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

Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

online.wsj.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 358 posts

Re: Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

#31

Post by tptacek »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #13

There's a potentially dangerous line that the US is approaching where, factoring in all the exemptions, credits, and deductions, a majority of the population will not be paying income taxes at all. Thus, a majority of the population will be deciding (via their votes) how much and on what the taxes of the minority will be spent. The only saving grace, if you can call it that, is that the people who actually place the…

This is pretty disingenuous. I've held low-wage jobs, and so have most of the members of my immediate family, and taxes took a serious bite out our paychecks. You are referring to the federal income tax, as many people do in debates like this, but lower-middle class people pay a much greater percentage of their income in payroll taxes than do wealthy people; the "income tax" debate is misleading.

Re: Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

#34

Post by burgerbrain »

ugh wrote: post #29
burgerbrain wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No, the premise of the article is "these are some 'bad' ideas, kick them around in your head and maybe we'll think up something 'good'" . It helps to read.

That’s not a premise what you are quoting there. (Please don’t make pointless accusations.) Scott Adams posits that it is necessary to somehow appease the rich. He doesn’t call them whiners but depending on your perspective that might be a fair extrapolation.

"I spent some time working in the television industry, and I learned a technique that writers use. It's called "the bad version." When you feel that a plot solution exists, but you can't yet imagine it, you describe instead a bad version that has no purpose other than stimulating the other writers to imagine a better version."

"With that technique in mind, I will describe some bad versions of how society might go about the job of convincing the rich to accept higher taxes on themselves. But first I need to address the illusion of fairness."

That is in fact the premise^ of the article.

^"The premise of a film or screenplay is the fundamental concept that drives the plot.", or in this case, the fundamental concept that drives the article.

Re: Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

#35

Post by TomOfTTB »

andreyf wrote: post #17

I think the "power" category is best, but obviously a sensitive topic. What we need is a layered democracy, where the smart people who understand a field and have power to influence laws there (with the advice of experts in whatever fields those laws have side-effects on), but not in a selfish way. The way congress works now, it's the people with money who influence law, and some of them are doing it either out of se…

That's the whole point of the article. Taxing the rich doesn't work because they always find a way to subvert the taxes. So we have to give them something they can "buy" rather than taxing them in order to get their money without them fighting us on it.

Re: Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

#36

Post by georgecmu »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #2

I like the "rich" driving lane idea - put up X licenses for auction in each city, let people bid up the price, let the market decide how much time is worth.

I always thought that institutionalized speeding would be very successful both in terms of additional revenues and time saved. Right now highway speed limits are set to a sort of common denominator: safest for the worst car and driver on the road. But if you're driving a modern, well-maintained car and are adequately trained, there's no evidence that you'd be unsafe driving 20 mph over the speed limit. So, why not for an extra, non-nominal, fee, raise speed limits on interstate highways to qualified drivers? Of course they'd have to take additional driving lessons, pass extra driving tests to extend their privilege every year, and drive only approved cars, i.e. no 1996 Ford Explorers need apply.

Re: Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

#37

Post by ugh »

burgerbrain wrote: post #34
ugh wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That’s not a premise what you are quoting there. (Please don’t make pointless accusations.) Scott Adams posits that it is necessary to somehow appease the rich. He doesn’t call them whiners but depending on your perspective that might be a fair extrapolation.

"I spent some time working in the television industry, and I learned a technique that writers use. It's called "the bad version." When you feel that a plot solution exists, but you can't yet imagine it, you describe instead a bad version that has no purpose other than stimulating the other writers to imagine a better version." "With that technique in mind, I will describe some bad versions of how society might go abo…

That’s disclaimer to protect himself from any and all attacks on his positions.

Re: Scott Adams: How to Tax the Rich

#38

Post by pnathan »

bluedevil2k wrote: post #13

There's a potentially dangerous line that the US is approaching where, factoring in all the exemptions, credits, and deductions, a majority of the population will not be paying income taxes at all. Thus, a majority of the population will be deciding (via their votes) how much and on what the taxes of the minority will be spent. The only saving grace, if you can call it that, is that the people who actually place the…

I like the idea of taxing all income at a fixed and flat rate, no exceptions, no exemptions, credits, deferrals, whatever.

It's a terrible idea, but it is also, by definition, perfectly equitable.

Post reply on HN