Taxing the Rich

[New Tolerance]

I need some good arguements arguing for that the rich are not too heavily taxed. (The main arguement from my opposition is that rich people should not have to pay for poor people's education through taxes) Can you comrades give me some good points that I can use the next time I run into this kind of debate?

[The Feral Underclass]

erm.....look around the world dude!!!

[Bradyman]

That's easy. The rich actually get more benefits from taxes than the poor people. Here are some examples:

In the area of Defense spending, which is a large percentage of the budget, the rich have more to be defended. Like how you pay more for insurance if you have an expensive house or car.

Social Security: put in more, (taxes) get more when you retire.

Public education does not help the rich directly, (they send they're kids to private schools) but it helps the companies by creating a more intelligent workforce that can do higher level activities without having to go to such high-priced schools.

Infrastructure: airports, and interstate highways are mainly used by those that can afford cars and airplane tickets, not those in the ghettos.

And, for christ sake, corporate welfare constitutes hundreds of billions of dollars for large businesses also helps the rich executive and not the poor.

Rich should get taxed more because they are getting more.

[redstar2000]

A famous American bank robber of the 1930s was asked why he always held up banks.

His reply: "That's where the money is."

If one must get involved in arguing about taxing the rich (instead of just taking it all)...the obvious answer is that you tax them because "that's where the money is."

http://anarchist-action.org/forums/images/smiles/redstar.gif

The RedStar2000 Papers (http://www.anarchist-action.org/marxists/redstar2000/)
A site about communist ideas

[The Children of the Revolution]

Unfortunately, in a capitalist society, over-taxing the rich makes no sense. They would just move elsewhere, or take businesses (think - jobs) elsewhere. And spend less, thereby putting less into the economy.

Plus, taxing the rich an extra 30% raises the equivalent amount of cash as taxing the middle classes an extra 1%. (In the UK, that is...) You could do both of course...

[New Tolerance]

The scenario proposed by my opposition was: If I was 95 years old (going to die soon) and I don't have any kids, why should I pay any taxes to support lower class people's education.

[The Children of the Revolution]

The scenario proposed by my opposition was: If I was 95 years old (going to die soon) and I don't have any kids, why should I pay any taxes to support lower class people's education.


If you're 95 and going to die soon, why not do some good in the world? Why not support the "lower classes" and their education rather than hoarding money for no apparent reason? Why not make people happy, (or happier) God likes that! And he might get a 'warm-fuzzy-feeling' inside - that'd be worth it!

Although the guy deserves some respect if he's still employed at 95!!

[New Tolerance]

Originally posted by The Children of the [email protected] 18 2004, 03:17 AM


The scenario proposed by my opposition was: If I was 95 years old (going to die soon) and I don't have any kids, why should I pay any taxes to support lower class people's education.


If you're 95 and going to die soon, why not do some good in the world? Why not support the "lower classes" and their education rather than hoarding money for no apparent reason? Why not make people happy, (or happier) God likes that! And he might get a 'warm-fuzzy-feeling' inside - that'd be worth it!

Although the guy deserves some respect if he's still employed at 95!!
You don't pay taxes if you retire? No property tax either?

[The Children of the Revolution]

Hey man, I'm not 95 and I don't own a house! When you mentioned taxes, I immediately thought of taxed earnings - wages. I don't know what the guy's moaning about anyhow, useless old git. Nick all his money and put him out of his misery, that's what I say! Bleehhh!

[apathy maybe]

For the senario with you being 95, well don't pay taxes. We will take it all when you die. All of it. Once your dead you don't need it, you children don't need it (they should be old enough to look after themselves), but the poor do.

[Don't Change Your Name]

think it this way:

Johnny is poor. He works very hard, but he gains $300 per month, but from that money he spends $60 on taxes.

Jimmy is rich. He "works hard" and gains $10000 per month, but he spends about $60 on that.

How can Johnny save money so that their kids go to a university or to pay for the things they need? Why Jimmy, who sits all the day in a confortable desk, gets so much money while Johnny works 12 hours a day in an unsafe factory to get only enough money to survive? And why does Johnny have to spend so much on something that only benefits people like Jimmy (like the state and the police to protect their "individual and property rights") while he can't feel most of those benefits? Why does he have to spend such a high % of his salary in defending an exploiter?

This is just a simple example I came up with.

[Hegemonicretribution]

If there is no response to these reasonable answer, try something like; It will make you more efficient. That is there is more incentive to work hard, if you recieve less money for what you get, although proportionally you pay more as you earn more, you will in more in real terms. It is a way to ensure that the wealthy stay wealthy, and never end up poor and idle...but don't sound sarcastic.

[Saint-Just]

It depends to what extent, how progressive the tax is. The rich man and the poor man live in the same society, if the poor man works to create a more prosperous society the rich man will benefit too. So, the poor individual has no money to receive a good education, if he receives money from the rich man then he can have a good education. A good education provides a more skilled workforce. A more skilled workforce creates a far more prosperous economy, the said economy will develop a comparative advantage in its labour force. Look at the difference between America and any developing country. The workforce in America is more skilled and so the economy is geared towards industry that makes more money, fincancial services, information technology and so on.

Closing the gap between rich and poor may make the rich man relatively poorer, but in the long run it will make the nation richer and thus the rich man richer in real terms.

[RyeN]

I really dont see where the debate is, its clearly unjust that there are people who are ritch whilst others sleep in alley ways. Of course the ritch should pay for the education of the poor. The education standards between the classes are one of the ways the ritch use thier power to keep the ritch, ritch and the poor poor. Posibly sugest a system where everyone is an owner in all buissness, and everyone is ritch and taxed the same rate of 0%

[JonP]

Those who have most allso have most to give ......

:blink: