reply on: Tax the Rich? Not a Good Idea \ stacker news ~econ

pull down to refresh

0 sats \ 7 replies \ @Solomonsatoshi 12 Aug \ on: Tax the Rich? Not a Good Idea econ

Taxing the rich directly reduces the tax burden upon those who are not wealthy and therefore less able to afford paying taxes.

Thus the beauty and truth in Adam Smiths first maxim of taxation - that the wealthy who benefit more from the protection of the state, pay more tax.

User pays its that simple - just there's always some selfish greedy rich pricks don't want to pay their fair share.

42 sats \ 3 replies \ @Undisciplined OP 12 Aug

Taxing the rich directly reduces the tax burden upon those who are not wealthy

That is categorically false. Raising taxes on the rich has no necessary relationship with tax rates for anyone else.

When you factor in reduced investment, there will almost certainly be negative fallout on the non-wealthy.

0 sats \ 2 replies \ @Bell_curve 13 Aug

left wing interpretations of Adam Smith

0 sats \ 1 reply \ @Solomonsatoshi 13 Aug

Direct quote in fact -

“The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith

31 sats \ 0 replies \ @Bell_curve 13 Aug

Proportion to the revenue? This is most likely a flat consumption tax. Income taxes did not exist in 1776.

Adam Smith also outlined four canons of taxation, which serve as guiding principles for a fair and effective taxation system:

The Tax Should be Certain: Tax laws and rates should be clear and stable. The Tax Should be Convenient: Taxation should be easy and convenient for taxpayers. The Tax Should be Easy to Assess: Taxation should be straightforward and simple to calculate. The Tax Should be Light: Taxation should be minimal and not excessively burdensome.