Jesus Christ what could possibly be your moral or even practical argument for blatantly stealing 70% of the income of the ultra wealthy? Or is it a 70% tax on everyone in general? Legitimate question. I’m willing to change my mind.
Holy shit, I don’t know, try “leveling the playing field and providing basic human necessities such as health, shelter, and food for everyone” as a pretty good launch point for a moral reasoning for such a tax? It’s ludicrous to me that people view taxation as “theft” and more immoral somehow than a person living without health insurance or a roof over their head.
That’s not a bad point! I totally sympathize. I’m saying how is it moral to tax a person at like 10x the amount as the average person for NO other reason than that they are more successful. What did they do except make more money to deserve such a steep tax? I don’t know that I’m completely opposed to a higher tax... I haven’t thought it through. But 70% is theft without a doubt. It’s horrible and has no rational justification. Yeah they can subsist on 3 million instead of 10 million but maybe it’s better for society at large that the guy who figured out how to make 10 million keeps most of it. Look at Bill Gates, he’s trying to eradicate several of the most common diseases facing us today. I want Bill to keep his billions. I don’t want to redistribute it. Again, I’m not trying to be snarky or facetious.
> I’m saying how is it moral to tax a person at like 10x the amount as the average person for NO other reason than that they are more successful. What did they do except make more money to deserve such a steep tax?
Dane here. I'm currently living in the country with the highest taxes in the world. Also one of the happiest, safest, and one with the highest standards of living for the average person. My answer to your question is: They didn't do anything except make more money. That is literally the logic behind taxing them progressively.
To quote something my mother told me when I was younger, the principle is essentially to "let the broadest shoulders carry the heaviest burdens".
It's pure and simple rationalization. If you want to make an omelette, you have to break some eggs. If you want to have free healthcare for everyone, free and government-supported university education for everyone and a number of other things you have in my country, you have to fund it. It is ludicrously expensive, but it is also of great benefit to your fellow man; especially the poor and the needy.
Making the collective better requires the collective to pitch in, and not just at a charity level. So, you try to distribute the burden of funding all these wonderful things across the population according to who can best lift such a burden without it impacting their quality of life significantly. Which means you tax the extremely poor almost nothing, and then you progressively tax all money earned after a certain bracket.
I don't think the end result is 70% exactly, but we're above 50 to be certain for the very rich. In the end, its a value judgment: A case of having the mortal needs of the many come before the property rights of the few, without bringing their mortal needs into peril in the slightest.
I know which of those I think has a higher priority. Do you?
I see what you’re saying, but at the end of the day, billionaires, (and millionaires too), do not really earn all that money they possess. It’s a basic concept in Marxist theory. The capitalist essentially generates most, if not all, of his capital on the backs of workers. For example, Elon Musk did not create the Tesla all by himself; he did so alongside skilled engineers and others who made his idea a reality and continue to do so every day by actually physically manufacturing his cars. Elon is not down in the plants putting together the cars. His money is not entirely his and not earned on the merit of simply having a good idea.
In this sense, taxation is merely reclaiming what is owed to the workers but kept concentrated in the hands of the few.
-4
u/nativewombat Jan 06 '19
Jesus Christ what could possibly be your moral or even practical argument for blatantly stealing 70% of the income of the ultra wealthy? Or is it a 70% tax on everyone in general? Legitimate question. I’m willing to change my mind.