To clarify what i suggested, it was to increase the capital gains tax and reduce the personal income and corporate tax. It seems that would help the economy by giving workers more incentive to work and companies more incentive to make profits, but make passive investment less rewarding. I'm not positive it's correct, but it seems the economy would rather have people working than have them owning IBM stock. Both work and ownership would naturally still go on, but work would get a bit more reward and ownership a bit less.
You say land owners pay high taxes and workers pay low taxes. You assume property owners didn't earn that property.
Never said anything of the sort. The owner likely earned whatever he owns, and the worker definitely (???? Well, maybe!) earned his salary. They both earned the thing that is going to be taxed equally. And property is just one subset of what falls under capital gains. I'm thinking more along the lines of stock sales, but property sales (not annual property tax) are also capital gains.
Envy is so evil and unproductive. People who suffer envy should not get mad, they should get even.........by doing everything in their power to be an owner.
Sure envy is bad. I'm just thinking of a revenue neutral shift in the tax code that might help the economy. The goal is a better economy, not wealth distribution. The envy comment should have just said something along the lines of, despite an increase in the tax on sale of assets, people will still pursue ownership. Ownership is nice, working often is not.
Owning is not easy and lazy, owning is full of responsibilities both physical, psychological and monetary. You would not understand unless you put extra assets into owning. If you did, you would be singing a different tune.
You're thinking property here, I think, which of course has responsibilities and requires time and effort. Owning IBM stock is really easy. Maybe not lazy, but it definitely is easy. Owning IBM stock is a lot easier than working at IBM.
===================
I wasn't really paying attention to the US news when the Bush tax cuts went through. What was the logic on cutting long term capital gains tax rates instead of some other (payroll, corporate) tax rate? I understand the idealogical justification (it is capital the the person has earned and already paid taxes on, don't tax it again), but what is the economic argument? How is a reduction in capital gains taxes better for the entire economy than a reduction in personal income taxes or corporate income taxes? |
