How much of a drag How much of a drag
Posts 1 to 8 of 8
  1. #1

    The beerded one

    EternalOptimist is NOT a disguised employee

    EternalOptimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Castle Saburac
    Posts
    22,442

    Default How much of a drag

    How much of a drag on a country is a complicated tax regime ?

    The negatives are a vast bureaucracy , an army of accountants, constant disruption to business

    The positives would be, social justice, fine tuning, political expediency



    I think a flat rate would be better. what do youse think ?
    (\__/)
    (>'.'<)
    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

  2. #2

    Banned

    SpontaneousOrder 's job has never been outsourced


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    How much of a drag on a country is a complicated tax regime ?

    The negatives are a vast bureaucracy , an army of accountants, constant disruption to business

    The positives would be, social justice, fine tuning, political expediency



    I think a flat rate would be better. what do youse think ?
    I think the word 'social' in social justice is redundant. When people use it it makes me think they have something else in mind other than justice.

  3. #3

    The beerded one

    EternalOptimist is NOT a disguised employee

    EternalOptimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Castle Saburac
    Posts
    22,442

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpontaneousOrder View Post
    I think the word 'social' in social justice is redundant. When people use it it makes me think they have something else in mind other than justice.
    yes, but it wasn't the SJW who said it, it was me.
    and I am aware, concerned but not a SJW


    so try again
    (\__/)
    (>'.'<)
    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

  4. #4

    Banned

    SpontaneousOrder 's job has never been outsourced


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    And flat rate would be pretty much as low as you can get, and zero tax would result in best standard of living for both rich & poor, IMO. So low as you can get is closest to zero - so I also think flat rate would be best.

  5. #5

    The beerded one

    EternalOptimist is NOT a disguised employee

    EternalOptimist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Castle Saburac
    Posts
    22,442

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpontaneousOrder View Post
    And flat rate would be pretty much as low as you can get, and zero tax would result in best standard of living for both rich & poor, IMO. So low as you can get is closest to zero - so I also think flat rate would be best.

    Yes, I sort of agree. but then you lose loads of jobs
    in the tax office, accountants etc

    so my question is one of overall benefit
    (\__/)
    (>'.'<)
    ("")("") Born to Drink. Forced to Work

  6. #6

    Banned

    SpontaneousOrder 's job has never been outsourced


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    yes, but it wasn't the SJW who said it, it was me.
    and I am aware, concerned but not a SJW


    so try again
    I wasn't accusing you. Just implying that the most just kind of justice wouldn't need to be called 'social' justice. I think there will always be a place for charity - and real justice dictates that charity is recognised as charity, and not a faux 'social' justice.

    I think that state of affairs would be better for both the givers & receivers of charity.

  7. #7

    Banned

    SpontaneousOrder 's job has never been outsourced


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EternalOptimist View Post
    Yes, I sort of agree. but then you lose loads of jobs
    in the tax office, accountants etc

    so my question is one of overall benefit
    Balls... I edited my post instead of quoting it. Here's it roughly again...


    Those are jobs that are net consumers of wealth, so they aren't jobs worth existing.

    I.e. if a tax man earned 25k a year doing the job of impoverishing us (or, for the sake of argument, was net wealth production neutral), we would be better off paying him 25k a year to pick litter.

  8. #8

    Banned

    SpontaneousOrder 's job has never been outsourced


    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Posts
    3,378

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by SpontaneousOrder View Post
    Balls... I edited my post instead of quoting it. Here's it roughly again...


    Those are jobs that are net consumers of wealth, so they aren't jobs worth existing.

    I.e. if a tax man earned 25k a year doing the job of impoverishing us (or, for the sake of argument, was net wealth production neutral), we would be better off paying him 25k a year to pick litter.

    Does that make sense? because I've always been confused about the debate on this point. The whole broken window fallacy & Bastiat's "Ce qu'on voit et ce qu'on ne voit pas" thing. **edit** not that I read that in french. I can't.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •