4 ms·
I mean, to me "fair" would be everyone paying the same tax total, like $1k per person per year. The next level of "fair" would be everyone paying the same tax
by hnlurker 7y ago
I mean, to me "fair" would be everyone paying the same tax total, like $1k per person per year.
The next level of "fair" would be everyone paying the same tax rate, like 10% of their income.
Just because a tax can be shouldered by some group doesn't mean it ought to be levied. It's extremely unfair.
Equity is evil. Equality is good.
- mikepurvis 7y agoThe whole point of my post is that when your starting point in the discussion is to seek a taxation scheme that's "fair", you've already lost. The point should be to seek an outcome that is good for the society as whole, and that means balancing a lot of different objectives. For example: - People who are wealthy and successful should enjoy an elevated standard of living. - Regardless of your birth and other factors outside your control (race, wealth of parents, etc), it should be possible to achieve wealth through hard work. - No one who works hard should lack basic necessities like food and shelter. The current system optimizes heavily for the first item at the expense of the other two, and the fact that someone can even propose with a straight face that a flat $1k/year taxation scheme would be "fair" is just a sign of how broken our attitudes around this are.