Neeum Zawan <m.n### [at] ieeeorg> wrote:
> >    I have yet to hear any good argument why rich people should be punished
> > with high taxes, other than emotional things like it being "fair".

>         Again, you use the word "punishment". Since when was taxing punishment? 

  It's a "punishment" in practice, even if it isn't technically one.
If you earn more, you get taxed with a higher percentage. That discourages
earning more in that country, especially if in a neighbouring country you
could earn the same amount and get taxed less, in which case you get to
keep more. Guess what happens.

> If increasing taxes for the rich is punishment, then isn't increasing 
> taxes for *any* group punishment?

  Taxing everyone the same percentage is not punishment, in any sense.

>         It may simply be the case that the government needs the money, and 
> having a progressive tax rate is the most optimal way to do so for the 
> economy. Wasn't that the criterion you yourself set?

  Only up to a certain point. When you tax rich people with 60%, while in
the neighbouring country they get taxed 20% for the exact same income, guess
what happens.

  I wouldn't say entrepreneurs moving out of the country is good for the
country's economy.

> >    Taxing rich people a lot is not very productive because they are so few.

>         What is "a lot"?

  60% in Finland.

>         A 1% tax increase hurts the medium and low income citizens more than it 
> hurts the rich.

  A medium-wealth person can afford paying 10 euros more for each 1000 euros
he earns.

  The core question is what is better for the economy: Having medium-wealth
people paying 1% more and rich people paying 10% less, or the other way
around.

-- 
                                                          - Warp

Post a reply to this message