3 ms·

> Taxing the rich isn't about generating revenue to make something. It's a reallocation mechanism for dollars that already exist in the economy to things that w

> Taxing the rich isn't about generating revenue to make something. It's a reallocation mechanism for dollars that already exist in the economy to things that we want as a body of people. That simplistic logic fails to account for the fact that pursuing income is an incentive to allocate resources to productive investments that are self-sufficient and pay off tons of taxes directly and indirextly, such as by paying salaries and generating demand. Once you start to impose communist "reallocation mechanisms", not only are you eliminating incentives for productive investments as they effectively cease to be productive due to state intervention and actually create incentives to move production and industrial capabilities out of the country. In short, you're advocating that the goose that lays golden eggs should be slautered to get to someone else's eggs.

deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
dragonwriter 8y ago
> Once you start to impose communist "reallocation mechanisms" You mean, like a heirarchy of preferential tax rates for different income sources where capital income is favored over general income which in turn is favored over labor income?
- geezerjay 8y ago
  Robbing someone of 70% of their income is way more aggravating and profoundly totalitarian than a simple progressive tax. It's one thing to grant a small share of your income to the state in order to keep social institutions running, but it's an entirely different thing if the state robs you off the majority of your total income for no reason at all. In a free and democratic society, a citizen has the right to the fruit of his labour, not just to a small fraction of what he worked for.
  - dragonwriter 8y ago
    You seem to be responding to something other than the post yours is attached to, but: > Robbing someone of 70% of their income is way more aggravating and profoundly totalitarian than a simple progressive tax. A 70% top marginal rate isn't taxing (much less “robbing”) 70% of your income, unless your income is literally infinite. Also, the top marginal rate was at or above 70% for every year from 1936 through 1980, yet for some reason those 44 years aren't usually considered a “profoundly totalitarian” period in US history.

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

dragonwriter 8y ago

> Once you start to impose communist "reallocation mechanisms" You mean, like a heirarchy of preferential tax rates for different income sources where capital income is favored over general income which in turn is favored over labor income?

geezerjay 8y ago
Robbing someone of 70% of their income is way more aggravating and profoundly totalitarian than a simple progressive tax. It's one thing to grant a small share of your income to the state in order to keep social institutions running, but it's an entirely different thing if the state robs you off the majority of your total income for no reason at all. In a free and democratic society, a citizen has the right to the fruit of his labour, not just to a small fraction of what he worked for.
- dragonwriter 8y ago
  You seem to be responding to something other than the post yours is attached to, but: > Robbing someone of 70% of their income is way more aggravating and profoundly totalitarian than a simple progressive tax. A 70% top marginal rate isn't taxing (much less “robbing”) 70% of your income, unless your income is literally infinite. Also, the top marginal rate was at or above 70% for every year from 1936 through 1980, yet for some reason those 44 years aren't usually considered a “profoundly totalitarian” period in US history.