4 ms·

Government economists say the government needs more tax money. Very convincing. Instead of making people dependent on social welfare systems, and funneling mon

Government economists say the government needs more tax money. Very convincing. Instead of making people dependent on social welfare systems, and funneling money to useless bureaucracies, how about we force the billionaires to put that money to use in the markets? Not just stocks and bonds. Most certainly not NGOs/non-profits (they siphon enough public money). Venture capital, urban renewal projects, interests that promote science + discovery.

jahnu 3y ago
1) They are not government economists, it’s an independent body. 2) With increased tax revenue from billionaires a government could choose to reduce the tax burden of non billionaires and keep total taxation the same.
- Eumenes 3y ago
  > 1) They are not government economists, it’s an independent body. Its funded by the EU and NORAD - https://www.taxobservatory.eu/about/ https://www.taxobservatory.eu/about/ Not exactly neutral parties in 'we need more tax money' circles. > 2) With increased tax revenue from billionaires a government could choose to reduce the tax burden of non billionaires and keep total taxation the same. A big IF ... I don't trust government to lower taxes in any regard.
harimau777 3y ago
Things like venture capital, research, and urban renewal projects could produce new technologies and companies (which might help the economy). However, they wouldn't necessarily do much to address inequality. It's the difference between making a bigger pie and distributing the pie more evenly. As I see it, the best strategy is to try to balance both approaches.
- deleted 3y ago
  [deleted]
- Eumenes 3y ago
  The same governments that created this so-called inequality should receive billions to address the inequality they apparently created? I don't really buy that. And we all know that inequality, from a western perspective, means addressing "equity", which is a fancy term for wealth redistribution, likely along racial/ethnic lines, and not class.
  - AnimalMuppet 3y ago
    > The same governments that created this so-called inequality... 1. Why do you say "so-called"? Isn't there real inequality? 2. How did the governments create it?

jahnu 3y ago

1) They are not government economists, it’s an independent body. 2) With increased tax revenue from billionaires a government could choose to reduce the tax burden of non billionaires and keep total taxation the same.

Eumenes 3y ago
> 1) They are not government economists, it’s an independent body. Its funded by the EU and NORAD - https://www.taxobservatory.eu/about/ https://www.taxobservatory.eu/about/ Not exactly neutral parties in 'we need more tax money' circles. > 2) With increased tax revenue from billionaires a government could choose to reduce the tax burden of non billionaires and keep total taxation the same. A big IF ... I don't trust government to lower taxes in any regard.

harimau777 3y ago

Things like venture capital, research, and urban renewal projects could produce new technologies and companies (which might help the economy). However, they wouldn't necessarily do much to address inequality. It's the difference between making a bigger pie and distributing the pie more evenly. As I see it, the best strategy is to try to balance both approaches.

deleted 3y ago
[deleted]
Eumenes 3y ago
The same governments that created this so-called inequality should receive billions to address the inequality they apparently created? I don't really buy that. And we all know that inequality, from a western perspective, means addressing "equity", which is a fancy term for wealth redistribution, likely along racial/ethnic lines, and not class.
- AnimalMuppet 3y ago
  > The same governments that created this so-called inequality... 1. Why do you say "so-called"? Isn't there real inequality? 2. How did the governments create it?