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

71–80 of 161 posts

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

#71

Post by ctdonath »

alphabettsy wrote: post #33
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 should the average American pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes? Allowing the rich to choose what organizations and causes are worth supporting is certainly not Democratic. For example, you have private schools getting massive amounts of donations from Alumni, while the local elementary is shutting off water fountains because of lead exposure and they can’t afford to update the plumbing. I also don’t…

Why should the average American pay a higher percentage of their income in taxes?

They shouldn't. All should pay $0 taxes.

We expect adults be financially independent after a few decades. The gov't, with its ability to literally make money along with other unique powers, should be financially independent after 225 years.

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

#72

Post by bilbo0s »

ctdonath wrote: post #62
bilbo0s wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It's not like it [democracy] is really an admirable state of affairs. So, what is an "admirable state of affairs" if democracy is so objectionable to you?

Individual liberty. Individuals choosing to engage in mutually beneficial activities, rather than being told at implied gunpoint to do what a bunch of ignorant strangers, or a tyrannical dictator, decided.

>Billionaires have to at least be competent enough to make their money, and shelter it from the thieving governments and other leeches etc etc etc

and

>rather than being told at implied gunpoint to do what a bunch of ignorant strangers

You are clearly emotionally driven on this issue so it's probably best that I step out of this discussion. You have a good day guy.

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

#73

Post by ceejayoz »

malvosenior wrote: post #53
AlexandrB wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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…

I trust politicians as much as I trust billionaires: not at all. In fact as the OP points out at least the occasional billionaire will do something productive for society. The same can't be said for the government. > [citation needed] In fact, there's an easy counter-example. Healthcare. More expensive than any public system, with worse outcomes for the general population. The only reason health care is so expensive…

> The same can't be said for the government.

Sure, if we pretend roads, emergency services, public schools, safer cars, hell, the very Internet we're posting on don't exist.

> The only reason health care is so expensive in the US is because of government regulations.

And yet, highly regulated, government-run European healthcare costs half what it does here.

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

#74

Post by neogodless »

roenxi wrote: post #17

At least everyone can agree that government taxing should be higher than government spending^. This article is mainly baiting rich v poor division; on a close read it doesn't actually say much. The real issue is that everything in general has become so complicated that nobody has a hope of understanding how it works. Unless we have accountants on deck today nobody really has a feel for how much the rich pay in taxes…

I'd prefer the government spent the same amount as taxing. Or it does very thoughtful borrowing. (There are arguments about whether a government should have debts, and I don't think that's particularly salient to your point, but I can only assume you want taxes higher than spending to either pay off debt, or save for a rainy day.)

How do the rich think about money and spending? Everything is an investment (or an intentional extravagance to enjoy a little bit of that money.) So there's going to be literal investing (financial vehicles) but also influential investing to ensure things go the way they want. Money at that level doesn't magically translate to power without thoughtful investment.

Anyway, I think we're saying some of the same things. But I don't like the statements saying that we can't examine taxes being paid or spent. We should be working towards that being more transparent - not necessarily that we need to make public the private financial details of everyone (or just the particularly rich), but that there's, at least on the government side, a clear picture of how the various tax policies are being exercised and adhered to.

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

#75

Post by ajsnigrutin »

alphabettsy wrote: post #51
dwrowe wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a tired take. Is it not possible to just believe that a person shouldn’t HAVE to pay more (percentage-wise) in taxes because they’re successful - while at the same time, be fine with the credits / deductions available to the less fortunate? I can’t be the unicorn here.

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.

If by "the wealthiest" you mean millionares and billionaires, then you must also know that they have ways to move their money around to avoid those taxes. Some programmer with 200k wage, living in an ultra expensive city, doesn't.

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

#76

Post by akhosravian »

skrowl wrote: post #4

It's probably different in the UK where The Guardian is, but in the USA the bottom 45% of wage earners pay $0 federal income tax while the top 20% pay 87% of it. I'm not sure how much more you should slap on the "evil" job-creating rich before it's "proper", but 87% already seems pretty high to me. https://www.marketwatch.com/story/45-of-americans-pay-no-fed...

“The top 20% pay 87% of [federal income tax]” is only a meaningful statement in context of percentage of income they make. What’s that number?

OTOH the top 400 households in the US paid a lower tax rate than any other group who owed anything last year: https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2019/10/06/opinion/incom...

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

#77

Post by ajsnigrutin »

geggam wrote: post #27
dwrowe wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is such a tired take. Is it not possible to just believe that a person shouldn’t HAVE to pay more (percentage-wise) in taxes because they’re successful - while at the same time, be fine with the credits / deductions available to the less fortunate? I can’t be the unicorn here.

Why is it tired? The wealthy benefit from the social infrastructure they live in. Should they not pay for it ? Think of the wear and tear the roads get from the Amazon delivery service alone.

Doesn't amazon pay road taxes for their trucks (or whatever they're called over there)?

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

#78

Post by rayiner »

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…

> More expensive than any public system, with worse outcomes for the general population.

That presupposes the US would have a cheaper system if it were public. (Also most European systems aren’t “public systems” but that’s a separate issue.) We spend more per student on our public education system than almost every other OECD country, to get far worse results. Our public transit systems spend several times as much money per mile to build transit, again to get worse results. There are scant few examples of the US public sector being competitive with those of well-run European countries. (In fact I can’t think of any.) Remarkably, Canada’s non-military government spending per person is lower than America’s non-military government spending, and Canada offers significantly more services for less money.

I don’t think it is at all clear that costs wouldn’t go up under a public healthcare system in the US.

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

#79

Post by tangent128 »

ColanR wrote: post #18
noahth wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Everyone deserves a say in the allocation of resources. The way we accomplish that is through government. Elon Musk is not improving the environment, he's launching cars into space for giggles while mistreating his workers.

> Everyone deserves a say in the allocation of resources. How about we amend that to, 'Everyone deserves a say in the allocation of resources, in proportion to their demonstrated ability to amass and manage resources'. Elon Musk figured out how to make a ton of money; he has more right to determine its use than some bureaucrat in an office. You say that government is our method of collective allocation, but it's real…

How is the ability to amass resources relevant to competence in determining the appropriate allocation?

That's like saying that winning a game makes you competent to referee it.

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

#80

Post by ctdonath »

s9w wrote: post #20
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…

In that case no one should pay taxes.

Exactly.
Post reply on HN