/liberty/ - Liberty

Gold, Property Rights, and Physical Removal

Index Catalog Archive Bottom Refresh
Name
Options
Subject
Message

Max message length: 8001

files

Max file size: 32.00 MB

Total max file size: 50.00 MB

Max files: 5

Supported file types: GIF, JPG, PNG, WebM, OGG, and more

CAPTCHA
E-mail
Password

(used to delete files and posts)

Misc

Remember to follow the Rules

The backup domains are located at 8chan.se and 8chan.cc. TOR access can be found here, or you can access the TOR portal from the clearnet at Redchannit 3.0.

SHOOT GUNS, EAT BURGERS, BE RACIST! IT'S AMERICA DAY!

8chan.moe is a hobby project with no affiliation whatsoever to the administration of any other "8chan" site, past or present.

(1.19 MB 583x727 50s taxes.gif)

Anonymous 01/24/2020 (Fri) 03:00:02 Id: 0e0d43 No. 1619

Were taxes REALLY much higher on the rich in the 1950s?
Can we get a definitive answer on this?

I mean if we plan on winning, we need to be countering these dumb talking points.

>>1619
>NYT
>Opinion article
Why are you reading trash? The tax rate on the rich is well documented. They not only pay less they can afford accountants to avoid it all together. The Middle class pays more taxes than the rest of the tax payers combined.
>>1620
>They not only pay less they can afford accountants to avoid it all together. The Middle class pays more taxes than the rest of the tax payers combined.
I thought the standard libertarian line is that taxes in the 1950s were about the same as they are today due to all of the deductions and loopholes?
I'm just wondering if this is accurate or not?
>>1624
That's the Fox News Libertarian line. If you look at the amount paid by the rich in taxes it's incredibly large. The tax rate % is NOT the tax revenue %, and it's especially true that the INCOME tax rate % is nowhere near the tax revenue %.

A slightly more nuanced line is, "How exactly can you tax the rich more?" The rich can afford really savvy accountants and lawyers to loophole around tax arrangements. They can also leave a lot more easily as they are the most liquid and mobile segment of society (personally, I find this to be a fact that isn't really appreciated). E.g., France with its billionaires who have left to Monaco, Benelux, and various islands.

I think the Walter Block libertarian line is, "Who cares, you're getting sucked into the game where you argue about inequality." The truth of the matter is, is that the government simply taxes where it thinks it can get away with it. Progressive taxation is just a veneer it uses to try to sway public support to increasing tax rates, even though often that is not the case once you take into account the plutocratic loopholes invented by swarms of lobbyists.
>>1626
To answer your question though, I can't find data on the actual amount PAID in taxes by quintile (as opposed to the rate %s). The best I can get is the tax revenue as a % of GDP, which has stayed relatively constant.

This isn't what we're talking about, but if you really wanted to increase the government's tax revenue (I'm not speaking as a moral libertarian here, I'm speaking as an evil Machiovellian asshole), the only way I could see the U.S. doing that is to pass a VAT. VATs are scarily efficient at extracting wealth from society. However, I doubt it's very progressive.
>>1627
>I'm speaking as an evil Machiovellian asshole
>Nevertheless a prince ought to inspire fear in such a way that, if he does not win love, he avoids hatred; because he can endure very well being feared whilst he is not hated, which will always be as long as he abstains from the property of his citizens and subjects and from their women. But when it is necessary for him to proceed against the life of someone, he must do it on proper justification and for manifest cause, but above all things he must keep his hands off the property of others, because men more quickly forget the death of their father than the loss of their patrimony. Besides, pretexts for taking away the property are never wanting; for he who has once begun to live by robbery will always find pretexts for seizing what belongs to others; but reasons for taking life, on the contrary, are more difficult to find and sooner lapse. But when a prince is with his army, and has under control a multitude of soldiers, then it is quite necessary for him to disregard the reputation of cruelty, for without it he would never hold his army united or disposed to its duties.
It's always fascinated me how Machiavelli became viewed as Evil when his whole thing was about being a good ruler while not allowed your goodness to manifest as weakness, as a weak ruler would lead to greater misfortune for himself and his subjects than a cruel lord.
Making plans is difficult when you live in a police state. Everything is illegal. You are not allowed to go outside. You don't know if you can buy a house because you don't know if the government will close your business. You are not allowed to travel or escape. The state can indefinitely detain you without trial, grope you, kill you, torture you, or destroy or steal your property at any time. You are not allowed to have free speech, the government wiretaps you, you cannot go to church, and you cannot own a gun. Americans are now just slaves like North Koreans are.


Forms
Delete
Report
Quick Reply