Quote:
Originally posted by Tobiasly
I'm all for making sure people pay their fair share of taxes, and I see no problem with a progressive tax structure. But a common argument one hears during these sorts of debates is "if someone is making $100 million a year, what's wrong with taking half of it in income tax? By the time you have that much money, you're not going to miss it anyway."
<I>That's</I> the mentality that I have real issues with. We have no right to determine what amount of money someone "needs".
|
You are contradicting yourself: if 'we have no right to determine' how much money a person needs, you are directly arguing either against a progressive tax structure (which you said you have 'no problem' with), or against income tax altogether.
What is it, then. Do we have the right to determine how much money they need, thus allowing us to tax rich(er) people more, or don't we, thus taxing everyone equally?
It's the only logical conclusion. That's why you will always hear 'rich' people (at least those with a modicum of intelligence) arguing in favour of a completely flat tax rate, such as for instance Steve Forbes during his several failed runs for the presidency.
X.