On 08/14/09 13:21, Warp wrote:
> Neeum Zawan<m.n### [at] ieeeorg>  wrote:
>>          But let's talk about the progressive tax in the reverse direction. Do
>> you think rich people should pay _less_ tax than the ordinary person?
>
>    Maybe, if there's a good economical reason to do so. However, I'd say
> equal tax % for everybody is a good lower limit (well, as long as that %
> is not exorbitant). Rewarding success shouldn't be done at the cost of
> punishing poor performance. That's morally daunting.

	See. Here's what I meant. You said "if there's a good economical reason 
to do so" (and I agree). Why assume that it's not the case when they tax 
them more? Why jump to the conclusion that it's "jealousy" or "punishment"?

	Also, "success" is a very slippery concept. Not everyone views working 
hard to be extremely rich as an example of success. In the context that 
you set, "success" should be defined as being at the ideal point to 
benefit society (at least in an economic sense).


-- 
When a toast with butter falls from your hand, it always falls on the 
butter side.

When a cat falls from a height, it always lands on her feet.

If you tie a buttertoast over a cat with the butterside to the top, and 
let both fall, what will face the floor, the butter or the feet?

Post a reply to this message