Quotes and Chaos...

Burner said:
I havent read the tax act. I have not said they are not benefitting. I am saying there is a huge discrepancy if one person benefits more than the other in the exact same scenario.
The world is not fair but that is not how some things are meant to be. And the issue here is not exactly fairness (although i admit it does play a part), it is wellbeing.

Putting aside how our local system is with its corruption, looting and politicians' greed, It is in the interest of the you, the government and ultimately even Vimal Shah himself that he pays more tax than you even if he gets a tax cuts that are larger than yours. Because it would improved the wellbeing of everyone including Vimal Shah.
Click to expand...
It just depends on your perspective and where you are coming from. I don't think you can convince the small struggling business man to pay more tax for any reason
 
The.Black.Templar said:
It just depends on your perspective and where you are coming from. I don't think you can convince the small struggling business man to pay more tax for any reason
Click to expand...
I believe you can absolutely convince a businessman to pay more in tax if the end benefits him and his business. if paying more tax guaranteed you would have free health cover for you and your employees so you dont have to pay for health insurance...the roads and transport systems were more efficient so your employees didnt waste manhours traveling to work..the was better and cheaper energy so your costs of production could be lower? Housing costs would lower...schools would be better funded and education is standardized and even free...

If the answer is yes, then remember there countries like these already (a lot of them scandinavian). And they are happy to pay taxes and even occasionally increase them as long as service delivery is there and people and corporations pay Commensurate to their revenue. Compare that same service delivery that is powered hugely by taxes to the US where you have tax cuts which allow for the discrepancy. Its unbelievable.
 
Burner said:
I believe you can absolutely convince a businessman to pay more in tax if the end benefits him and his business. if paying more tax guaranteed you would have free health cover for you and your employees so you dont have to pay for health insurance...the roads and transport systems were more efficient so your employees didnt waste manhours traveling to work..the was better and cheaper energy so your costs of production could be lower? Housing costs would lower...schools would be better funded and education is standardized and even free...

If the answer is yes, then remember there countries like these already (a lot of them scandinavian). And they are happy to pay taxes and even occasionally increase them as long as service delivery is there and people and corporations pay Commensurate to their revenue. Compare that same service delivery that is powered hugely by taxes to the US where you have tax cuts which allow for the discrepancy. Its unbelievable.
Click to expand...
The tax cuts means that people and businesses have a lot more to spend amd re-invest into their businesses, they means more jobs in the economy...there are commensurate benefits to the economy that eventually meets those needs like building roads and funding a working healthcare system especially in a vibrant economy like in the US. More jobs, and more business means more taxes
 
The.Black.Templar said:
The tax cuts means that people and businesses have a lot more to spend amd re-invest into their businesses, they means more jobs in the economy...there are commensurate benefits to the economy that eventually meets those needs like building roads and funding a working healthcare system especially in a vibrant economy like in the US. More jobs, and more business means more taxes
Click to expand...
I'd argue that after a tax cut, the more money you have have now is less likely to go back into the business and more likely it is to go into your pockets. This is exactly why companies pay out huge dividends to investors and pays bonuses to its executives. It is why Bezos networth keeps going up.
 
Burner said:
I'd argue that after a tax cut, the more money you have have now is less likely to go back into the business and more likely it is to go into your pockets. This is exactly why companies pay out huge dividends to investors and pays bonuses to its executives. It is why Bezos networth keeps going up.
Click to expand...
with bezos networth going up so are his investors too, and they have even more money to invest in other businesses and the chain goes down to job creation and ultimately even more people paying tax, don't you agree?
 
The.Black.Templar said:
with bezos networth going up so are his investors too, and they have even more money to invest in other businesses and the chain goes down to job creation and ultimately even more people paying tax, don't you agree?
Click to expand...
Partial agreement. Yes, there will be new investments and consequently more people paying tax.
The part i deviate is because those kind of investors never use their own money to invest in other businesses. They will use all manner of instruments to fund those new businesses but if the business go bust, that guy somehow hasn't lost a chunk of his money.
But cummulatively, there is still a reasonable portion of taxes not entering the system at every level of these new investments due to these tax cuts. It is still an unlevel playing field.
 
Burner said:
Partial agreement. Yes, there will be new investments and consequently more people paying tax.
The part i deviate is because those kind of investors never use their own money to invest in other businesses. They will use all manner of instruments to fund those new businesses but if the business go bust, that guy somehow hasn't lost a chunk of his money.
But cummulatively, there is still a reasonable portion of taxes not entering the system at every level of these new investments due to these tax cuts. It is still an unlevel playing field.
Click to expand...
That is capitalism, what you are talking about is now socialism which also comes with its own devils
 
Burner said:
How is what im saying socialism? And if it is, what then should government's role be and how would it be funded?
Click to expand...
by leveling the playing field, that means that government must play a big role in resource/financial usage instead of the market actors to make the wealthy stop using any and all market instrument at their disposal. When you give businesses limitations by government order, you would be creating a bigger mess out of things.

Governments role is regulating the whole market and not putting limitations on private resources and their usage
 
The.Black.Templar said:
by leveling the playing field, that means that government must play a big role in resource/financial usage instead of the market actors to make the wealthy stop using any and all market instrument at their disposal. When you give businesses limitations by government order, you would be creating a bigger mess out of things.

Governments role is regulating the whole market and not putting limitations on private resources and their usage
Click to expand...
Noooo...you are countering an argument I havent made at all. By levelling the playing field i was talking about all parties paying taxes commensurate to the income they receive.
Those same taxes being used to provide a good standard of service to all players equally.
There is no limitation made on businesses by taxing them. There is however a limitation on the service provided when you do not have funds aka taxes to provide said services.

I have made no mention of regulating the market, private resources or their use at any point.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top