The 70s comparison doesn’t really hold. Healey’s 98% rate was on paper but almost nobody paid it because of loopholes and avoidance. The IMF bailout then was about 13 percent of GDP, but scaling that up to 100% doesn’t make sense. The UK borrows differently today and isn’t in that situation.
The idea that millionaires are leaving in droves is exaggerated. A few go, most don’t, and the UK still draws plenty of wealthy people in.
The real point is that the very rich don’t take salaries. They hold assets. Income tax doesn’t touch most of their resources, which is exactly why a wealth tax is being talked about. Saying we’d just be repeating the 70s misses what the debate is actually about.
setInner234@lemmy.ml 7 months ago
That millionaires leaving in droves myth is always trotted out in these debates.
The very institute that was perpetuating the idea recently rescinded their own report because the UK is making millionaires at 10x the rate they are leaving. But of course that’s not reported on.
Plus, again, the ultra rich operating on a global scale don’t pay taxes anyway, so good riddance.
Did all the millionaires leave when taxes were incredibly high compared to today’s standards? And again we’re talking progressive taxation. Only income above a certain threshold would have a higher rate applied. They won’t notice it. They literally are just fighting it because they can.
Many UK millionaires only speak English and don’t want to uproot their lives to save a tiny amount on taxes (the S&P500’s returns will always make up for whatever tiny additional percentage we might tax the rich).
It’s so silly to think that there’s this millionaire flight. By now we wouldn’t have any left.
Oh and conveniently it’s happening in all other countries too. So where are they going, space? Antarctica? It’s propaganda for the stupid.