If you strictly and only tax consumption and property, you will have large segments of the population living hand-to-mouth, trapped in a vicious cycle of poverty and and hard labor in a hole that requires super-human or generational effort to get out of. Meanwhile, those who started with a leg up will continue to accelerate their net-worth. There are people who "make money" by "having money" and under your rules those people would only pay taxes on the fees they pay to their money manager. We aren't THAT far from that now were it not for the miserly 15% investment income tax.
I realize the typical HN-libertarian-calvinist view is that everything needs to be transactional. Transactional down to the level that the taxes someone pays would ideally go towards the services that they as an individual use, and that everyone needs to work in order order to be "worthy" of a social-safety-net (assuming a safety-net has to exist, which isn't a given in such points of view). It doesn't have to be that way but sadly there are motions in that direction.
Net worth taxes exist in a small number of places in Europe. It appears to be unpopular because it causes people to hide their assets and invest in assets that are harder to place a value on. Some places just have a property tax instead.
Revenue is taxed in many places; it’s called sales tax. Profit is also taxed. It is called an income tax / corporate tax.
Humans can deduct things so they are taxed at their profits. It's just that rules are not straightforward and what counts as a deductible expense is not the same for both. So you are aiming at the wrong level for a critique. See https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26698446
