Taxation Issues

Philosophy Forums Society, Government, and Economics
1

Linear tax system

  • Yes
  • No
0 voters

Do we want a tax system that is progressive (i.e the more you earn, the more you pay)
Or
Do we want a tax system that is linear (flat rate)?

Do we support the idea of a tax system at all?

Personally I support the progressive system, the more you earn, the more you should pay. I know the progressive system has been under pressure recently from workers doing 2 to 3 jobs, they are not wealthy managers and they deserve to be compensated for the extra surplus value they generate. Some criticise the system for being disincentive to high income earners.

My response is this, managers do very little work and they get paid more than the workers. The higher you go, the lesser work you do, and the more you get paid. Therefore, progressive taxation is a way of ensuring a more equitable distribution of income.

If a workers is doing 2 to 3 jobs, then s/he should pay the amount stipulated because s/he is getting more money. I don’t believe it to be a disincentive because just because something is unpleasant, does not mean you don’t do it. Just because exercising makes you tired, does not mean you shouldn’t be exercising. Also, keep in mind that people earning your amount are paying the same level of tax, so why shouldn’t you?

If you want more money, then you should be paying more taxes. If you are uncomfortable with the means by which you earn the money, i.e selling your labour. then maybe you should look for other means to earn the money. why should we change a system that has worked so well over the past, to suit you because you can’t think of an easier way to earn money?

2

firstly, the notion that managers work less is a completely flawed one

excercise duties payed on tabacco and alchohol shouldn’t be replaced by any other alternative - the externalities caused by the consumption of these goods is minimised most efficiently this way

ad velorem is neseccary to achieve maximum allowcative efficiency for the economy: the vat makes sure that comsumption burdon is shared as equally as possible on the shoulders of both the consumer and the producer; accelerating income tax keeps the gini coeficient at the right level - a steep slope lorenz curve would simply destroy the long run economy

anyother various taxing, e.g. on inheritance, gambling ect, are also needed to suite each case as perfectly as possible

so for most economies, a mixture of taxation methods is proven to be the best. the preference of having one single taxation way is just uneconomic

3

taxes are legalized theft… nothing more

-Imp

4

IMP, IMP, IMP, I see you still haven’t
come to your senses. Without taxes, our very
civilization would end and thus your right to
life. Without taxes, there would be no
firemen, no policemen, no sewage plants,
no garbage pick up, no military forces protecting
you from those darn pesky terrorist trying to hurt you.
Yes, you. Your shortsided hatred of taxes blinds you
to the fact that taxes keep your very way of life
going. Without those taxes it becomes every person
for themselves anarchy, and anarchy is certainly not
the way for one to conduct a life worth living.

Some day you shall come to your senses and
see taxes as the good they are.

Kropotkin

5

this is the epitome of irony…

of course we know who Peter Kropotkin actually was?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Peter_Kropotkin

“Prince Peter Alexeevich Kropotkin (In Russian Пётр Алексе́евич Кропо́ткин) (December 9, 1842 - February 8, 1921) was one of Russia’s foremost anarchists and one of the first advocates of what he called “anarchist communism”: the model of society he advocated for most of his life was that of a communist society free from central government.”

-Imp

6

Taxation is neccesary for the preservation of society!

7

no, taxation is necessary for the preservation of government…

-Imp

8

man, your nihilism shows…

9

no, taxation is necessary for the preservation of government (which exist for to serve the interest of society.

10

Imp, the problem here is you fail to see
the benefits of government. Your solution of
business taking all roles of government simply will not
work. Would you want a enron to handle national security?
Or perhaps worldcom to handle roads and freeways?
Your love or perhaps better said your faith in business,
is midguided and wrong. Your freedom is just as in danger
from big business as it is from the government. You money
is just at risk from big business and your very health is just
at risk from big business as from the government.
Because big business is based on profits, and this pursuit
of profit is a bigger danger to you and me, then any actions
by the government because it has no accountability
except for profit. And look at what happens when
profit is pursued to the exclusion of all other motives.
You get a enron, where enron can
steal billions from california without any
punishment. There is a old saying,
he who fight by the sword dies by the sword,
the Kropotkin rule is this,
he who lives for profit, dies by profit.
And money is a sad and lonely thing to base
life or anything else for that matter.

Kropotkin

11

no, the government exists to serve the interests of government

-Imp

12

-Imp

13

The only fair system is a flat-tax system. Pinnacle come on now, you really need to think more about this issue. Let me give you a scenario that should help clarify this issue:

Person A makes $25,000 / yr. If everyone pays 10% in taxes, person A pays $2,500. Now, let’s take another person, person B. This individual makes $100,000 / yr. Again, 10% rate, this person pays $10,000 in taxes.

Pinnacle wrote:

You see, under the flat tax system your requirement is met. If I make more I pay more plain and simple. Everyone should have to pay the same percentage. Otherwise you are punishing people for being more successful than others. If we live in a truly capitalistic world, why should we punish the people who succeed the most? This is plain ludicrous. As it is now, the highest wage earners, in the US, can pay in excess of 50% of their salary in taxes.

