5 ms·
just random thought is taxing very rich without hurting others possible?
by tester34 5y ago
just random thought
is taxing very rich without hurting others possible?
- chalst 5y agoI think so. https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/progressive-wealth-taxation/ https://www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/progressive-wealth-t...
- dennis_jeeves 5y agoNo, because you cannot draw the line at who is rich. Any tax based on wealth/income is fundamentally legalized (hence perfectly ethically acceptable to most morons) theft.
- atat7024 5y agoSo Americans in the 50s were at their most moronic? Apart from the obvious social considerations...this doesn't seem correct.
- dennis_jeeves 5y ago>So Americans in the 50s were at their most moronic? Yep. Quote: if at age 20 you are not a socialist you do not have a heart. If at age 30 you are not a capitalist, you do not have a brain.
- atat7024 5y agoNot Americans in their 50s. The 1950s.
- dennis_jeeves 5y agoNo I did not misunderstand you. Though my quote did indicate age, that was a coincidence. Socialist policies are largely favored by the morons, they really do not see the slippery slope.
- deleted 5y ago[deleted]
- AnimalMuppet 5y agoI think so, to some degree. I start with the marginal utility of money - the first thousand dollars means a lot more to someone than the next thousand means to a billionaire. If you take a thousand from a billionaire, and give it to someone who currently has $0, that improves their life massively while hurting the billionaire only a tiny bit. So while it still "hurts others", it's still a massive net gain... ... until you get to second-order effects, where things get really complicated. If the rich have less money to invest in things, does that cut down on job creation? If so, is the tax a net win or a net loss?