5 ms·
Nobody can be fully certain of this, but I suspect all the way up to 100%
by smikhanov 4y ago
Nobody can be fully certain of this, but I suspect all the way up to 100%
- cambaceres 4y agoWe can actually be certain that humans work the other way since we ran huge experiments in labs called the Soviet Union and China. In those experiments we found out that people worked way less/not at all when there was no economic incentive to do so.
- smikhanov 4y agoThere’s an economic incentive for someone to increase their productivity at every taxation level that is less than 100%, no?
- usefulcat 4y agoTechnically correct, but totally missing the point. There’s going to be a big incremental incentive difference between, say 10% and 90% taxation.
- smikhanov 4y agoSocieties taxing their entrepreneurs at 10 and at 90% are always vastly different. This difference in turn heavily influences every participant’s system of motivations, so comparing these two numbers alone is usually not very helpful
- ramblenode 4y agoAn apt comparison is sharecroppers. Their effective tax rate is close to 100% but they still work hard because eating > not eating.
- pg938hkd 4y agoThat’s not true. Many companies people work at provide them little to no incentive to work harder or better, yet still a lot of people try to do so. Lots of places have almost no possibility of promotion just the ability to go elsewhere. Some professions like teaching, nursing pharmacy treat all workers as interchangeable with no performance incentives.
- TexanFeller 4y agoPeople have an incentive in those cases. To improve themselves so that they can get hired at another company or in an industry with more demand.
- pg938hkd 4y agoWho pays nurses more just because they are good? In a lot of professions rates are set by governments or institutions and there is not enough competition between businesses for wages.
- gloosx 4y agoAny private clinic would pay the better nurse more? You can check this quickly on job-listing portals – nurse wages are in the 20000-100000k/year range, so clearly supply and demand as well as qualification are determining it. Which socialist country is it where wages are ceiled by the government?
- pg938hkd 4y ago[dead]
- importantbrian 4y agoI guess that depends on what you mean by good, but better credentialed, more experienced nurses do get paid more. Source -- my wife is a nurse.
- Gigachad 4y agoI can tell you that there is no way I’d be doing what I do if it wasn’t for the money. I’d be developing useless keyboard firmware or some other junk no one but me would care about. It would provide minimal value to the world.
- therealdrag0 4y agoSure that’s risky for 100% of population. But for 0.1 percent of population who makes many millions a year, who cares? No one is that special of a snowflake we need to optimize for their productivity. Most of those people are either already workaholics or already retired on a yatch.
- dennis_jeeves1 4y agoI wonder why people endlessly argue how much they should tax the rich and the poor, there is only one answer: 100% of everything, i.e wealth, income, gifts etc. It's a nice round number and everybody is taxed fairly.
- nullsense 4y agoNorth Korea called, it wants it's ideology back.
- therealdrag0 4y agoWth. Are you trolling or what?
- ruddyrabbit 4y agoAgreed. After all, that is the equivalent rate for all work done in the commons, on free software for example. Zero dollars earned, but somehow the incentive is still there. Money is not the only thing that motivates human beings.
- zdbrandon 4y agoSure this works for creative endeavors. Now what would motivate someone to pick fruit in the summer Sun? Or clean toilets in a corporate office? Sure you could say, "there are some people who just enjoy picking fruit." But are there enough people to satisfy the demand? And even if there are, what do you do with them as that demand decreases? The people who love picking fruit will have to clean toilets.
- ramblenode 4y agoI believe this is why the income tax is so popular with economists. Other taxes create some type of negative feedback where raising the tax decreases transactions and shifts capital elsewhere. But with the income tax people have no choice but to keep working and may even have to work more. So the "economy" benefits because more labor/capital can be squeezed out of individuals without slowing anything down.