate tax, because the terminology used in discussing a political issue can affect popular opinion.[1]

If an asset is left to a spouse or a charitable organization, the tax usually does not apply. The tax is imposed on other transfers of property made as an incident of the death of the owner, such as a transfer of property from an intestate estate or trust, or the payment of certain life insurance benefits or financial account sums to beneficiaries.

Why would anybody dead have the slightest interest in that c.i.?

There's nothing of that nature in the Darwinian canon.

It would appear to be YOU that doesn't "get it". The Estate Tax is NOT the same as the Wealth Tax that I have mentioned nor is it the same as the Wealth Tax that is being proposed in CA.

Perhaps if you had a clue you wouldn't make such stupid comments.

You could also explain it with equal accuracy by saying the budget has not been approved because the Democrats refuse to contemplate any spending cuts - mostly because state employee unions are their principal source of financial support. Why did you omit that element of the impasse?

Fair enough! That's the reason for the deadlock.