1360
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 2 points 21 hours ago

Yeah, we should fix that, but it's still pretty bad because it incentivizes investments in stocks (an inherently speculative asset that destabilizes the world) over bonds (a contractually defined asset that more effectively resists speculation and destabilization). Sure, they're both financial assets, so there's a certain amount of nonsense built in, but I'd much prefer a society filled with people who invest in bonds and incentivized to demand financial regulation.

Also, we should treat stocks like dividends and tax them at the same rate. You get money every month from dividends and you choose whether you want to re-invest it or not. You're effectively auto-re-investing with stocks, so it's not meaningfully different. You should have to pay on the yearly difference in value, and if that means you have to sell some to pay the tax then you should just get over it.

[-] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 20 hours ago

What happens when my socks value decreases 30% one month? Do I get a tax refund?

[-] theacharnian@lemmy.ca 1 points 5 hours ago

What happens to the property taxes you paid when your property value tanks? Do you get a tax refund then? No? Then no.

[-] sexhaver87@sh.itjust.works 2 points 18 hours ago

Got some bad socks there brother

[-] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

Lol! Ya got me! Yeah, autocorrect is a bitch, and I failed to verify the text. Socks = stocks. (And it tried to change it to sticks that time).

[-] tristynalxander@mander.xyz 2 points 19 hours ago

What happens when someone fails to pay back their bond? Do I get a tax refund?

[-] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 1 points 5 hours ago* (last edited 5 hours ago)

No, since you didn't make any money and were not taxed. Also, the bond issuer is now in bankruptcy and/or being sued into bankruptcy. I might even get back the principle depending on the output of the legal proceedings.

[-] jtrek@startrek.website 1 points 18 hours ago

It depends on the details of the implementation. There are many possible solutions.

If we change it so the rule is like "if you use stock as collateral to get a loan, that is income and taxed as such" then no. You might just default on your loan, but that's kind of on you and the bank for using a volatile asset as collateral.

[-] MasterBlaster@lemmy.world 2 points 5 hours ago

I appreciate that you took the question seriously and offered a useful response.

this post was submitted on 24 May 2026
1360 points (100.0% liked)

Work Reform

16397 readers
1557 users here now

A place to discuss positive changes that can make work more equitable, and to vent about current practices. We are NOT against work; we just want the fruits of our labor to be recognized better.

Our Philosophies:

Our Goals

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS