4 ms·

There is scant evidence backing up that "usually". You obviously need some incentives for people to take risks or work hard, but no Zuckerberg or Gates or Kampr

There is scant evidence backing up that "usually". You obviously need some incentives for people to take risks or work hard, but no Zuckerberg or Gates or Kamprad or Ek would have been discouraged if his marginal tax rate had been 10% higher. Indeed a social safety net such as the one you could fund with such a tax increase may make it easier for people to start businesses, because they know failure wouldn't mean starvation. It's also pretty clear, that success requires more than motivation. You also need education, and access to (infrastructure/decision makers/capital/potable water ). Inequality, in the sense that the American right glorifies, stands opposite such access. The Ayn Rand crowd seems to really enjoy their phantasies of inflicting harm not only on the poor, but also descendants three generations down the road. And so you get some people to argue about "wealth creation" in a country that has created the greatest wealth ever amassed by humankind but also has major cities whose drinking water is unfit for human consumption.

bsbechtel 10y ago
>>There is scant evidence backing up that "usually". You obviously need some incentives for people to take risks or work hard, but no Zuckerberg or Gates or Kamprad or Ek would have been discouraged if his marginal tax rate had been 10% higher. Had Elon Musk's marginal tax rate been 10% higher, we wouldn't have Tesla or SpaceX, considering he nearly went bankrupt multiple times trying to build both companies. Your comment about drinking water is also inaccurate considering the water systems in nearly all US cities are government controlled monopolies.
- aninhumer 10y ago
  Or he would have structured his investments slightly differently to take into account the extra tax, and been fine. Or he would have gone bankrupt, but got back up again thanks to an improved social safety net. Or a better funded space program would have made greater progress on its own, and he could have focused on another aspect of his vision of colonising Mars. You can't just look at how people did under one set of circumstances and extrapolate to another.

bsbechtel 10y ago

>>There is scant evidence backing up that "usually". You obviously need some incentives for people to take risks or work hard, but no Zuckerberg or Gates or Kamprad or Ek would have been discouraged if his marginal tax rate had been 10% higher. Had Elon Musk's marginal tax rate been 10% higher, we wouldn't have Tesla or SpaceX, considering he nearly went bankrupt multiple times trying to build both companies. Your comment about drinking water is also inaccurate considering the water systems in nearly all US cities are government controlled monopolies.

aninhumer 10y ago
Or he would have structured his investments slightly differently to take into account the extra tax, and been fine. Or he would have gone bankrupt, but got back up again thanks to an improved social safety net. Or a better funded space program would have made greater progress on its own, and he could have focused on another aspect of his vision of colonising Mars. You can't just look at how people did under one set of circumstances and extrapolate to another.