5 ms·
I’m assuming they think that rich people spend more so they pay more. This is a fallacy, because poor people spend a higher portion of their income (over a 100%
by Pet_Ant 9mo ago
I’m assuming they think that rich people spend more so they pay more. This is a fallacy, because poor people spend a higher portion of their income (over a 100% a lot of the time).
- Reimersholme 9mo ago[dead]
- epolanski 9mo agoMost economists agree that sales taxes are the fairest because they are always proportional to consumption.
- thisislife2 9mo agoI don't get it - what about "taxing consumption" makes it "fair"? Poor people aren't poor because they spend more money than others. They are poor because they don't have enough money to live a "decent" life (assume a middle-class lifestyle) or to even save it. Right?
- MichaelZuo 9mo agoConsumption has real negative externalities on the environment and other people… i.e. A burger wrapper doesnt care about economic status.
- genocidicbunny 9mo agoUntil you get to things like Vimes Theory of Boots. Not all consumption is equal. Not all consumption can be reduced. A burger wrapper might not care about economic status, the bag of beans and rice might.
- MichaelZuo 9mo agoHow is reducibility relevant? Do you think the burger wrapper just automatically winks out of existence for poor people?
- thisislife2 9mo agoAgain, what has that got to do with the "fairness" aspect of taxing consumption?
- MichaelZuo 9mo agoThere are no “fairness” molecules so it clearly cannot be relevant for the physical generation of negative externalities. How exactly that load is divvied up by society, where it would apply, is not something I know the answer to.
- IAmBroom 9mo agoCitation required. The economists I've read disagree strongly.
- lazylizard 9mo agoi thought most economists would agree that consumption should be encouraged and savings should be discouraged. and that'd be how progressive taxes work? people tend to save more and consume less as their incomes increase?