|
|
|
|
|
by javert
1854 days ago
|
|
Which raises a subsequent question: Why does the middle class clamor to raise taxes on the rich, which won't appreciably benefit themselves, when they could instead push to lower taxes on themselves, which will benefit themselves? Maybe different in Europe, but in the USA tax increases do not find their way back to benefits for the public. I mean unless by "public" you mean the next country we want to "liberate" and bring "democracy" to... |
|
"Money at the top levels is not at all like money for the rest of us. For a middle class citizen, money is about consumption and freedom to do what you want (with enough of it).
At the top end of the distribution, money is no longer about consumption or freedom (since you can never realistically consume as much as they have, and you don't have to work after you've saved like $10M). Money at that level is a proxy for power - a group of oligarchs can basically have the power of a shadow government, but unelected. And the real question to ask is "how much power/leverage do we want an individual (or a group of rich oligarchs) to have in a democracy."
So taxing the rich is not even about spreading the wealth, necessarily - if you redistributed it directly you might get inflation by redirecting investment money into consumption. It's more about limiting the amount of power that a person can accumulate over others."