4 ms·

What is your rule of thumb based on? In, for example, the Netherlands the richest people pay less tax [0]. Do you think this is not the case in many other cou

• robertlagrant 3y ago
  > What is your rule of thumb based on? E.g. [0] > In, for example, the Netherlands the richest people pay less tax [0]. Do you think this is not the case in many other countries? That's a non sequitur from the previous point. However, on the "who pays taxes?" point, that article is careful to only talk about income tax in absolute terms, and indirect taxes in relative terms. It doesn't appear to be trying to make an objective analysis. > Is that a benefit of having rich people? I don't share the assumption that people should only exist if they're a benefit. > If companies were employee-owned that tax would still be paid. Some companies are employee-owned, but you have to think how that works for every type of business. Assuming that it's easy to make a business, and the hard bit is the ownership structure is a mistake. [0] https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2016/08/01/why-so-many-wealthy-families-lose-it-all-in-3-generations-and-how-to-stop-it https://www.thinkadvisor.com/2016/08/01/why-so-many-wealthy-...
  • depr 3y ago
    >I don't share the assumption that people should only exist if they're a benefit. Well it's not a matter of the people existing, it's whether they are rich or not. They can exist without the money. Anyway, if you don't think it matters if they are of benefit, then why did you bring up the fact that they pay taxes?
    • robertlagrant 3y ago
      > Well it's not a matter of the people existing, it's whether they are rich or not. They can exist without the money. I meant people with a certain amount of money. I don't think we should be assessing pros or cons of economic systems based on whether people get to keep their money. > Anyway, if you don't think it matters if they are of benefit I don't know what this means. > then why did you bring up the fact that they pay taxes? I bring it up because saying they pay less in income taxes doesn't matter if they're spending money on stuff that employs people (which creates lots of tax) and gets VAT added to it. Everything is constantly taxed, at many levels, all the time. Pretending we don't live in a society where not much tax is paid seems ludicrous. Lots of tax is paid. If it's paid as VAT instead of income tax - who cares?
      • depr 3y ago
        What I meant is: >I don't think we should be assessing pros or cons of economic systems based on whether people get to keep their money. but earlier you said: >They are also, for everything they buy, and everyone they employ, paying tax. So if we should not assess the economic system based on whether people keep their money, i.e. pay tax, then why mention that they pay tax? It doesn't seem relevant.
        • robertlagrant 3y ago
          > So if we should not assess the economic system based on whether people keep their money, i.e. pay tax Not just pay tax. People lose money over generations for all sorts of reasons. I brought up tax in the context of "redistribution", as there's a growing worldview that says tax is not as a thing to pay for central services, but more just to take money from people who have more of it than they do.