Need arguments for tax debate with friend
 

Me and one of my colleagues always end up in a tie debating the principals regarding tax levels. He is basically a fan of the pure Socialistic system. I am not. In Sweden the income tax is progressive. You pay a higher percentage in tax the more you earn. He thinks this is all very well and keeps hitting me with this being the core meaning of Solidarity.

My position is that with any given tax percentage, the person with a high income will still pay a lot more to the 'common good' than the person with a low income. I believe thats fair. If you have worked hard and/or happen to be gifted in some area, that should pay off.

He goes on, debating other political topics but always with the same theme - people who earns a lot of money should show Solidarity toward the poor by paying relatively much more. Basically, everyone should end up with roughly the same amount of money in their pocket at the end of the day. No matter if you lead a multinational company or are unemployed.

I have run out of arguments. Its like banging my head against the wall. What is your take on the subject and those of you that are in my corner - any arguments would be welcome.

This isn't an argument; it's just contradiction!

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs."

Anyone know who said that?

Woodrow Wilson, Franklin Roosevelt, and every president since the latter.

Jim Richards wins!!

It was Groucho Marx. I think Harpo actually came up with the saying, but he couldn't talk and stuff, so Groucho actually said it.

The sad thing is that Marx's statement has a lot in common with the current tax and welfare policy of the US.

If you're going to make poor Karl spin in his grave with ridiculous statements like that - the least you can do is take him for a stroll around the river walk....

Re: Need arguments for tax debate with friend
 

In my opinion, the reason you're losing the argument is that you're giving up over half your position by asserting that any taxes are good, or even necessary. Of course, they're neither.

As a reference, I suggest you read For Good and Evil: The Impact of Taxes on the Course of Civilization by Charles Adams, and then visit the Mises Institute and view their essays on the subject of taxes

Well that was a lovely intro to an reasoned reply but then you left out the reply part.

Care to actually address why you think it is a ridiculous statement or shall we just take you at your word?

My feeling is the pain involved ought to be the same for everyone, similar to the way your speeding tickets are written in Sweden.

A $100 ticket is painful for $20k/ yr worker, but means nothing to the $1m/yr CEO

similarly a $20k tax bill is devastating to a $50k/yr worker, but nothing to the $100k exec.

Actually, who really gives a damn if Karl Marx spins in his grave. Now Groucho, Chico, Harpo and Zeppo are an entirely different matter.

Oops, I assumed (I know, ass - u - me, sry) that your observation to the effect that...

"The sad thing is that Marx's statement has a lot in common with the current tax and welfare policy of the US."

...was either rhetorical or sarcastic in a subtle way that was beyond simple understanding or that it was intended as a joke. So I assumed the latter posture and responded in a similar, non-sensical way.

To state that the most regressive (or better, least progressive) personal tax system in the world (well of the G7 nations, anyway) is even a vague reflection of Marxist philosophy must be some kind of joke. Or it's very, very deep man.

I don't think it's possible to determine anyone's "pain" level reliably, particularly if we leave that determination up to the agency that's benefitting from the judgement.

My friend claims that in order for every citizen to enjoy the same health care and education possibilities, the high progressive taxes are necessary. Typically slams me with the, almost rhetorical, question: So you think its alright for the rich person to enjoy more qualified health care and better schools ???

That Americans pay an income tax at all is Marxian.

Sure it is &#177

"Taxes are baad, mmmm-kay?"

and they were distributed to each according to need.

Acts 4:23

taxes are a nessary evil
what is wrong is taxing at a rate less then what is spent
and taxing workers more then the RICH

REMEMBER capital gains tax is less then income PLUS SS tax rates by a lot
so if you do Bill Gates taxes you will find his net gain
vs his total tax rate is FAR less them the avg workers
most of bill gate's BILLIONS WILL NEVER BE TAXED
ESP IF BuSh2 kills the estate tax

don't like bill gate fine pick any other guy with millions in stock options and figure their real tax rate on all the money they control
the claim the rich are over taxed is a BIG LIE
they just tax income not all money they are GIVEN
stock options, dividends perks and freebees ect make a big un or low taxed part of the richs money