An incremental tax system would help. The more money a person makes, the larger the percentage of income they pay which makes it pointless to earn more money at a certain level of earnings.
Playing with the tax on "incomes" doesn't help/address the problems. What needs to be taxed is WEALTH. Billionaires (and corporations) have already figured out how to play the "taxes on incomes" game to their advantage.
It is not as easy to play "games" with wealth as it is with taxes - hence the vociferous and vehement opposition to taxes on wealth (by the wealthy).
Hiding wealth is orders of magnitude more challenging (even for billionaires) than is income. Take the example of any billionaire in the US, say Elon Musk for example. Musk can have an income of $0 (through accounting strategies), but hiding ownership of stocks, bonds, other securities is something else entirely. Same for Jeff Bezos of Amazon, etc.
You have it the opposite way. Income is EASY to hide. Almost everyone does it at some level (think of normal/common payments in cash instead of credit/debit, non-declaration of things like tips, etc.)
To hide wealth (eg. shell companies, offshore banking, etc.) is more challenging - one needs a certain amount of resources to do those things - ordinary people don't have access to such resources.
No, you misunderstand. Tax on wealth ANYWHERE in the world (i.e. eliminate all tax loopholes on wealth).
The example you provide is EXACTLY the kinds of loopholes written into the Tax Code for the benefit of the wealthy. Hence, to effectively tax wealth - the tax codes need to be changed.
Example: Net worth of individuals can be calculated (roughly) regardless of where they hide their wealth. Now, TAX this net worth (regardless of where it is hidden - that is not a concern). Hence, TAX Musk's $350 billion (regardless of what state/form or location this ephemeral quantity is). THIS would be an incentive for Musk to SPEND more of his money in the REAL ECONOMY (rather than keep it in the financial economy), thus benefiting not only ordinary people but also the GDP of the country.
We currently DO have progressive taxation (not only in the Western world but in many other non-Western countries too).
I'm not sure where you're getting your information of "dismantled", but that is false. Anyone that has filed their taxes in the US (or other Western countries) on their own knows this.
In the USA this progressive taxation has become outdated and is woefully inadequate. Loopholes have been added right and left, and those at the very top escape anything that would resemble fair taxation. You, my friend, are the one who needs to educate yourself.
Marci, sorry - you are right. I misunderstood your earlier comment. Yes, we still have a progressive taxation system that has been completely loopholed (as you say) to make it ineffective to address all the social issues it was designed to tackle.
Part of the problem is the "taxation on income" loophole. Instead, it should be augmented with "taxation on wealth", "taxation on net worth", taxation on "usage/behaviors", etc.
An incremental tax system would help. The more money a person makes, the larger the percentage of income they pay which makes it pointless to earn more money at a certain level of earnings.
Playing with the tax on "incomes" doesn't help/address the problems. What needs to be taxed is WEALTH. Billionaires (and corporations) have already figured out how to play the "taxes on incomes" game to their advantage.
It is not as easy to play "games" with wealth as it is with taxes - hence the vociferous and vehement opposition to taxes on wealth (by the wealthy).
Hiding wealth is orders of magnitude more challenging (even for billionaires) than is income. Take the example of any billionaire in the US, say Elon Musk for example. Musk can have an income of $0 (through accounting strategies), but hiding ownership of stocks, bonds, other securities is something else entirely. Same for Jeff Bezos of Amazon, etc.
There are so many loopholes and ways to hide wealth it's not funny. Income is at least harder to hide.
You have it the opposite way. Income is EASY to hide. Almost everyone does it at some level (think of normal/common payments in cash instead of credit/debit, non-declaration of things like tips, etc.)
To hide wealth (eg. shell companies, offshore banking, etc.) is more challenging - one needs a certain amount of resources to do those things - ordinary people don't have access to such resources.
No, you misunderstand. Tax on wealth ANYWHERE in the world (i.e. eliminate all tax loopholes on wealth).
The example you provide is EXACTLY the kinds of loopholes written into the Tax Code for the benefit of the wealthy. Hence, to effectively tax wealth - the tax codes need to be changed.
Example: Net worth of individuals can be calculated (roughly) regardless of where they hide their wealth. Now, TAX this net worth (regardless of where it is hidden - that is not a concern). Hence, TAX Musk's $350 billion (regardless of what state/form or location this ephemeral quantity is). THIS would be an incentive for Musk to SPEND more of his money in the REAL ECONOMY (rather than keep it in the financial economy), thus benefiting not only ordinary people but also the GDP of the country.
What ever happened to the concept of a flat tax?
That used to exist and was called progressive taxation. Long ago dismantled, and made to seem an outrage to ordinary people who benefitted from it.
We currently DO have progressive taxation (not only in the Western world but in many other non-Western countries too).
I'm not sure where you're getting your information of "dismantled", but that is false. Anyone that has filed their taxes in the US (or other Western countries) on their own knows this.
We used to have a watered down version of this, but it has been whittled away in recent years.
??? Where are you getting such "incorrect" information from? Currently, ALL Western countries follow a system of "progressive" taxation.
In the USA this progressive taxation has become outdated and is woefully inadequate. Loopholes have been added right and left, and those at the very top escape anything that would resemble fair taxation. You, my friend, are the one who needs to educate yourself.
Marci, sorry - you are right. I misunderstood your earlier comment. Yes, we still have a progressive taxation system that has been completely loopholed (as you say) to make it ineffective to address all the social issues it was designed to tackle.
Part of the problem is the "taxation on income" loophole. Instead, it should be augmented with "taxation on wealth", "taxation on net worth", taxation on "usage/behaviors", etc.
No problem. We all have bad days.