5 ms·
The primary purpose of income tax (unlike, say, the cigarette tax), isn't to reward or penalize people for making less or more money. It's to generate revenue f
by tdoggette 15y ago
The primary purpose of income tax (unlike, say, the cigarette tax), isn't to reward or penalize people for making less or more money. It's to generate revenue for the government.
- jerfelix 15y agoI absolutely agree. In last night's debate, my son's stance was that financial transactions were win-lose, and that in order for the 1% to get rich, the 99% had to be worse off. Therefore it is right to "penalize the 1%". Louis CK seems to pose a counter-case to that logic. I'd argue that most, if not all, voluntary financial transactions are win-win. So "penalizing" is not appropriate. The 1% aren't inherently evil just because they are in the top 1%.
- tdoggette 15y agoI agree with you about most/all voluntary transactions being win-win (it seems almost tautological), but the question then becomes, "How many transactions involving both the very rich and the poor are truly voluntary and non-coercive?"
- roguecoder 15y agoThat's only true if the monetary supply remains tightly constrained. As long as we are willing to tolerate inflation the 1% can become richer and the 99% can also still have access to money. Otherwise, in order for the rich to accumulate more wealth, it has to come from somewhere.