• galanthus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    9 months ago

    I am not opposed to inreasing taxes necessarily, but people need to understand that the income of wealthy individuals is not used purely for the fulfilment of their needs and wishes. Rich people play a rather important role in allocating and managing resourses(capital) in society, and increasing the taxes will decrease the capability of rich people to invest, which is not ideal.

    Also, if the tax increase is percieved to be unfair, rich people can just leave and go to Monaco or Switzerland or any other “rich friendly” country. They are pretty much free to do so and they do it all the time. So increasing taxes will not necessarily lead to more tax revenue if they are increased above what is reasonable.

    I am so happy karma is not a thing here btw. I would be in an unenviable position otherwise.

    • Bytemeister@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      You’re literally preaching trickle down economics. Which from the state of things today, clearly does not work for the benefit of the lower and middle class. The greatest times for the middle class in US history was when we had a 70% corporate tax rate. Upward mobility though hard and smart work is a myth. The richest people in this country see you as indentured servants, and they would let you get mangled in an industrial accident if they thought it would save them a dollar.

      • galanthus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        9 months ago

        I am not advocating lowering taxes, just not increasing them beyond what is sensible.

        Also, I sincetely doubt the richest people in America see me as an indentured servant. You are being overly dramatic.

        • Psychadelligoat@lemmy.dbzer0.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          9 months ago

          just not increasing them beyond what is sensible.

          No, you openly said raising them currently isn’t a good idea, which is a fucking stupid Take that shows you’re totally clueless on the topic

    • Triasha@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      9 months ago

      To take your seriously for a moment: Lack of investment sounds like next generations problem.

        • Triasha@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          9 months ago

          I do in fact wish we had European problems. That would be a massive upgrade. We should be so lucky.

          • galanthus@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            9 months ago

            Yeah, when welfare and pensions are butchered because the EU is trying to salvage the deindustrialising increasingly uncompetitive economy by pouring lots of money in the military-industrial complex instead of social services this is going to be soooo awesome. Only Europe is going to be doing that in a much more fiscally constrained environment that America. Greaaaat.

            • Triasha@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              ·
              9 months ago

              You are trying to scare me, an American, by saying that if Europe keeps going the way they are going someday they might be as terrible a place to live as America.

              That’s better odds than my current reality. I’m guaranteed to live in a country no social safety net and a constrained fiscal environment because that describes America right fucking now.

              Again, we should be so lucky.

              • galanthus@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                0
                ·
                9 months ago

                I would say that America can afford a safety net, it just doesn’t do it for ideological reasons.

                I mean, I am not trying to scare you, just showing you that a lack of investment is bad.

                • Triasha@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  0
                  ·
                  9 months ago

                  Really sounds like you are arguing in favor of those ideological reasons.

                  I’m not saying we should take the fortunes of the rich and light them on fire. (Though there would be benefits even to that destructive approach)

                  Sure, eating the rich would not solve all our problems forever. It would solve some immediate problems today, and future generations would need to grapple with their problems tomorrow.

                  “We can’t change things! There would be costs!” There are costs to inaction. We are paying them every day.

                  • galanthus@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    0
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    9 months ago

                    If you get rid of the rich, what will you do then? The institutions we have now, the social order we have now, what will you replace it with? Who will control the economy and by what means?