User Tag List

View Poll Results: Hmm??

Voters
33. You may not vote on this poll
  • 0%-10%

    6 18.18%
  • 11%-20%

    2 6.06%
  • 21%-30%

    5 15.15%
  • 31%-40%

    4 12.12%
  • 41%-50%

    5 15.15%
  • 51%-60%

    1 3.03%
  • 61%-70%

    1 3.03%
  • 71%-80%

    1 3.03%
  • 81%-90%

    0 0%
  • 91%-99(?)%

    8 24.24%
First 56789 Last

Results 61 to 70 of 101

  1. #61
    ^He pronks, too! Magic Poriferan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    MBTI
    Yin
    Enneagram
    One sx/sp
    Posts
    13,909

    Default

    Maximum?

    Here's my idea. There should be a formula for a progressive taxation curve. The larger your income gets, the larger a percentage of it is taxed. There is technically no ceiling, but it can never (as well it ought never) reach 100%.
    Go to sleep, iguana.


    _________________________________
    INTP. Type 1>6>5. sx/sp.
    Live and let live will just amount to might makes right

  2. #62
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Magic Poriferan View Post
    Maximum?

    Here's my idea. There should be a formula for a progressive taxation curve. The larger your income gets, the larger a percentage of it is taxed. There is technically no ceiling, but it can never (as well it ought never) reach 100%.
    Trying to rule society and humans rights with mathematical rationalisations is a misguided action.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  3. #63
    Senior Member UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    Theses people take the risk to be poor, but the rule is that there's a possibility to be rich and see the risk rewarded. Overall, taxes discourage people to take risk to make money and create wealth. Therefore people make less money and create less wealth. Therefore the country become more poor. It's logic.
    Actually people tend to take more risky behaviors under extreme stress and duress. This does not necessarily positively impact their lives. It seems you are ok with living in a world of extremes. Extreme wealth on one side and extreme poverty on the other. I think that this inhibits productivity more greatly in the long run (aka over millennia, hundreds of thousands of years, millions, billions, and most especially over eons).
    For all that we have done, as a civilization, as individuals, the universe is not stable, and nor is any single thing within it. Stars consume themselves, the universe itself rushes apart, and we ourselves are composed of matter in constant flux. Colonies of cells in temporary alliance, replicating and decaying and housed within, an incandescent cloud of electrical impulses. This is reality, this is self knowledge, and the perception of it will, of course, make you dizzy.

  4. #64
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    Theses people take the risk to be poor, but the rule is that there's a possibility to be rich and see the risk rewarded. Overall, taxes discourage people to take risk to make money and create wealth. Therefore people make less money and create less wealth. Therefore the country become more poor. It's logic.
    How do taxes discourage risk-taking in business efforts? You don't pay taxes if you don't make any money, after all. Meanwhile, it's not as if you're going to pass up the opportunity to make $X, simply because you would have made $Y if taxes were lower.

  5. #65
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by UniqueMixture View Post
    Actually people tend to take more risky behaviors under extreme stress and duress.
    Yes, when there's a few possibilities that the risk will be worth to be taken. Not when success is always sanctioned.

    Extreme wealth on one side and extreme poverty on the other.
    The correlation between extreme wealth and extreme poverty still have to be established.

    [/quote]I think that this inhibits productivity more greatly in the long run (aka over millennia, hundreds of thousands of years, millions, billions, and most especially over eons).[/QUOTE]

    The extreme poverty was a problem in the pre-industrial era. However, just one century of economic freedom and industrilised economy changed things strongly. The fantastic improvement of the life standard between 1750 and 2000 are not dues to an high taxing rate, but to economic freedom.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  6. #66
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    How do taxes discourage risk-taking in business efforts?
    Because the potential success is lower, so the motivation to take the risk is lower too. Logic. See the Wil S's reaction. When you applies theses kind of super-high taxing rate, the rich fly the country. Or they just sit on their money and don't try to create more wealth because there's some risk and it is not rentable. Thoses who are not rich don't take risk either, they find a salary job, so they take a job instead of create job, or they stay unemplyed and prefer to win unemployements benefits.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  7. #67
    Dreaming the life onemoretime's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    MBTI
    3h50
    Socionics
    ILE
    Posts
    4,460

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    Because the potential success is lower, so the motivation to take the risk is lower too. Logic. See the Wil S's reaction. When you applies theses kind of super-high taxing rate, the rich fly the country. Or they just sit on their money and don't try to create more wealth because there's some risk and it is not rentable. Thoses who are not rich don't take risk either, they find a salary job, so they take a job instead of create job, or they stay unemplyed and prefer to win unemployements benefits.
    Not logical at all, because the tax rate is a sunk cost. If you think you can make even a dollar off of a venture, then it makes no sense to pass up the opportunity, simply because of the potential tax rate. And rich people aren't gods we must supplicate to so that they may rain down there green papery beneficence upon us, as much as many of them seem to think they are.

