2 ms·

Superannuation is essentially a payroll tax. As you suggest, many countries have these. Whether they are good or not depends what you do with the money after i

Superannuation is essentially a payroll tax. As you suggest, many countries have these. Whether they are good or not depends what you do with the money after it is collected. In the case of super it's "put it in a special account for an individual where they can't spend it until retirement". Much better would be "put it in a massive Norway-style fund, and use it to fund above-poverty-line welfare for all". Skeptical that super gains shouldn't be taxed highly - a broad, universal welfare state means everybody needs to be contributing, not just the rich (of course, those at the bottom of the pyramid net benefit through the consequent redistribution).

bedobi 5y ago
> Superannuation is essentially a payroll tax. Isn't the whole point that it's not a payroll tax? Ie instead of the government getting and using the super money to fund its activities (whether they be welfare or what have you), the money remains the individuals own, just forcibly saved in what should be cheap or free index funds, but in many cases unfortunately isn't. I guess a halfway point would be for government to get the money, but rather than using it to fund its activities, the money is pooled and invested and then that money is given out to fund retirement according to need down the track? Is that what you're referring to? > Skeptical that super gains shouldn't be taxed highly - a broad, universal welfare state means everybody needs to be contributing But that's the thing, it kind of doesn't and economists have been pointing that out for decades. Economists across the political spectrum agree that pretty much all taxes, including payroll, capital gains, stamp duty etc etc be completely abolished for everyone and replaced with taxes on wealth, carbon, consumption etc etc instead. But that will never happen, because people don't get it and neither do politicians.

bedobi 5y ago

> Superannuation is essentially a payroll tax. Isn't the whole point that it's not a payroll tax? Ie instead of the government getting and using the super money to fund its activities (whether they be welfare or what have you), the money remains the individuals own, just forcibly saved in what should be cheap or free index funds, but in many cases unfortunately isn't. I guess a halfway point would be for government to get the money, but rather than using it to fund its activities, the money is pooled and invested and then that money is given out to fund retirement according to need down the track? Is that what you're referring to? > Skeptical that super gains shouldn't be taxed highly - a broad, universal welfare state means everybody needs to be contributing But that's the thing, it kind of doesn't and economists have been pointing that out for decades. Economists across the political spectrum agree that pretty much all taxes, including payroll, capital gains, stamp duty etc etc be completely abolished for everyone and replaced with taxes on wealth, carbon, consumption etc etc instead. But that will never happen, because people don't get it and neither do politicians.