Why would this be unreasonable?

http://www.upworthy.com/trying-to-get-richer-heres-why-you-can-pretty-much-give-up-now

I have no doubt there are excellent reasons for it, but I'm terribly uneducated when it comes to economics.

Can somebody explain to me why a 2 percent tax increase on the top 1% would be unreasonable?
It's not unreasonable. Its even fair. But it is impractical.

Say you have (Dr Evil face here) 1 billion dollars.

Say that is suddenly taxed with 2 extra percent. That's 20 million.

Pay a clever accountant and a tax lawyer a million dollars to shift your billion around, "invest" it in trust funds, hide if offshore, what-have-you. There'll always be a legal way to beat the system if you're smart enough. Or can hire people smart enough. When they're done, only a small part of your wealth is actually taxable. You may end up having to pay, say, a million in extra taxes.

You have just saved 18 million dollars.
 
It's not unreasonable. Its even fair. But it is impractical.

Say you have (Dr Evil face here) 1 billion dollars.

Say that is suddenly taxed with 2 extra percent. That's 20 million.

Pay a clever accountant and a tax lawyer a million dollars to shift your billion around, "invest" it in trust funds, hide if offshore, what-have-you. There'll always be a legal way to beat the system if you're smart enough. Or can hire people smart enough. When they're done, only a small part of your wealth is actually taxable. You may end up having to pay, say, a million in extra taxes.

You have just saved 18 million dollars.


That is just so depressing, and I was already depressed after that clip.

But aside from the tax loopholes, there's also I think just the inherent flaws in the tax system. Like the fact that Obama pays a lower tax rate than his secretary. Which I'm not blaming him for, it's just something that strikes me as skewered and should be corrected and yet it still hasn't yet.

I've said this before, but it's so strange to me that someone who earns up to $36,250 pays 15%, and someone who earns $400,001 pays 39.6% - which means if you go from 36k to 400k in income you pay a 24.6% additional tax rate, but if you go from 401k to 4 million, you don't. Unless I'm wrong on that too.

Tax on 400 001 = 39.6%
Tax on 4000 000 = 39.6% right?

Just assuming nobody's done any nifty accounting tricks to hide their money, that being the rate they're both accessed at with all their taxable income, it still just seems so skewered to me. Huge difference in rates for people who earn in the thousands, and no difference for people who earn in the millions. Please correct me if I'm wrong or misinformed though, I really do appreciate it when people help me understand this stuff because I wouldn't even know where to start to figure out if I'm on the completely wrong track.
 
I know with the marginal tax rates thing it does end up being slightly different in total tax rates, but when we're looking at millions vs thousands I think it works out to be a very...marginal difference, ie, effectively the same.
 
The only intelligent thing Pauline Hanson ever said, was to tax ALL financial transactions at 1%.
Every single transaction.
Pay goes into account?
1% tax.
Wanna take money out of your account?
1% tax.
Banks moving money from one account to another?
1% tax.

Think about it.
 
The only intelligent thing Pauline Hanson ever said, was to tax ALL financial transactions at 1%.
Every single transaction.
Pay goes into account?
1% tax.
Wanna take money out of your account?
1% tax.
Banks moving money from one account to another?
1% tax.

Think about it.

Is that with removing all other taxes?
 
Knowing the libertarian view against taxation in general (basic and limited, political philosophy theory says it's unjust to ask people to support others through taxes and instead people are naturally inclined to give charity)...

I'd like to actually hear the republic reason as to why it's so bad.

The two reasons I always hear are:


You raise taxes, they hire less. Every bit of research I've done says this is full of shit.


Being taxed for entitlement programs punishes those who 'worked' for their money.
 
You cannot tax the very rich without taxing yourself.

The vast majority of them can simply demand more money.

If they are entertainers, then the entertainment gets more expensive.

If they are employers they pass it on to the stockholders, the consumer, or the workers.

The only people who ever really pay taxes are the middle class.

If you keep on taxing "the wealthy" you take a step back to a feudal class structure with only those on the top of the pyramid (who can bribe government or simply become part of it) and the poor, who will then be taxed in turn.

Wealth is not to be envied, for it is Capital; the rich do not hoard it like Scrooge McDuck in a big vault where they can go swim in it, they put it to work. The more money they have at work, then the more opportunity there is for the middle class and the upward mobility of the poor.

The best tax would be a FairTax (Fairtax.org) or the Sarah Palin transaction tax...

http://forum.literotica.com/showthread.php?t=722197
 
Knowing the libertarian view against taxation in general (basic and limited, political philosophy theory says it's unjust to ask people to support others through taxes and instead people are naturally inclined to give charity)...

I'd like to actually hear the republic reason as to why it's so bad.

The two reasons I always hear are:


You raise taxes, they hire less. Every bit of research I've done says this is full of shit.


Being taxed for entitlement programs punishes those who 'worked' for their money.

Mises.org
 
188860_447399675342269_2120468911_n.jpg
 
Sorry, I won't debate anyone stupid enough to believe a word out of Ayn Rand's mouth.
 
Do do yourself grave disservice by deciding truth based upon source.

Ayn Rand says nothing not backed by the Austrian School.

If you would like, I can use the language of Say, Wicksteed, von Humboldt, von Mises or Freidman too. However, I and anyone perusing this thread can clearly see that you are most likely not inclined to conversation when a serious charge is much easier than actual constructive dialog.
 
And a pile of buffalo hides to fall into?


I went rug shopping with Mom and Junior back when he was maybe 4. There was a huge heap of rugs, so I picked him up and tossed him into the air toward the pile of rugs. He went a lot higher than I thought he would, and I have the dread feeling I had just done something very stupid. He landed, and after a few seconds, he came bounding out of the pile with a huge grin on his face and said, "do it again."


I respectfully declined.
 
Man, I miss the days when Princess would demand that I bury her and the rat in a pile of leaves...



:sniff:

It all went by in the wink of an eye.
 
Back
Top