Wealthy forever
This article is a poignant illustration of the political power of wealth. One goal of the Republican tax reform proposals is to completely eliminate the estate tax, an achievement that could signal the end of the American republic. The rich have enormous power as it is, and dynastic families have survived and flourished even with the estate tax in place. Eliminating it in this time of great public debt poses a grave threat to our country. Successful people should be able to see to the welfare of their progeny, but one should not have the right to be super-wealthy by birth. Therefore, limit inheritance to $20 million tax-free and then impose a sliding scale that would become 100% over some established amount like $100 million. That is enough of a head start for anyone. Dynastic wealth is dangerous to the American way of life. If inheritance were limited to $100 million and the remainder was taxed at 100%, the nation would have a shot at retiring its debt. Such a tax would not solve the problem of wealth concentration, but it would start to address it. Richard Ableser, Long Beach
What the authors ignore is that wealth is not a zerosum game, where one side must lose if the other gains.
The amount of money Amazon founder Jeff Bezos has acquired has no impact on how much I earn. His having more money in no way means someone else must have less.
People have less money because of bad luck, bad timing, health problems or other conditions beyond their control, or because of their own poor decisions and bad habits — but not because someone has more than they do.
The “he has more so I must have less” argument is a thinly disguised excuse for those with an income-redistribution agenda, or it is their own excuse for why they don’t have as much as they “should.” Jeff Pressman
Bell Canyon
So, Bezos is the richest man in the world, and in October alone his wealth increased by $10 billion.
Still, Amazon expects corporate welfare from cities that want to land the company’s second headquarters. The laundry list of demands by Amazon is appalling. Communities that extend large tax breaks as a way to create jobs will never recoup their investment. As the article notes, Amazon pays some of its workers “as little as $12.84 an hour,” and the number of jobs it brings with it is a pittance.
The millions of people who together own a fraction of the wealth controlled by a handful of the nation’s super-rich should demand that companies use their own profits to expand their businesses. They can afford to do so. Karen Hamstrom
Mission Viejo
Wealth versus income is an apples-oranges comparison. Bezos is rich because he had a revolutionary idea, took the risk to execute it, sold his enterprise to the stock market and made not just himself but a slew of others rich as his business succeeded and thrived.
The only real solution is to tax the wealth away, which I think is ludicrous. But it is a dream of many, including, I’m sure, the authors of this article. Ken Artingstall
Glendale
So much for the trickledown effect. Nancy Kreile
Bonsall, Calif.
Re “Our growing wealth gap, by the numbers,” Opinion, Nov. 15