  8. #68
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by onemoretime View Post
    Not logical at all, because the tax rate is a sunk cost. If you think you can make even a dollar off of a venture, then it makes no sense to pass up the opportunity, simply because of the potential tax rate. And rich people aren't gods we must supplicate to so that they may rain down there green papery beneficence upon us, as much as many of them seem to think they are.
    I'm pretty sure you know nothing about investment. When you take risk in buisness, you take risk to lose money to win more. If you take the risk to spend 10 000 000 but it seems that you can win 16 000 000, then it can be interesting and rentable. But with that tax, you can only win 4 000 000 and it's not rentable anymore, the result will always be negative.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

  9. #69
    Senior Member UniqueMixture's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    MBTI
    estj
    Enneagram
    378 sx/so
    Socionics
    esfp
    Posts
    3,038

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Speed Gavroche View Post
    Yes, when there's a few possibilities that the risk will be worth to be taken. Not when success is always sanctioned.
    There is no guarantee that lower taxes will generate more wealth for the society as a whole, because that does not deal with the problem of inequality. If people have no disposable income to spend on new products & services then growth cannot happen without getting into debt. Also, you refuse to deal with questions of equity and fairness. What do you believe is the -point- of economic systems?

    The extreme poverty was a problem in the pre-industrial era. However, just one century of economic freedom and industrilised economy changed things strongly. The fantastic improvement of the life standard between 1750 and 2000 are not dues to an high taxing rate, but to economic freedom.
    There are lots of reasons for this, especially developments in technology and medicine like antibiotics. The massive amount of wealth created in the 20th century was also largely based on procurement of resources from impoverished countries and then converting them into products sold largely to the native population. As resources become more scarce, developing countries create their own manufacturing bases, and manufacturing becomes more automated this is less of an option.

    In other words there is more to this than tax policy alone. The system has always been expoitative, it is just that now that people are recognizing it because it is no longer only those funny looking people from far away that are being exploited.
    For all that we have done, as a civilization, as individuals, the universe is not stable, and nor is any single thing within it. Stars consume themselves, the universe itself rushes apart, and we ourselves are composed of matter in constant flux. Colonies of cells in temporary alliance, replicating and decaying and housed within, an incandescent cloud of electrical impulses. This is reality, this is self knowledge, and the perception of it will, of course, make you dizzy.

  10. #70
    Whisky Old & Women Young Speed Gavroche's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    MBTI
    EsTP
    Enneagram
    6w7 sx/sp
    Posts
    5,143

    Default

    [QUOTE=UniqueMixture;1847856]There is no guarantee that lower taxes will generate more wealth for the society as a whole, because that does not deal with the problem of inequality. (/quote]

    Inequality is not a problem.

    if people have no disposable income to spend on new products & services then growth cannot happen without getting into debt.
    The income come from creation of wealth, when you let people create wealth, then the income is not a problem anymore.

    Also, you refuse to deal with questions of equity and fairness.
    I don't. It's just that there's nothing fair and equal in taxing people at 75%, and Will Smith agree with me.

    What do you believe is the -point- of economic systems?
    Freedom and prosperity.

    There are lots of reasons for this, especially developments in technology and medicine like antibiotics.
    Which happened because of the freedom to everybody to take rish to be innovator, and the right to get the maximal profit from their innovation.

    The massive amount of wealth created in the 20th century was also largely based on procurement of resources from impoverished countries
    No. These poor countries had these ressources with them from the long time, but they failed to use it efficiently for their economic development, that's because they did not adopt a free-market capitalistic economy, which is the true motor of economic development.
    EsTP 6w7 Sx/Sp

    Chaotic Neutral

    E=60% S=55% T=70% P=80%

    "I don't believe in guilt, I only believe in living on impulses"

    "Stereotypes about personality and gender turn out to be fairly accurate: ... On the binary Myers-Briggs measure, the thinking-feeling breakdown is about 30/70 for women versus 60/40 for men." ~ Bryan Caplan

Similar Threads

  1. What do you think America's role in the world should be?
    By DiscoBiscuit in forum Politics, History, and Current Events
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 07-09-2012, 10:09 PM
  2. Replies: 13
    Last Post: 04-04-2011, 10:28 PM
  3. Replies: 0
    Last Post: 04-15-2010, 10:56 AM
  4. [NT] NTs what do you spend most of the time thinking about?
    By yenom in forum The NT Rationale (ENTP, INTP, ENTJ, INTJ)
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: 05-30-2009, 11:30 PM
  5. Time to re-evaluate myself (again?) - what do you think I am/could be?
    By TenebrousReflection in forum What's my Type?
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 03-18-2008, 07:22 AM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO