So, I work hard, my ass off, 5 days a week, 11 months a year, and I pay 1/3 or 1/4th of it so that pidophiles dont pay taxes.
Income tax, VAT, property selling tax are all theft. There is no logic behind it.
The taxes that should exist is: Wealth tax, nature tax for the businesses that damage nature, and that is it. And no tax should be over 5%.
Wealth tax: 0%, income tax: 30% this is unacceptable. You either pay no taxes or you pay everything as tax.
I actually calculated it, and yearly 2.5% of wealth tax should be enough. And also, countries have a lot of resources, that also can help their budget, like mines or rented lands that are owned by government etc.
If we taxed wealth, not work, we could buy our houses way easier, we could buy land way easier, we could find a job way easier because we are not gonna pay income and vat, businesses will be able to hire people freely, and everybody can own a business easily. Nowadays, if you are poor it is so hard to create a business. You have a lot of expenses.
Yea. I said that.
What do you mean by income tax? Because clearly you aren’t understanding what I mean.
I mean ALL income. Of any kind. No loopholes. The problem isn’t conceptual. It’s practical. The law hasn’t kept up with the bookkeeping shenanigans the rich get up to. In fact, the rich actively influence current legislation to their benefit.
You’re arguing for a complete conceptual shift for no reason, when the actual problem is corruption.
What’s really needed, is just look at how the rich are avoiding taxation, and closing the legal loopholes they use. Which your “wealth tax” won’t do. Especially as “wealth” doesn’t actually have a value until it’s bought or sold.
Wealth has a value, land can be valued easily, we have data for years all around websites and in government about the lands everywhere. The houses are also like this. You can value a company by the factories it has people it employs etc, money it earns etc. This three is more than enough. The rest of wealth may not count, it is not important.
You cant fix loopholes without taxing all billionaires until none exists, because they will constantly bribe government. Even if you fixed loopholes, they will create intentionally.
Exactly. How is your proposal a solution?
Of course assets have value. But to tax them fairly, that value needs to be defined! Impartially, too boot! And can you imagine the governmental overhead of constantly defining the values of shifting assets for tax purposes, regardless whether they are being bought or sold?
Your suggestion is as exploitable as the current system. Maybe worse!
Start by taxing everything above 10M dollars, then spread wealth control to all people, than start taxing wealth, not work because if you don’t tax wealth it will again cumulate and we will have to start over.
The fuck do you mean by “wealth control”?
Are you referring to UBI?
It sounds like what youre sctually arguing for, is an asset cap. Where any property above a certain cap goes to the government.
If the cap is 10M, how do we fund UBI, infrastructure and emergency services once everyone is below that cap?
Current economies are powered by the movement of money. So we tax the movement of money. No-one gets anything without spending their assets in some way, including the rich.
You are suggesting that taxes would somehow work better, if we taxed value that was sitting still. Which isn’t entirely false, but you are also claiming that taxation of moving money should be ended entirely. Which simply won’t work. That would eventually lead to the end of public funding.
Wealth control means giving them the wealth, and not owning by the government. Because when the government owns everything, that means the people in government become rich.
Why does, not taxing moving money end public funding? Okay, it can be 2%, and this is enough.
Because eventually everyone is below the “wealth cap”. Which means no-one pays any further tax. Why would anyone accrue more wealth at that point?
If we’re taxing all transactions, then yes, sounds about right.
Are you suggesting we privatize everything?
Ok, but how do decisions get made then?
Government are systems. Just because you change the structure, doesn’t make it not a government. It sounds like you want better government, not “no government”.
Which I agree with.
Thanks dude, I think we agreed in a lot of ways and some disagreements may happen, no need for further discussions.