Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

theguardian.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 161 posts

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#151

Post by DuskStar »

zpallin wrote: post #124
logicchains wrote: post #114

Earlier quoted context omitted.

There's a huge difference. Kings and dictators get power through war and violence. Musk got rich through making and selling things people want. Surely you see the difference between war and commerce.

Well actually no. Kings and Dictators also gain power by being opportunistic in the same way as Musk. They begin by amassing social power, and then at the right moment they take over. See the Medici family of Florence, or the East India Company. War is not the only means for domination. Also, the only difference between war and commerce is the level of violence applied. War is an exchange, just as commerce is. The on…

> Lastly, Elon Musk didn't just get rich through selling things people want. No one believes that this works. Henry Ford even said as much: "If I had asked people what they wanted they would have asked for faster horses." Musk gained his power by being opportunistic. He jumped into opportunities at the right time, competitively fought to get the engineers he needed, and punched his way through almost every problem he faced. The product quality is a byproduct of his ruthlessness as a capitalist. Don't forget it.

I think you're horribly twisting the meaning of Ford's words there. It doesn't mean "ignore what people want", it means to figure out what they actually want. People didn't want faster horses, they wanted better transport - "faster horses" was just how they expressed that.

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#152

Post by foogazi »

bonoboTP wrote: post #119
ctdonath wrote: post #115

Earlier quoted context omitted.

the main function of the govt is to redistribute. Absolutely not. That's communism, which never does - and never can - turn out well. The USA was founded on the main function of gov't is to protect individual rights - that each knows & serves his own interests better than strangers.

But then what? Roads and police, that's it? It seems like many Americans view the government as some external entity that imposed itself on the people and now the people have to keep them in quarantine. A bit like how we felt in Hungary when the Soviets were sitting on us. They came in and now are taking our stuff away. But a country's own govt isn't supposed to be "those guys who came in and took our stuff for thems…

what makes you think society can’t organize itself?

The state only exists for protection of its members: military protection from other states and the monopoly on violence with a system of law internally

Overtime a lot of stuff just gets tacked on

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#153

Post by foogazi »

AlexandrB wrote: post #26
ctdonath wrote: post #7

Why the notion that gov't should be the provider & arbiter of all? Why do none of the "they don't pay enough taxes" crowd not realize the rich do so much of, and more efficiently, what the gov't purports to with massive overhead? Job creation, charity, arts funding, lowering costs of necessities, etc - and at levels & locations which gov't would never achieve. The "tax/soak the rich" notion seems almost entirely puni…

> Why the notion that gov't should be the provider & arbiter of all? Because the government is democratically elected. Billionaires are not. > Why do none of the "they don't pay enough taxes" crowd not realize the rich do so much of, and more efficiently, what the gov't purports to with massive overhead? [citation needed] In fact, there's an easy counter-example. Healthcare. More expensive than any public system, wit…

what is more democratic than letting people choose we’re their money goes to directly?

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#154

Post by geraltofrivia »

logicchains wrote: post #100
geraltofrivia wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In my opinion, the problem isn't that people hate on Billionaires for philanthropic acts, but increasing wealth gap. In other words - very fact that billionaires exist.

Unless you believe everybody is equally skilled at managing money, investment and entrepreneurship, it's natural that some people will be more successful than others. China 70 years ago had no wealth gap, because everyone was dirt poor (except maybe the Party members).

Look I'm not saying that managing money, technical skills, investment etc should not matter. Of course it should. Of course it's true that some people work harder than others (even if we discount the upbringing, and the family's economic situation).

That said, the difference in standard of living, and the difference in the number of zeros in bank balances surely do not reflect the aforementioned differences. Surely you don't believe that someone works a thousand time better than me (current income ~ 2.5k EUR)?

I'm saying that the wealth gap is far too wide for any reasonable justification. I'm not rooting for a completely egalitarian/communist society, but the current situation needs to change.

