3 ms·
> raising taxes on the rich eventually costs the government revenue by discouraging work. The latest economic research suggests that this is true — but only if
by leereeves 8y ago
> raising taxes on the rich eventually costs the government revenue by discouraging work. The latest economic research suggests that this is true — but only if you raise the top tax rate higher than (approximately) 70 percent.
Why is maximizing government revenue a good idea? Shouldn't the government be encouraging private sector activity and encouraging people to do as much socially valuable work as possible?
Of course, not all income comes from activities that are socially valuable, and we'd do well to eliminate the harmful activities, but taxes aren't the way to do that. Taxes are a scythe that cuts down both the wheat and the weeds. I'd like to see the government focus on weedkiller policies and let the wheat grow.
- tryptophan 8y agoAn assumption that is unsaid in all these pro-tax articles is that somehow taxation is some innately good thing, and letting those evil rich people keep their money is some fundamentally wrong thing. Why is it assumed so moral and good to give your money to the government? >Why is maximizing government revenue a good idea? Why indeed. Arguments say it is because that money can be spent for higher purposes, fancy projects private investors will never do, etc... But if that is the case, and you extend that line of thinking ad absurdum, what is the point of letting people earn money at all? Why not confiscate 100% of it to spend more efficiently and better by the government? Obviously that would not work, as it would be communism.