50%? Get real. Why should anyone have to work more than six months out of the year to support people they don’t want to? (Welfare, education, unemployment, etc) The more I think about it, the more I think the US is a communist nation posing as a capitalist one. Except according to Marx, “To each according to his work, to each according to his need.” What is going on in the US is really this, "To all illegals everything free, to all hard workers a dildo up your butt, without lube!

One final question: Didn’t the Supreme Court of the US actually rule against income taxes and call them unconstitutional? So what did the US Gov’t do? They passed an Amendment to allow for it. Greedy bastards!

14

Tell that to the monopolies and price fixers…

15

Out of curiousty, which group do you fall into? Your avatar suggests you’re enjoying it, whichever it is. :wink:

And, what group do the ‘not hard workers, but very rich nevertheless’ fit into?

16

Delboy wrote:

Hard worker. No ‘free’ money from Uncle Sam. I, unfortunately work two jobs and get punished because of it.

As for my avatar, I wouldn’t enjoy being raped by anyone, especially not the IRS. I don’t know how it is in the UK, but I’d like to think in the US we could devise a more fair system. But this won’t happen until we abolish political parties and congressman who can essentially serve life terms. One term limits should be on everything, that way the people who represent us don’t have to cater to specific groups but can instead focus on doing what is right, not what will get them re-elected.

17

price fixers … like nixon?

honest government indeed… :slight_smile:

-Imp

18

this is how everything works: you pay the governemt, the government gives you an environment to live. paying the tax is a civilised act that ensures everyone contributes to the whole. that’s only the idealogy part of course. this is the simple economics fact: no taxation, no nation

19

Peter Kropotkin: "Imp, the problem here is you fail to see
the benefits of government. Your solution of
business taking all roles of government simply will not
work.

Imp: and what you fail to see is that people are people… business is business (all run and made by people) but government is a business as well … business is simply honest with incentive…

K: You are missing the function of government. Government is
not about a profit. In fact for most of the 20th century the U.S.
government ran a deficit. The goal of government is to provide
services that is cheaper done via government instead of
business.

PK: Would you want a enron to handle national security?
Or perhaps worldcom to handle roads and freeways?
Your love or perhaps better said your faith in business,
is midguided and wrong.

Imp: as in yours in government (which is nothing but a business monopoly)… as if the perceived evils of monopolistic business vanish with the imposition of monopolistic business under the name of “public” government…

PK: You keep mixing up business and government.
the two have different functions, goals and purpose.

PK: Your freedom is just as in danger
from big business as it is from the government. You money
is just at risk from big business and your very health is just
at risk from big business as from the government.
Because big business is based on profits,

Imp :so is government… but why do you think they bitch about the budget deficit? the business of government doesn’t create profit (except in conquest), it merely steals profit from the economy via taxes…

PK: Again, how many years of surpluses has government have
in the last 105 years? Less then 10 with 3 of them from
the clinton years.

K: and this pursuit
of profit is a bigger danger to you and me, then any actions
by the government because it has no accountability
except for profit. And look at what happens when
profit is pursued to the exclusion of all other motives.

IMP yes you get MANIFEST DESTINY

PK: Manifest Destiny is a failed and discredited
policy. It has no place in 2005.

K: You get a enron, where enron can
steal billions from california without any
punishment. There is a old saying,
he who fight by the sword dies by the sword,
the Kropotkin rule is this,
he who lives for profit, dies by profit.
And money is a sad and lonely thing to base
life or anything else for that matter.

Imp :a better one is that he who lives for government, dies for government…

PK: It is better to live for a noble reason such as
what a government stands for instead of living
for the lowest common denominator of profit.

Kropotkin

20

I don’t know why you work two jobs, but do you think that anyone should have to work two jobs to earn a living wage?

I couldn’t agree more.

In the UK we have three main types of taxation: income tax, National Insurance (NI) and value added tax (VAT).

Income tax is progressive with the basic rate about 22 percent and the top rate, which kicks in on earnings over about £28000, at 40 percent. So far, so good (although could be better).

However, NI is in effect a regressive tax. Weekly earnings of up to about £350 are taxed at ten percent, but any amount over that is exempt

VAT is also a regressive tax, as a greater percentage of a low earners disposable income goes on VAT compared to that of a higher earner.

Then there’s the question of what all this tax revenue is spent on and who benefits the most.

  1. The National Health Service
    The better off, middle classes consume a larger quantity and receive better quality than the poorer classes.

  2. State Education
    The same as for health.

  3. Roads
    The larger the income the greater the likelihood of owning one or more cars and therefore make more use of the roads (and this is especially true of expensive motorways).

4.Retirement
This is twofold. Firstly, as there is a correlation between income and life expectancy, so wealthier people will receive more state pension and secondly, wealthier people take more advantage of the tax concessions on private pensions.

Then, of course, there are all the advantages that having money provides with regard to transactions in the private sector: food shopping, banking, insurance.

Maybe it’s different in the US, but in the UK it’s ‘middle Britain’ that decides who runs the country.

It’s so easy to knock the poor and blame them for the taxes that we pay. But if you want to know who the real leeches are, look towards the home owning, gas guzzling, long-living educated middle-class.

And what really riles me is the implication on so many posts that the wealthy are hard working and the poor are lazy. Then, having stated this ‘fact’, it’s open season on poor people.