re: #3 freetoken

re: #3 freetoken

REGARDING: Correct, I did not mean to imply that the investor bears no risk. However, trying to scale (i.e., via CPI or any similar means) the taxable amount essentially tries to scale the risk and thus shield the investor from the full consequences of a poor performing asset.
RESPONSE: I am not sure that I agree with your thinking without further explanation.
The measurement should be objectively precise.
The cost is simple. The translation from cost period dollars to current dollars should be similar to converting non-dollars to dollars; vertically, rather than laterally. And the sales price is defined. I.e., I don’t see a problem with the measurement of economic gain or loss by applying the CPI ratio, and assessing the economic gain or loss at normal rates.

REGARDING: This gets down to the whole idea of why we “tax” and how we do it in our society.
RESPONSE: Here, we have a heavy-duty concept worthy of serious discussion. This could be a complete chapter within a book on taxation.

REGARDING: I propose a proper way to approach the taxing of “gains” is to realize that only the present and future matter as far what can be changed in life - the past cannot be changed.
RESPONSE: I am listening (reading). lol
By the way, only the future can be affected.
The past was, i.e., is unchangeable.
The present is, i.e., is unchangeable.
The future will be.

REGARDING: For example, which is more important: lost value due to inflation, or, other opportunity costs?
RESPONSE: “Opportunity costs” cannot be rationally codified within any tax code..

REGARDING: Income from wages are taxed on face value - even if wages become less valuable due to inflation over the period of the tax year (something we’ve not had to worry about the past few years because of very low inflation, but in previous times where double digit annual inflation manifested.)
RESPONSE: The assumed value of a wage is the wage itself, at the time earned.
The storage of that “energy” is another situation.
Theoretically, an adjustment should be made to the stored value in the form of interest, which would be equal to inflation and which not be taxed.
Unfortunately, we do not exist within a theoretical world.
We, each, must assess where and how we want to store our energies.

REGARDING: More important still, taxes on wages are really taxes on time, since the hours expended in labor can never, never, be returned, unlike so called “capital” assets which, even if depreciated due to inflation, can be sold for some value.
RESPONSE: Time is of great value. Each of us must assess what we want to do with those precious moments. The conversion of our valuable time is not solely dependent upon our demands, since our demands must be accepted by the remunerating party. Much of our time is assessed to be more valuable to us when we are engaged in non-remunerative endeavors.
Each of us must assess and decide upon how we allow our time to be expended.
Not all capital assets are subject to depreciation.

REGARDING: In other words, I question how we have come to value our lives when we tax life expended rather than tax negotiable and tradable “assets”.
RESPONSE: You are highlighting a very important concept. Net rewards for labor are burdened much more than earnings from assets, e.g., a single person making $50,000 per year will pay around 35% in income and other payroll taxes, while a $50,000 long-term capital gain will be assessed 15%.
Our “leaders” say that they want to promote the work ethic. Their legislation belies that fantasy.

REGARDING: And life is the ultimate depreciating asset since we only have some finite quantity of hours to expend.
RESPONSE: Absolutely. Assuming 45 years @ 2,000 hours per year = 90,000 productive hours.

(continued…………………….)