The Progressive Tax System is unethical... We need a Flat Tax

STEVEN SEAGOLD

Banned
Banned
Joined
Jan 4, 2015
Messages
3,078
Reaction score
0
Punishes people for being wealthy. Ironically the demographic hurt most by this is the middle class. They're in the no-man's land between not paying much income tax, and being able to utilize the tax code to it's fullest.

Why punish people? Institute a flax tax rate.
 
Because its fucking stupid.

If only the wealthy could pay less, then the middle class would do better! Give me a fucking break.
 
There is this weird myth going around that when rich become become richer, they spread that wealth and enhance the lives of all those beneath them.

In reality, they just keep paying everyone shit wages and keep as much money as possible, with rare exceptions.
 
Punishes people for being wealthy. Ironically the demographic hurt most by this is the middle class. They're in the no-man's land between not paying much income tax, and being able to utilize the tax code to it's fullest.

Why punish people? Institute a flax tax rate.

Because income inequality is a greater threat to global stability then ISIS has wet dreams about.

A flat tax will increase this.

I swear your ilk is intent on proving Marx's criticisms of capitalism 100% correct. Marx solutions are 100% wrong, but his identification of the problem seems prophetic..........

______________________________________________________________________

Karl Marx The Concentration and Centralization of Capital
Posted by Zera | 04:10 |
Karl Marx The Concentration and Centralization of Capital

Although the basic Marxian model assumes perfectly competitive markets with a large number of small firms in each industry, Marx was aware of the growing size of firms, the consequent weakening of competition, and the growth of monopoly power. He concluded that this phenomenon derives from the increasing concentration and centralization of capital. Increasing concentration of capital occurs as individual capitalists accumulate more and more capital, thereby increasing the absolute amount of capital under their control. The size of the firm or economic unit of production is increased correspondingly, and the degree of competition in the market tends to be diminished.

A more important reason for the reduction of competition is the centralization of capital. Centralization occurs through a redistribution of already existing capital in a manner that places its ownership and control in fewer and fewer hands. Marx maintained that larger firms would be able to achieve economies of scale and thus produce at lower average costs than would smaller firms.

Competition between the larger, lower-cost firms and the smaller firms would result in the elimination of the smaller firms and the growth of monopoly.

The battle of competition is fought by cheapening of commodities. The cheapness of commodities depends, ceteris paribus, on the productiveness of labor, and this again on the scale of production. Therefore, the larger capitals beat the smaller.5
The increasing centralization of capital is furthered by the development of a credit system and of the corporate form of business organization. Although the corporation was just beginning to assume importance during Marx's time, he demonstrated a remarkable insight into some of the long-run consequences of the growth of the corporate economy. Corporate capitalism is characterized by the fact that its enterprises assume the form of social enterprises as distinguished from individual enterprises. It is the abolition of capital as private property within the boundaries of capitalist production itself. Transformation of the actually functioning capitalist into a mere manager, an administrator of other people's capital, and of the owners of capital into mere owners, mere money capitalists.

Marx's view was that capital accumulation, economies of scale, the growth of credit markets, and the dominance of the corporation in business organization would lead to the concentration and centralization of capital into fewer and fewer hands. Competition would end by destroying itself, and the large corporation would assume monopoly power. With the large corporation would come a separation of ownership and control, along with a number of undesirable social consequences:
a new aristocracy of finance, a new sort of parasites in the shape of promoters, speculators, and merely nominal directors; a whole system of swindling and cheating by means of corporation juggling, stock jobbing, and stock speculation. It is private production without the control of private property.7 Possibly no other vision of the future of capitalism advanced by Marx has been more prophetic than his law of the concentration and centralization of capital. Yet this prediction was not backed up by any substantial reasoning, for Marx did not fully develop an explanation of the forces that would bring about the growth of the corporation and monopoly power. According to Marx, the growth of the large firm with its monopoly power is merely another example of the contradictions within capitalism between the forces and relations of production that will lead to the ultimate destruction of capitalism.

http://www.economictheories.org/2008/07/karl-marx-concentration-and.html
 
Flat tax is one of the biggest scams the rich and right wingers have been trying to pass for years.

It's up there with privatizing social security.
 
Flat tax is one of the biggest scams the rich and right wingers have been trying to pass for years.

It's up there with privatizing social security.
If you have a job, The government thinks you're rich!
 
Punishes people for being wealthy. Ironically the demographic hurt most by this is the middle class. They're in the no-man's land between not paying much income tax, and being able to utilize the tax code to it's fullest.

Why punish people? Institute a flax tax rate.
<18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18><18>
 
Yeah progressive tax is crap. Great thread.
 
I dont mind a flat tax. But get rid of loopholes that allow the rich to avoid paying their fair share.
 
It seems to lack an explanation for why Billionaires should pay the same tax rate as someone living in poverty.
you don't need an explanation for this because it's fair. the rich person will still be paying more.

we shouldn't be able to tax certain earners at a higher rate because it's immoral as fuck
 
That is an argument for a progressive flat tax, which I have no issue with.

It seems to lack an explanation for why Billionaires should pay the same tax rate as someone living in poverty.
Because they're humans just like the rest of us? 15% of 1 billion is a lot more than 15% of 20k. They pay a lot more in absolute terms, but the important one is relative. Relative equality of taxes is essential.
 
you don't need an explanation for this because it's fair. the rich person will still be paying more.

we shouldn't be able to tax certain earners at a higher rate because it's immoral as fuck


Fair?

Fuck your feelz.(Not trying to be a dick, just making the point)

Mine is an economic argument about functioning systems.

How is the collapse of the global economy fair to anyone?
 
Because they're humans just like the rest of us? 15% of 1 billion is a lot more than 15% of 20k. They pay a lot more in absolute terms, but the important one is relative. Relative equality of taxes is essential.


The collapse of the global economy is a human concern.

Have you ever seen this graph before?

0*uVb8VV84cMh2kY4f.png


Figure-2-e1455723827815.png
 
The collapse of the global economy is a human concern.

Have you ever seen this graph before?

0*uVb8VV84cMh2kY4f.png


Figure-2-e1455723827815.png
And so you choose equality over ethics? You choose equality over freedom? An unequal outcome, given equal opportunity and freedom... Is paramount.
 
And so you choose equality over ethics? You choose equality over freedom? An unequal outcome, given equal opportunity and freedom... Is paramount.


I choose not watching people eat other human being in the street, if the global economy collapses.

That is what I think is moral.

I bet you don't have these same moral objections when it comes to, let's say, US foreign policy though huh?
 
Back
Top