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#155

Post by logicchains »

geraltofrivia wrote: post #154
logicchains wrote: post #100

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Unless you believe everybody is equally skilled at managing money, investment and entrepreneurship, it's natural that some people will be more successful than others. China 70 years ago had no wealth gap, because everyone was dirt poor (except maybe the Party members).

Look I'm not saying that managing money, technical skills, investment etc should not matter. Of course it should. Of course it's true that some people work harder than others (even if we discount the upbringing, and the family's economic situation). That said, the difference in standard of living, and the difference in the number of zeros in bank balances surely do not reflect the aforementioned differences. Surely y…

>That said, the difference in standard of living, and the difference in the number of zeros in bank balances surely do not reflect the aforementioned differences.

Look at it this way. A company is something someone can create that grows in value many orders of magnitude. Wouldn't we hence expect an ownership stake in this to also grow many orders of magnitude? Whereas the average worker assists in creating some product that has a fixed value, so when they receive a share of what people are willing to pay for that product/service, it's obviously much less compared to if they had created something with the potential for exponential growth.

If the worker assists in creating a company, and manages to negotiate for stock in it, then they too can experience an exponential growth in their income's zeros if it grows in value.

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#156

Post by foogazi »

geraltofrivia wrote: post #86
bonoboTP wrote: post #2

Scott Alexander had a compelling argument against this: https://slatestarcodex.com/2019/07/29/against-against-billio...

In my opinion, the problem isn't that people hate on Billionaires for philanthropic acts, but increasing wealth gap. In other words - very fact that billionaires exist.

I think the problem is social mobility, that there is a chance as long as people have the opportunity to better their condition in life

everyone starts off with 0 wealth

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#158

Post by alphabettsy »

dwrowe wrote: post #107
alphabettsy wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Without thinking too much I’d agree, but I have a hard time saying someone making $25k/yr should pay 25% of their income compared to someone making $1mil/yr. If the very wealthiest weren’t paying lower effective tax rates than the people making $200k/yr. that would be a start.

They're not paying 25% of their income in taxes - they're paying maybe 1-2% ? https://files.taxfoundation.org/20190719104737/TF_2018TaxDat...

Parent was referencing flat tax. I’m aware that lower incomes do not pay anywhere near 25% on average.

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#159

Post by ben509 »

zpallin wrote: post #91
ben509 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why does it matter if their motives are pure? You don't need a moral justification to do a thing that helps other people and is entirely at your personal expense.

You're right, but unless a person is spending money for a social-cause that benefits us all, they absolutely do not deserve any special status, press coverage or a title such as "philanthropist." They're just spending money for themselves, and that's nothing special. Anyone can do that.

If everyone has to benefit, this seems to define philanthropy to be an impossible feat.

I suspect you're thinking of some celebrities or causes you agree with and assuming their motives must be pure because they agree with your interests. This isn't saying you have some devious intent, I'm just pointing out a potential unquestioned assumption you may hold.

Maybe the compromise is this: Wanting people to like you (or wanting good PR) may be an impure motive, but it's also the least concerning impure motive. After all, if a very powerful person wants to be liked by others, that motivation forces them to then listen to others and consider their interests.

Re: Forget philanthropy. The super-rich should be paying proper taxes

#160

Post by zpallin »

DuskStar wrote: post #151
zpallin wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well actually no. Kings and Dictators also gain power by being opportunistic in the same way as Musk. They begin by amassing social power, and then at the right moment they take over. See the Medici family of Florence, or the East India Company. War is not the only means for domination. Also, the only difference between war and commerce is the level of violence applied. War is an exchange, just as commerce is. The on…

> Lastly, Elon Musk didn't just get rich through selling things people want. No one believes that this works. Henry Ford even said as much: "If I had asked people what they wanted they would have asked for faster horses." Musk gained his power by being opportunistic. He jumped into opportunities at the right time, competitively fought to get the engineers he needed, and punched his way through almost every problem he…

I think you're horribly twisting my words. I didn't mean that at all. I meant exactly what you wrote and there really isn't anything there for you to accuse me of otherwise.
Post reply on HN