10 ms·

This is exactly why I believe income tax is stupid. It's people like this who should be lifted up on our shoulders by our economic system and taxed 0%. They a

This is exactly why I believe income tax is stupid. It's people like this who should be lifted up on our shoulders by our economic system and taxed 0%. They are the real leaders of us all. A high consumption tax that punishes buying stupid things like super cars and private yachts would help do this. “the millionaire will be but a trustee for the poor” - what a great thing to say. Where are these great men?

6t6t6t6 9y ago
Are you familiar with the term "progressive taxes"? Consumption tax is the same for multimillionaires and for people who have 3 part time jobs and struggle to feed their family. Then, imagine that you put a massive consumption tax for cards, for instance. What happens when the car of the 3 jobs guy is broken? Also, how do you decide which products are the products that rich people buy and which are the products for "the poor"?
- icebraining 9y ago
  Also, how do you decide which products are the products that rich people buy and which are the products for "the poor"? Congress did that by price - specifically, by imposing a 10% Luxury Tax cars over $30k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_tax#Luxury_tax_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_tax#Luxury_tax_in_the_U...
- ChrisBland 9y ago
  Not agreeing with OP but have studied this and want to provide color to it. Most of the proposals I've seen that promote a consumption tax deal with that by giving cash back to everyone in the form of refundable tax credits or block grants (yearly or monthly). They would figure out what the middle income person / family would consume, tie that to the CPI for those (breads, meats, consumables) and come up with the refundable tax credit amount to cover that persons estimated consumption tax.
cdancette 9y ago
Why would you let them accumulate an unreasonable amount of wealth if you then expect them to give it back to poor people? Why not limit the wealth in the first place to ensure that everyone get its share? And do you really expect every millionaire / billionaire to do this? I'm afraid numbers are against you, that's why this appears in a newspaper: it's a rare event. Finally, why let a few rich guys decide where the money goes? I think it would be better if the money was given to the government, so that the people can decide where the money will be useful. I'm not sure all of this guy's money went to good causes (you can check his Wikipedia page).
- foota 9y ago
  Not that I think low taxation would be a net transfer to the poor, but many disagree with how the government spends tax money.
  - mcny 9y ago
    > Not that I think low taxation would be a net transfer to the poor, but many disagree with how the government spends tax money. Pretty sure a worker at Mercedes or at VW will oppose free of cost public transit in Germany. I have met old people whose only income is their Social Security check advocate for "small government" that does away with all the safety nets in the US. Of course, we disagree with how governments spend money. If we all agreed, we wouldn't need a government. All in all, a charity cannot replace government safety net.
    - candu 9y ago
      The reverse is also (somewhat) true - this is at least part of the reason that governments effectively subsidize charitable donations, usually through some sort of tax exemption / deduction. It's a form of outsourcing aid.
  - fsloth 9y ago
    "many disagree with how the government spends tax money" I suppose that's as good definition of democracy as any. The whole purpose of democratic governance is to deal with a political situation where most people disagree.
smileysteve 9y ago
In the U.S. you can deduct your charitable contributions (up to 50% of your income) to not have income tax on that money.

6t6t6t6 9y ago

Are you familiar with the term "progressive taxes"? Consumption tax is the same for multimillionaires and for people who have 3 part time jobs and struggle to feed their family. Then, imagine that you put a massive consumption tax for cards, for instance. What happens when the car of the 3 jobs guy is broken? Also, how do you decide which products are the products that rich people buy and which are the products for "the poor"?

icebraining 9y ago
Also, how do you decide which products are the products that rich people buy and which are the products for "the poor"? Congress did that by price - specifically, by imposing a 10% Luxury Tax cars over $30k. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_tax#Luxury_tax_in_the_United_States https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luxury_tax#Luxury_tax_in_the_U...
ChrisBland 9y ago
Not agreeing with OP but have studied this and want to provide color to it. Most of the proposals I've seen that promote a consumption tax deal with that by giving cash back to everyone in the form of refundable tax credits or block grants (yearly or monthly). They would figure out what the middle income person / family would consume, tie that to the CPI for those (breads, meats, consumables) and come up with the refundable tax credit amount to cover that persons estimated consumption tax.

cdancette 9y ago

Why would you let them accumulate an unreasonable amount of wealth if you then expect them to give it back to poor people? Why not limit the wealth in the first place to ensure that everyone get its share? And do you really expect every millionaire / billionaire to do this? I'm afraid numbers are against you, that's why this appears in a newspaper: it's a rare event. Finally, why let a few rich guys decide where the money goes? I think it would be better if the money was given to the government, so that the people can decide where the money will be useful. I'm not sure all of this guy's money went to good causes (you can check his Wikipedia page).

foota 9y ago
Not that I think low taxation would be a net transfer to the poor, but many disagree with how the government spends tax money.
- mcny 9y ago
  > Not that I think low taxation would be a net transfer to the poor, but many disagree with how the government spends tax money. Pretty sure a worker at Mercedes or at VW will oppose free of cost public transit in Germany. I have met old people whose only income is their Social Security check advocate for "small government" that does away with all the safety nets in the US. Of course, we disagree with how governments spend money. If we all agreed, we wouldn't need a government. All in all, a charity cannot replace government safety net.
  - candu 9y ago
    The reverse is also (somewhat) true - this is at least part of the reason that governments effectively subsidize charitable donations, usually through some sort of tax exemption / deduction. It's a form of outsourcing aid.
- fsloth 9y ago
  "many disagree with how the government spends tax money" I suppose that's as good definition of democracy as any. The whole purpose of democratic governance is to deal with a political situation where most people disagree.

smileysteve 9y ago

In the U.S. you can deduct your charitable contributions (up to 50% of your income) to not have income tax on that money.