Thread: Fairness

Right, and also don't forget the flat taxers and others who want to remove the little progressiveness that is present today,
as well as those who want to abolish taxes completely.

There are so many that don't consider progressive taxes as fair or legal and want to get rid of them, while others of us disagree with them,
and this fundamental disagreement is part of what causes the huppla even though we have a tax system with progressive elements.

Originally Posted by Meta777

who want to remove the little progressiveness that is present today

Half the people pay all the income tax and the other half pays none. They feed at the proverbial trough. I can't even imagine what a lot of progressiveness would be like.

Originally Posted by Meta777

Right, and also don't forget the flat taxers and others who want to remove the little progressiveness that is present today,
as well as those who want to abolish taxes completely.

There are so many that don't consider progressive taxes as fair or legal and want to get rid of them, while others of us disagree with them,
and this fundamental disagreement is part of what causes the huppla even though we have a tax system with progressive elements.

Income tax should be abolished. It is an invention of progressives to expand government so they can socially engineer their Utopian vision.

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Income tax should be abolished. It is an invention of progressives to expand government so they can socially engineer their Utopian vision.

Given the need for a safety net, if anything we should be going the other way: integrating income tax with the benefits system (ensuring thereby the avoidance of unemployment and poverty traps)

There are two schools of thought on fairness when it comes to income taxes.

1: A flat tax is fairest because it ensures that everyone contributes an equal part of their income to the society.
2: A progressive tax is fairest because it ensures that taxes come mostly or completely from disposable income and not from the part of their income needed for survival.

I'd like to see a mix of the two. A simple two-bracket system with no deductions, exemptions or credits. The first bracket would be a zero tax bracket and would cover all income up to the poverty line - ensuring that no money needed for survival would be taxed. The second bracket would be about 12% to ensure that we got the same revenue we do today - much lower than the current marginal rate.

But, since this will take away the politicians' ability to manipulate the public through taxes, it will never pass.

Originally Posted by Reiver

Given the need for a safety net, if anything we should be going the other way: integrating income tax with the benefits system (ensuring thereby the avoidance of unemployment and poverty traps)

Which, of course, it never has. After spending trillions on "The War on Poverty" we have about the same rate of poverty (as measured by the government to make sure we keep pumping money into the pit).

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Which, of course, it never has. After spending trillions on "The War on Poverty" we have about the same rate of poverty (as measured by the government to make sure we keep pumping money into the pit).

You're not making sense (in terms of the response to the quote). The US doesn't have a generous welfare system. However, that's not the point. If you want to have an effective welfare state then that will include an income tax (by ensuring integration with the benefit system we can ensure incentives are maximised)

Originally Posted by Reiver

You're not making sense (in terms of the response to the quote). The US doesn't have a generous welfare system. However, that's not the point. If you want to have an effective welfare state then that will include an income tax (by ensuring integration with the benefit system we can ensure incentives are maximised)

Incentives not to work are maximized.

Originally Posted by Hoosier8

Incentives not to work are maximized.

You'll find that its countries with high inequality and/or ineffective welfare states that tend to exhibit class structures and phenomena such as an 'underclass' (permanently stuck on low income).

Originally Posted by fmw

Half the people pay all the income tax and the other half pays none.

Perhaps that's because that half of the people control almost 96% of the wealth and receive nearly 83.3% of the income.
If you really want the other half to pay more in income taxes you've got to ensure that they are able to draw an income
sufficient enough such that they still have enough to support themselves with after taxes.

I believe the phrase, "you can't draw blood from a stone" applies nicely here.
So then if we want the government to work at all doing the things it does now, we will have to have some progresivity within the tax system,
and I don't see how you could disagree, that is unless of course you are part of the flat tax crowd or the abolish taxes crowd that I mentioned earlier....

-Meta