(Debate) Progressive or flat income tax: which is better?

[Rhodisia]

A flat income tax is a system by which all taxpayers are levied at exactly the same rate, irrespective of income.

A progressive income tax is a system by which the tax rate increases with taxpayer income.

---

I am in favor of a flat tax because it does not harm nor favor any one class of people, is far easier to calculate, and is easier to understand.

What say you, NSG? Do you prefer a flat income tax, or a progressive income tax?

[Sebastianbourg]

Progressive but I would like a simpler process. Deductions should be contemplated too.

[Teemant]

Flat.

It's fair, equal and requires less bureaucracy.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Progressive, by far.

[Alyakia]

A flat income tax is a system by which all taxpayers are levied at exactly the same rate, irrespective of income.

A progressive income tax is a system by which the tax rate increases with taxpayer income.

---

I am in favor of a flat tax because it does not harm nor favor any one class of people, is far easier to calculate, and is easier to understand.

What say you, NSG? Do you prefer a flat income tax, or a progressive income tax?

there are no classes of people, only classes of income. everyone actually gets the same taxes. it just so happens that a homeless man pays $0 on his income over $500,000 for fairly obvious reasons.

[Ardoki]

Progressive!

[Ziegenhain]

Total state control of the economy

Why worry about taxes when the State is there for you

[The Nuclear Fist]

A flat tax benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. Like so many other simple solutions to complex problems, a flat tax is wrong.

[Myrensis]

I am in favor of a flat tax because it does not harm nor favor any one class of people, is far easier to calculate, and is easier to understand.

Yes it does. Say a 'flat tax' of 10%, someone making 20,000 dollars a year is going to miss that 2,000 a lot more than someone making 20 million is going to miss 2. For the first person it might mean the difference between making rent or keeping the lights on or food on the table, for the second it means maybe a few less stocks to watch for while they're lounging on the deck of their 3rd vacation home in the Carribean.

[Teemant]

A flat tax benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. Like so many other simple solutions to complex problems, a flat tax is wrong.

Benefits the rich at the expense of the poor... not true. You're sounding like rich people are collecting taxes from poor.

[Rhodisia]

A flat tax benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. Like so many other simple solutions to complex problems, a flat tax is wrong.

Let the tax rate be 20%.

Working class - $25,000. ($5k contributed in taxes)

Middle class - $75,000. ($15k contributed in taxes)

Wealthy class - $1,000,000. ($200k contributed in taxes)

Our wealthy citizen earns 40 times as much as the working-class one, but also contributes 40 times as much money to the state. What's so unfair about that?

[Threlizdun]

The ideal would be to abolish currency, but until that time the only sensible solution is to have a strong progressive income tax.

[Sosi]

Flat, tax it all.

There was a finman from Finland with a bag of gold coins. He hoarded each coin with his life, you see. Eventually he became very rich but he was so wary to take his coins from the bag. He died poor, despite his riches.

Our friend the finman wouldn't have money to hoard if we taxed all he's got. We'd tax it and spend it on his neighbors with more than enough to spare the poor.

Workers of the world! Relax.

[Alyakia]

A flat tax benefits the rich at the expense of the poor. Like so many other simple solutions to complex problems, a flat tax is wrong.

Let the tax rate be 20%.

Working class - $25,000. ($5k contributed in taxes)

Middle class - $75,000. ($15k contributed in taxes)

Wealthy class - $1,000,000. ($200k contributed in taxes)

Our wealthy citizen earns 40 times as much as the working-class one, but also contributes 40 times as much money to the state. What's so unfair about that?

as far i understand, currently, it would be...

Working class - $25,000. ($3,348 contributed in taxes)

Middle class - $75,000. ($15,093 contributed in taxes)

Wealthy class - $1,000,000. ($328,596 contributed in taxes)

have you ever wondered why no one really cares about the flat tax? except rich people and people who have been told it's totally awesome you guys by rich people?

e: it's almost like a flat tax would increase the tax burden of the poor and decrease the tax burden of the rich. huh. who could have predicted that?

[Atlanticatia]

Progressive. Poor people need more of their (nominal) money because of basic needs and such.

If you earn $15,000, a 20% tax would be $3,000. $3,000 would be a huge dent that would make it hard to pay food, rent, power, etc.

If you earn $1,500,000, a 20% tax would be $300,000. Even after paying the tax, you'd have about $1.2 million left over. You don't need $1.2 million to live.


I think a tax system like this would be fair:

• $0-$20,000: 0%
  $20,000-$45,000: 20%
  $45,000-$90,000: 30%
  $90,000-$180,000: 40%
  $180,000-$250,000: 50%
  $250,000+: 60%

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

Progressive. It's much easier to do without a portion of your second $10,000/year than your first $10,000/year, and so on.

