On 12/12/2013 8:57 PM, Andrew Fildes wrote:
> The links and responses were about income tax and only income tax as an
> indicator of wealth distribution.
> The other taxes you mention are present and often iniquitous but utterly
> irrelevant to the the discussion.
Disagree. Many people, including some of the links, believe that income tax is
a creator or manipulator of wealth
distribution characteristics. Some believe it should be used to change them.
Even Warren Buffett said the govt. is crazy
not to tax him and others like him much more.
Even without that, any estimated comparisons of wealth distribution based on
income tax statistics alone will be
inaccurate to the extent that there are significant differences in other taxes.
In one of the links, it appeared that the tax burden on our poorest citizens is
negative. While that may be true of the
income tax, it is generally not going to be enough to offset other taxes. If
so, only at subsistence level.
Further, if income tax is an indicator of any value, it is of income, not
wealth. There is often confusion in usage, but
they are different. Here, at least, with no tax on holdings and tax free
investment income options, one may have lots of
wealth, invested properly, live simply, and pay very little tax. It gets taxed
as it goes in, as it goes out, as
investment income and through taxation of tax deferred retirement schemes and
inheritance tax, but not while it sits there.
Tax Free Moose
--
What if the Hokey Pokey *IS* what it's all about?
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|