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

Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

trackinghappiness.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 84 posts

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#51

Post by cryptica »

sovietmudkipz wrote: post #35
nicoburns wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes it sound like double is a big proportion. But given how much of the wealth the rich control, I'd expect it to be closer to 80 or 90% of tax coming from the rich. They just don't need it.

That seems like it would decentivize being rich pretty dramatically. The truth is that many rich people are the main movers of the economy, generating positive value for everyone (versus rent seeking). If you decentivize being rich you decentivize generating value. Ayn Rand explores a world where the rich value creators go on strike when people and the government “loot” and plumber their wealth, through regulations a…

>> Ayn Rand explores a world where the rich value creators go on strike when people and the government “loot” and plumber their wealth

If the rich went on a strike today; within a couple of years, they'd all be replaced by a different batch of newly rich people and the economy would be right back where it was before... Then after maybe a few more years, the economy would be in a better shape than it has ever been.

For every rich person, there are hundreds of even more talented people just waiting for an opportunity to take their place.

There have been many cases in history where all the rich people in a country lost their wealth and then they were replaced by a completely new class of rich people; Germany after WW2, Russia after the collapse of the USSR...

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#52

Post by mpreda »

stanleydrew wrote: post #29
nightski wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is why I truly believe in a consumption/sales tax instead of income tax (aka FairTax). You can build as much wealth as you'd like, but it doesn't do you any good until you spend it. At that point there is no avoiding the tax and it's much easier for the IRS to track. Even if a black market developed, at some point that money flows back into the economy and is taxed whereas today it does not (aka tax havens and m…

The idea is nice, and I'm sure I'm not introducing anything you haven't already considered, but a flat consumption tax is in fact regressive. The simplest way to think about it I guess is that regardless of wealth, everybody needs a certain number of calories to live. If you are poor and can only afford subsistence, you are paying a much larger portion of your overall wealth just to stay alive. That may be ok with yo…

A flat consumption tax would be regressive if the two extremes (rich vs. poor) would buy the same goods; but they don't. The very poor buy cheap food, the very rich buy diamonds and services ("dog walking", "garden design", "personal trainer"). Not to mention the two buying different kinds of habitation, in different locations, at very different price-points.

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#54

Post by audleman »

ur-whale wrote: post #13

Is this really a study where there is exactly one subject? He can gather another million data point about a single subject (himself), that's never going to prove the point. At the very best, he'll prove money makes him happy. And probably not even that, given how many factors might affect his own life and moods.

I too find it strange that he couches this as a scientific study. A study of....himself.

Aside from starting an anecdotal conversation about happiness and money, there is no scientific merit here.

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#55

Post by dorchadas »

nightski wrote: post #47
ohyes wrote: post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is even easier to tax dodge because you just pay cash and do stuff off the books. Regressive taxation schemes don’t take into account the disproportionate advantages that the wealthy get from having sound infrastructure provided by the government. How does a sales tax properly impact the monopolist who is getting advantages from state sponsored research and educational subsidies? They also don’t take into accoun…

How do you avoid a sales tax by paying cash? I don't understand that at all. Sure, the tax can't go back in time and make up for the poor system we have now. But you have to start somewhere - at least we could get on the right track.

> How do you avoid a sales tax by paying cash?

Simple: you just make a deal with someone saying that, if you pay cash, they won't report or charge the tax. Maybe you'll even pay them a bit more (but less than it would've cost you with the tax) to do so. With cash, how can you trace it?

But, a sales-tax based system is absolutely awful regardless; it does nothing but hurt those who can least afford it.

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#56

Post by [deleted] »

_kxbd wrote: post #50
nicoburns wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes it sound like double is a big proportion. But given how much of the wealth the rich control, I'd expect it to be closer to 80 or 90% of tax coming from the rich. They just don't need it.

Since you said "expect", this comment isn't directed at you specifically. But let's say someone is advocating for that 80%-90% tax-rate on income: 1. Why should I try to make more money if I'm going to be taxed at 80%-90%, forking over such a massive sum of my money as to make it mostly worthless? 2. Even if this advocate believes the rich don't need the money, what makes the government entitled to take the vast majo…

[deleted]

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#57

Post by [deleted] »

sovietmudkipz wrote: post #35
nicoburns wrote: post #25

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This makes it sound like double is a big proportion. But given how much of the wealth the rich control, I'd expect it to be closer to 80 or 90% of tax coming from the rich. They just don't need it.

That seems like it would decentivize being rich pretty dramatically. The truth is that many rich people are the main movers of the economy, generating positive value for everyone (versus rent seeking). If you decentivize being rich you decentivize generating value. Ayn Rand explores a world where the rich value creators go on strike when people and the government “loot” and plumber their wealth, through regulations a…

[deleted]

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#58

Post by dorchadas »

jemfinch wrote: post #32
Kaveren wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Taxes already do focus on the wealthy with progressive taxes (in many countries), though. From an American perspective, the top federal income tax bracket is 37%. The top state income tax rate can be anywhere from 0% to 12.3% (California), so in total you can pay up to 49.3% of a potion of your income in taxes. In America, the top 1% paid 45.7% of total income tax in 2015 [1] (earning 17% of "expanded cash income"),…

The top 1% of income earners, perhaps, but not the top 1% of wealth, which largely pays only a 15% long-term capital gains tax.

> which largely pays only a 15% long-term capital gains tax

Before or after it was gutted earlier this year?

Re: Money can buy happiness, but not unconditionally

#60

Post by [deleted] »

dorchadas wrote: post #55
nightski wrote: post #47

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you avoid a sales tax by paying cash? I don't understand that at all. Sure, the tax can't go back in time and make up for the poor system we have now. But you have to start somewhere - at least we could get on the right track.

> How do you avoid a sales tax by paying cash? Simple: you just make a deal with someone saying that, if you pay cash, they won't report or charge the tax. Maybe you'll even pay them a bit more (but less than it would've cost you with the tax) to do so. With cash, how can you trace it? But, a sales-tax based system is absolutely awful regardless; it does nothing but hurt those who can least afford it.

[deleted]
Post reply on HN