Because They've Earned It

[DanaC]

This is a problem I well understand Ali. The ward I represent is full of children whose expectations in life are tragically low....their family's expectations for them are likewise low....I also know people who've done very well for themselves and yet are patently thick as pigshit....go figure.

[Aliantha]

let me ask you this. Have you ever given to a charity? Maybe to the victims of Katrina for instance, or the Tsunami in south west asia?

If so, you have a social conscience, if not, your argument might work.

If you have a social conscience, it means you care about what happens to others in your society and see value in helping those who for whatever reason are not as well off as yourself. As to who should pay more tax etc, that's a difficult one. Probably another topic entirely.

So?

Originally Posted by Aliantha

let me ask you this. Have you ever given to a charity? Maybe to the victims of Katrina for instance, or the Tsunami in south west asia?

If so, you have a social conscience, if not, your argument might work.

If you have a social conscience, it means you care about what happens to others in your society and see value in helping those who for whatever reason are not as well off as yourself. As to who should pay more tax etc, that's a difficult one. Probably another topic entirely.

I have... that has nothing to do with anything.
I choose to have one.
To try to force it is wrong.
You cannot, and should not, try to make someone care.

[DanaC]

So, unless wealthy people have a monopoly on talent, ability and worth, they are depriving society of the benefits that could be gleaned from t hose who do not come from a wealthy background.

That is called natural selection.

[Spexxvet]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

That is called natural selection.

It's actually unnatural. Natural selection would be for the "best person" to succeed. Her the "most connected person" to win. The one who was given more just because his parents had wealth.

[DanaC]

no. society skews 'natural selection' to favour an unnatural set of criteria.

[Aliantha]

If you choose to live in a society and benefit from doing so, you should have one. If you don't, the state has a responsibility to make you do so because you have benefitted from the state.

Nothing occurs outside of nature.

At the risk of sounding like Ebeneezer, that is what taxes are for... I believe each should be taxed per-capita, not one group more than another.
I don't understand you...
Are you saying you want to get rid of social programs and rape the rich for it?

[DanaC]

True enough, but plenty occurs within nature. Natural tendencies can be subverted by societal norms.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

Nothing occurs outside of nature.

Including stepped tax rates. So what?

Sure... which is why the rich have a vested interest in continuing the current system that allows them to get out of most taxes the rest of us pays.
If you want them to have to pay like everyone else, tax them like everyone else... duh!

"Social norms" is our system of natural selection... "just because" they have wealth is it's determiner. Way it is.
& one has to hang on to the wealth and do something with it... a hell of a lot more than a "just because". It is called swimming with sharks for a reason.

[Happy Monkey]

So now your problem is that the rich pay too few taxes?

I have a problem with the tax system as it is. I feel all should pay a flat percentage of what they earn or spend... I could care less which.
Rich or poor. I have heard the argument that this would be easier on the rich. Bullshit, no easier than it is now. Being rich is easier, it should be.
Many want the rich to be taxed MORE than poorer people.
This is wrong. Not only is it unethical, but it encourages them to do what happens now... take over the tax system and rig it with loop-holes so they don't have to pay as much in taxes, or any at all.
I have some extremely rich family who have told me that if they did not want to pay taxes that they would not have to and that they have peers that make money off of the tax system. I also know that for what they make they pay a lower percentage than most.
The reason that there is so much resistance in government to a flat tax is that the rich are in control of it and they don't want it because they will pay more... not because the poor will, that is a scare tactic.
By doing this we would eliminate a sales tax (the states would just get a percentage), it would be easier on the poor and middle class.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by rkzenrage

The reason that there is so much resistance in government to a flat tax is that the rich are in control of it and they don't want it because they will pay more...

They would be just as much in control of a flat tax, and just as able to put in loopholes, but the poor still wouldn't, and now they'd be paying more.