|
|
|
|
|
by krisdol
3820 days ago
|
|
I also come from a previously communist country and I disagree. The world isn't so black and white. Progressive taxation is not equivalent to a centrally planned economic system. I've had state owned utilities and privately owned utilities, and I absolutely prefer the one that is subsidized by taxes and answers to voters. There's a huge difference between that and having state-chosen academia in Moscow decide how much electricity our city requires. Taxes on wealth and propert subsidize that. I don't care how much money someone makes off a search engine company, but taxation should incentivize affordable housing and discourage the creation of wealthier landlords. Rent is not valuable entrepreneurship. Controlling the township's electric or water company is not valuable entrepreneurship. At least the state answers to the citizens it services, and has less of an incentive to be driven by profit. Let's have higher taxes in order to create a social safety net and pool of opportunity for the rest of the people. |
|
We shouldn't de-incentivize prosperity. We need to create more tax payers, not less (or the whole system will collapse). Larger safety-nets will not create this incentive.
If it did, we would see many more startup and technology companies in nordic countries.
Instead, we see companies neutered by the intense regulations and taxes. Ikea, the biggest company in Sweden,is a non-profit in another country. Why is this?
Actually succeeding with a startup in those countries is nearly impossible. Starting a company is pretty much the only real way to truly become rich (if you are poor) and you will be systematically removing this power.
There is a good radiolab episode of exactly this in Peru.
Education is the key to a citizen with advantages with money. With freely available education, for instance, you can pay leas in taxes.
The problem is that most people would rather not sacrifice fun times now for a good life later. With freedom comes also comes the freedom to make poor life choices, and a certain percentage of people will alwayw make poor choices.
I'm not even saying there should be no safety net, just that there needs to be a careful balance.