Two people debate a 1% wealth tax on billionaires. Speaker A argues wealth taxes have failed historically and most billionaire wealth is tied up in non-cash assets, while Speaker B says billionaires have massive surpluses that could help the poor.
And a wealth tax is purely there to make people poorer as your objective. Because economically, in every country that's tried it, it's failed.
Taking the 1% off someone who has over a billion pounds, do you think that would work? Why?
Just because you're jealous? No, but more because— Well, why do you want to? He's paying tax anyway.
But they've got so much of a surplus and there are people who cannot get out of poverty.
In what view have they got a surplus?
Well, if they've— How do you know they've got a surplus?
What are their commitments? How many people are they employing?
Do you not think that obviously these billionaires are making lots of profit now?
Surely that's a significant portion of that goes dividends and— Well, they may not be getting any dividends. People running tech companies may have assets of billions, but their income may be very small because it may purely be in the paper of the company that they have founded. So you're saying they should sell their shares. To pay this tax when they've got no income or borrow money to do it. I mean, I just think it's absolute nonsense and it's purely the politics of envy. You just don't like billionaires being richer than you.