4 ms·
Yes, here were are because it turns out that modern societies with their amenities depend on taxation. What's the problem with that? If it were such a humongous
by Daishiman 6y ago
Yes, here were are because it turns out that modern societies with their amenities depend on taxation. What's the problem with that? If it were such a humongous deal you'd have more people voting for tax cuts.
- AnimalMuppet 6y agoOK, but it may well turn out that future versions of "modern society" depend on the revenue from wealth taxation, not just for those with wealth above $50 million, but with wealth above, say, $50 thousand. Remember what the argument in the local thread is. nemo44x stated that "these things" (things like the wealth tax) always expand to cover more people than they did at the beginning. rurp said that the income tax cuts a couple of years ago disproved that. I said that the expanding scope of income tax over the last 107 years supported nemo44x, not rurp. Your arguing that that's OK, because we want the society that results. That may be. But that's a different claim than "this won't expand to hit everybody".
- Daishiman 6y agoThe only promise the government will keep is what's in the Constitution. I find it unreasonable that a government should keep promises from times when I wasn't even alive.