[Sosi]

Progressive. Poor people need more of their (nominal) money because of basic needs and such.

If you earn $15,000, a 20% tax would be $3,000. $3,000 would be a huge dent that would make it hard to pay food, rent, power, etc.

If you earn $1,500,000, a 20% tax would be $300,000. Even after paying the tax, you'd have about $1.2 million left over. You don't need $1.2 million to live.


I think a tax system like this would be fair:

• $0-$20,000: 0%
  $20,000-$45,000: 20%
  $45,000-$90,000: 30%
  $90,000-$180,000: 40%
  $180,000-$250,000: 50%
  $250,000+: 60%

That's ridiculous, such a system preserves coercive economic systems. None should pay tax.

[Alyakia]

Let the tax rate be 20%.

Working class - $25,000. ($5k contributed in taxes)

Middle class - $75,000. ($15k contributed in taxes)

Wealthy class - $1,000,000. ($200k contributed in taxes)

Our wealthy citizen earns 40 times as much as the working-class one, but also contributes 40 times as much money to the state. What's so unfair about that?

as far i understand, currently, it would be...

Working class - $25,000. ($3,348 contributed in taxes)

Middle class - $75,000. ($15,093 contributed in taxes)

Wealthy class - $1,000,000. ($328,596 contributed in taxes)

have you ever wondered why no one really cares about the flat tax? except rich people and people who have been told it's totally awesome you guys by rich people?

e: it's almost like a flat tax would increase the tax burden of the poor and decrease the tax burden of the rich. huh. who could have predicted that?

i decided to try it again adding in 15,080, the minimum wage at $7.25 a year

progressive: $1,788
flat tax: $3,016

again, it seems like all a flat tax would do is increase the tax burden on the poor. a 40% increase. you want a 40% increase on your taxes because someone told you it was totally fairer trust me. or if you used $25,000 as your income, a 34% increase on your taxes, just so a millionaire can get a 40% decrease on his.

wait, that actually lines up. that's fucking perfect. people making minimum wage get their tax burden increased by 40%, a millionaire gets his tax burden decreased by 40%. sounds fair!!!

[Ziegenhain]

Progressive. Poor people need more of their (nominal) money because of basic needs and such.

If you earn $15,000, a 20% tax would be $3,000. $3,000 would be a huge dent that would make it hard to pay food, rent, power, etc.

If you earn $1,500,000, a 20% tax would be $300,000. Even after paying the tax, you'd have about $1.2 million left over. You don't need $1.2 million to live.


I think a tax system like this would be fair:

• $0-$20,000: 0%
  $20,000-$45,000: 20%
  $45,000-$90,000: 30%
  $90,000-$180,000: 40%
  $180,000-$250,000: 50%
  $250,000+: 60%

60%

like

what the hell kind of sane person would support this

[Sosi]

Progressive. It's much easier to do without a portion of your second $10,000/year than your first $10,000/year, and so on.

No, no, no. It's much easier to do with little but the clothes on your back and the soil on the ground. We must return to the evergreen womb from whence we came. Money does not make self-reliance.

[Republic of Coldwater]

Yeah screw the income tax.

[Leritorius]

Flat. Asking more to the wealthy is discriminatory, promotes both corporation exodus and working class poverty.

[Atlanticatia]

Progressive. Poor people need more of their (nominal) money because of basic needs and such.

If you earn $15,000, a 20% tax would be $3,000. $3,000 would be a huge dent that would make it hard to pay food, rent, power, etc.

If you earn $1,500,000, a 20% tax would be $300,000. Even after paying the tax, you'd have about $1.2 million left over. You don't need $1.2 million to live.


I think a tax system like this would be fair:

• $0-$20,000: 0%
  $20,000-$45,000: 20%
  $45,000-$90,000: 30%
  $90,000-$180,000: 40%
  $180,000-$250,000: 50%
  $250,000+: 60%

60%

like

what the hell kind of sane person would support this

a person who supports the redistribution of wealth via agressive and progressive tax and transfer policies.

Denmark, for example, has a total top rate of 60% that kicks in at $54,900. Their economy is doing very well.

[Sosi]

Flat. Asking more to the wealthy is discriminatory, promotes both corporation exodus and working class poverty.

Poverty is a social construct.

[Alyakia]

Flat. Asking more to the wealthy is discriminatory, promotes both corporation exodus and working class poverty.

lol see my post above for how a flat tax is a 30-40% rise on real taxation for the working class. unless you believe it will all trickle down, which i'm not gonna lie, is pretty lol.

it's also not discriminatory since it's paid on income. the rich man pays the same taxes on his first 8,000 as the poor man and the middle class man.