by William Thornton » Wed Dec 18, 2013 7:15 am
Following Keith's logic, with an assist from the others in certain ways, the thought is that wealth belongs not to the individual but to government. The individual is allowed to merely keep it for a period then it may be seized by government.
Tax avoidance is practiced by every person on this forum who earns enough to have a tax bill. Evidently, none of us believe that there is any moral issue with that practice.
Dave, I fail to see anything in my post that would lead you or anyone to conclude that I believe that there should be no taxes. As for social security taxation, the question of a cap on taxable earnings is open as far as I am concerned. Fairness there would also include continuing the principle of benefits being tied to contributions.
We already have progressive taxation. Rich folks pay more.
If taxes have already been paid on income, why should the wealth left be confiscated by government at death? The taxes already paid contributed to the costs of defense, infrastructure, etc.
You guys never disappoint when it comes to rich folks. The rich are society's evil scum, miscreants, and should be impoverished so that the non rich may feel smugly righteous.
Here's the lessons you guys miss: tax spending and consumption. The billionaire has six jets, several homes. Tax him on all those.
Here's the other related to the first: rich folks have the means and will always find ways to avoid income caps and other punitive taxes. This is why CEO pay limits are a tough thing to implement.
My stray thoughts on SBC stuff may be found at my blog,