The rich uncle isn't very bright.
Doing Good, or Helping doesn't have to go through the government. He could set up a scholarship fund for his employees, give them a bonus. He could even invest it in some technology company researching some important work.
Taxation, government redistribution, etc... add up the sum total of that benefit, and compare it to the benefits brought about by research, new technology, medicines, etc... IT's easily 10000 times better to give/invest money to try to solve a problem instead of bandaging a problem via government.
You know if the government wasn't taking as much in taxes from me, I'd still put it to use, some would be invested, some would be spent right now, etc.... we'd be creating a lot more constructive solutions (increased investment), instead of patchwork solutions and destructive ones (Wars, threat of wars).
Anyway, if anything the size and scope of our government, IMO, is slowing the rate of progress to things like a "cure for cancer', 'better alternative energies', et... Why simply because like in my case, I have to buy and invest at a slower rate than I wiould if the tax rate was lower, like I'd probably have bought the 6000 dollar inverter/charger/ I've been eyeing, and I probably have redone the outside of this house by now, which would mean more constructive jobs, meaning more people that want to work would be working.
As far as the lazy that refuse to work, I've no problem letting them die. Really, Essentially a person like that is putting a gun to their own head and saying 'give me your money or I'll pull the trigger', essentially forcing you to work for them. Screw that.
They want to decide who to take care of. (Gay marriage, not mormon marriage.)
Originally Posted by EBounding
Thye want to decide who gets taken care of more, and who get taken care of less. (Federal pensions for federal workers.)
They wnat to decide when someone should not be taken care of (death panels)
They want to decide when someone should be punished when they have done something which they could not control (bloomberg soda ban, tax for bad health behavior)
Sign up, Log in:
- Fiat Banking - Your supply of capital is limited to whatever arbitrary limit those who have limitless currency resources allow.
- There is no 'law' - Only psychopaths who pervert just principals for their own enrichment while violently stealing your wealth, your future, and your life if need be.
"*Successful* entrepreneurs aren't the concern. They have already made money and already created jobs. In economic terms, they are kind of a sunk cost. What matters are the entrepreneur wanna-bes. These are the people who will create new jobs. They aren't yet rich, so they don't show up among the "rich entrepreneurs" who say that taxes don't matter. They also haven't yet taken on the risk that leads to job creation. In deciding whether or not to take on entrepreneurial risk, they will balance the risk against the expected after-tax return. The higher the tax rate, the less likely they will be to take on risk and so the less likely they will be to create jobs.
Originally Posted by ShaneEnochs
In short, when it comes to creating jobs the "don't tax the rich" argument is less about the effect on the existing rich and much more about the effect on the might-be-in-the-future rich." --Antony Davies
Last edited by archangel689; 02-11-2013 at 08:59 AM.