3 ms·
Wait, did you read the essay? He talks about closing tax loopholes and even calls that 'stealing' (search for it in the essay). He also argues: > For example,
by shadowsun7 11y ago
Wait, did you read the essay? He talks about closing tax loopholes and even calls that 'stealing' (search for it in the essay). He also argues:
> For example, let's attack poverty, and if necessary damage wealth in the process. That's much more likely to work than attacking wealth in the hope that you will thereby fix poverty.
I believe, though I may well be wrong, that PG isn't against taxing the rich in order to provide social services and increased education, healthcare, what-have-you.
- raldi 11y agoI think you're right, but this is indeed a large misinterpretation hazard. When he writes about this in the future, he should probably explicitly say, "Tax the 1% far more heavily to pay for the social mobility and equal-access-to-politics programs; that's the only realistic way to fund them."
- shadowsun7 11y agoThis is a fair point. Thanks.
- curun1r 11y agoPerhaps you can enlighten me then...if he's arguing that we close loopholes (and the lower capital gains rate is a loophole) and increase taxes on the wealthy to an over 50% marginal rate, what direct attacks on income inequality is he arguing against? How are people attacking income inequality in any concrete way that isn't about taxation? Because if there isn't some concrete attack on income inequality, then we're arguing about an abstract concept, which is just pointless.
- vlehto 11y agoYou could tax big incomes in excess of 50%. Give them low inflation, no inheritance tax and pour all that extra money to defense. Congrats, you have fixed the position of a rich caste.