Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- From: jmh <jmhall@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 09 Aug 2008 12:29:52 GMT
On 2008-08-07, forbisgaryg@xxxxxxx <forbisgaryg@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 5, 5:55 pm, jmh <jmh...@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 2008-08-05, forbisga...@xxxxxxx <forbisga...@xxxxxxx> wrote:
On Aug 5, 10:20 am, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Your problem. It is the best way to tax those with more capacity
to pay more than those who have very little capacity to pay.
That's just not true. Why does someone with $1,000,000 in the
bank at the beginning of the year have less capacity to pay than
someone who makes $1,000,000 during the year?
If the one with the net worth of 1 million has
no other source of income then you're clearly
taxing the productive base of that person while
only taxing the income stream of the other.
If the person with the million cannot use it productively
then our society would be better off with that million in
That's changing the subject. Also, are you really
suggesting that society should applie that "what the
ef have you done for me latey" rule when it comes
to private property?
other hands. It seems to me that income streams
indicate the markets judgement of the economic
value of the products sold. The cost of the goods
And again a change in the subject. It doesn't
matter if it's only the "market judgement" that
determines the income streams. Your still taxing
the stock of one while taxing the flow of another.
That's not apples to apples.
sold indicate the markets judement of the economic
value of that which contributed to the production.
Natural resources exist independent of human activity
and yet they have a market price. To the extent that
Yes, the physical world does exist without
any dependancy on man. They do not have any
market price outside our activities though.
Not sure what this has to do with the claim
taxing someone with a net worth of 1 million
is equivalent to taxing someone with an
income of 1 million in terms of the burden
imposed.
control of natural resources is the limiting factor on
efficient production systems to free up control will
increase society's efficiency.
That's too broad a brush.
The existing arrangement is already fairly effecient.
The limiting of use in itself is not a terrible
situation, in fact the charge is typically that
the market solution, with the private ownersip,
is allowing us to over consume the natural
resources. Now you stand that on the head
and claim it's forcing us to under consume.
What's the "effecient" level of consumption?
jmh
.
- References:
- Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- From: jmh
- Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- From: forbisgaryg
- Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- Prev by Date: Re: Natural gas in New England
- Next by Date: Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- Previous by thread: Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- Next by thread: Re: Robotopia - Tax the Robots, live free.
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|