Subject:
|
Re: Preaching to the Choir
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 9 Aug 2004 18:46:02 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1821 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Dave Schuler wrote:
| |
I think I snipped it, but you asked for the proper tax rate for the wealthy.
Here’s my suggestion: for one year, tax the wealthy at zero percent for
anything that they earned on their own without help or protection from
“society.” Anything in excess of, say, $500,000.00 that was acquired or
“earned” under the military, economic, industrial, corporate, or consumerist
protections of society should be eligible for taxation at a rate of 100%,
since the individual is beholden to society for those earnings.
|
Why is income tax better than either of: a wealth tax or setting a common
earnings per hour rate across the nation and acting as a public work
clearinghouse?
Chris
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Preaching to the Choir
|
| (...) I need to plead ignorance and ask for clarification: By "wealth tax" do you mean a tax on acquisitions/already-held holdings separate from income? And does "common earnings per hour rate" mean that everyone would get the same hourly wage (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Preaching to the Choir
|
| (...) Just for clarity, could we have a solid definition of "Libertarian" here, leaving a minimum of wiggle room? My impression is that the Libertarian tent admits as many variants as does the Democratic or Republican tent. What's the clear (...) (20 years ago, 9-Aug-04, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
113 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
