And this why additional corporate income taxes, are often a hard tax on the middle class.
Because what do so many of them hold in the retirement 401K and IRA accounts…?
And so many of their union and corporate pension funds hold as their assets…
And so many municipal pensions hold as their assets…
The King Must Die!
Kings are easy to come by…
A year of luxury and prima nocta, then get your throat cut in a furrow.
I agree. I agree.
Or, how ever many years you as King, can publicly deflower all virgins upon menarche.
Once the lead is gone out of the pencil, then it’s off the the furrow for you.
Especially in times of prolonged drought, or pestilence, etc.
It is usually good to be the Cardinal, and usually but not always good to be the King.
I am fine with income and certain sales taxes.
back when everyone paid taxes for the privilege of being ruled by the powerful and wealthy?
Who paid no taxes thsemselves.
The irony being, when you pay a king more taxes, you increase their powers, as a tyrant, to tax you even more.
Until at last they own you, and then everyone else becomes the poor.
The value of the nobles is a weaker king.
The value of the merchants is weaker nobles.
The value of a populace trained in arms, able to produce for themselves, without having to depend on the King or the nobles for their own defense, their food, etc, is that the ability of tyrants to act tyrannical is greatly reduced.
And in the reverse, a king that is given too much in taxes, and too much power to tax, is given or has taken, a lot more than just the taxes.
Those asset prices are speculative, I’m not sure how you tax an idea of what something is worth.
using those speculative ideas of worth is currently acceptable to use as collateral for loans. Which can be problematic if they decrease in value. Which was the root of the contagion for the 2008 crash. I would rather law makers look into that
50% of all stocks in any individuals portfolio could be transferred to the government as taxes, every year,
and then pooled into a massive government owned mutual fund, that paid dividends to those that do not own stocks.
1 Like
But the stocks are considered assets aren’t they?
Wouldn’t that be unlawful seizure?
Unless you had the choice to pay in stocks or cash.
It would be interesting of you could start paying taxes with speculative assets. A clever person might be able to really fuck the government on that deal.
People don’t generally have choices on whether to pay income taxes currently, except the choice to earn the income, or not, and in what domiciles.
Cash, aka currency, is as speculative, as any other assets.
More so really, given how it is always fluctuating in value compared to other currencies.
Not to mention, that many of the rising prices we are currently seeing is just the public’s perception that the government issued currency is not worth as much compared to other assets, or one’s time.
Yah I suppose.
For a layman like me it comes across that much of the modern economy is just built on a wing and prayer.
Economists come up with ideas and law makers innact policy based on them. The realization of the results they are looking for as good as throwing darts with a blindfold.
It’s probably not a good idea if you want to keep a country going to make all taxes optional.
I like the idea of incomes being taxed the same way as company profits. Where you only tax what is left over after expenses.
Won’t some people arrange to have more expenses, if you do that?
Won’t that simply encourage frivolous consumption, and discourage savings and investment, and discourage attempting to earn more money (aka increase one’s productivity and work ethic)?
I thought it was velocity of the exchange that fueled the economic machine.
Large purchases would still require saving for and reinvestment in profitable things would be encouraged even more I believe. Since that spending would be a write off.
Also if your taxing after expenses everyone would be paying less tax right? So people would keep a larger share of their income as compared to now.
Isn’t that the reasoning behind why taxing revenue for business is considered bad, because it discourages growth?
I think it could work when complimented with a luxury goods tax.
It should be said that most of this tax probably comes in the form of payroll taxes. That probably accounted for about 10x what I paid in income tax, and also far more than I ever paid myself. I paid multiple factors in payroll tax over what I got for the sale of two successful businesses and the combined total income up to sale together.
That may skew in the other direction a little at the highest industrialist income brackets but it certainly stung a bit to see how much more I paid the US Gov than I paid myself.
2 Likes
Sounds like when the government owns the means of production and distribution ?
1 Like