4 ms·

Yes. It allows everyone of high education to lean into the fallacy that all our problems would be solved "if we just taxed the billionaires more". In reality,

Yes. It allows everyone of high education to lean into the fallacy that all our problems would be solved "if we just taxed the billionaires more". In reality, the sheer number of middle/upper middle/upper income and the tax revenue needed for a EU style social welfare would require an increase across a much broader tax base. So tax the billionaires more too, but we aren't getting a lot more government service from that alone.

EricDeb 4y ago
It's not just about government services. Wealth = power and speech in America and reducing that to any one, unelected person is another benefit of reducing wealth inequality.
fallingknife 4y ago
Exactly. All social democratic welfare states, by necessity, place massive tax burdens on the middle class. e.g. Germany hits 42% marginal rate at around $60K income, and on top of that there's a 19% VAT.
- steveBK123 4y ago
  Yes the average middle to upper class American underestimates how undertaxed they are for the services they claim to want. $60k American income person pays marginal income tax of 12% or 22% depending on single or married. And sales tax probably 7%. Even if they live in a high tax state, add another 6% income tax maybe.
  - medvezhenok 4y ago
    It's meaningless to discuss tax in isolation, you have to discuss it holistically. Saudi Arabia, for example, could have a tax rate of 0% and still provide for all of their citizens because of the oil they are sitting on. USA has some similar advantages in resources and arable land which Europe lacks. So comparing like for like tax rates makes no sense. Or things like conscription, for example, allows the Government the power to spend arbitrarily, since they can set whatever wage they want for the conscripted citizens, in theory (thereby controlling their own cost). This may not show up in nominal numbers (since they're reporting a cost that they themselves set) - for example, see USSR in WWII. If reported in nominal income, the cost of the war would have been 3x as large as normally reported.

EricDeb 4y ago

It's not just about government services. Wealth = power and speech in America and reducing that to any one, unelected person is another benefit of reducing wealth inequality.

fallingknife 4y ago

Exactly. All social democratic welfare states, by necessity, place massive tax burdens on the middle class. e.g. Germany hits 42% marginal rate at around $60K income, and on top of that there's a 19% VAT.

steveBK123 4y ago
Yes the average middle to upper class American underestimates how undertaxed they are for the services they claim to want. $60k American income person pays marginal income tax of 12% or 22% depending on single or married. And sales tax probably 7%. Even if they live in a high tax state, add another 6% income tax maybe.
- medvezhenok 4y ago
  It's meaningless to discuss tax in isolation, you have to discuss it holistically. Saudi Arabia, for example, could have a tax rate of 0% and still provide for all of their citizens because of the oil they are sitting on. USA has some similar advantages in resources and arable land which Europe lacks. So comparing like for like tax rates makes no sense. Or things like conscription, for example, allows the Government the power to spend arbitrarily, since they can set whatever wage they want for the conscripted citizens, in theory (thereby controlling their own cost). This may not show up in nominal numbers (since they're reporting a cost that they themselves set) - for example, see USSR in WWII. If reported in nominal income, the cost of the war would have been 3x as large as normally reported.