Against a wealth tax political
Tax itself is the problem
Taxation in general is harmful, so the state should tax neither wealth nor income; the right level of tax is as close to zero as possible.
- 3 counters
- 4 sources
- 3 people
The case for taxing wealth, argument by argument.
Taxation in general is harmful, so the state should tax neither wealth nor income; the right level of tax is as close to zero as possible.
You're making the "Tax itself is the problem" argument against a wealth tax. Tax is what funds the courts, roads, schools and security that make wealth possible in the first place — a tax on the largest fortunes raises real revenue without touching low- and middle-income households. Narrowing extreme wealth gaps also strengthens social cohesion, reducing the resentment and instability that threaten the very order markets depend on. And the current system already taxes income from labour heavily while barely touching wealth — a wealth tax makes it fairer, not more harmful. Learn more: https://wealthtax.now/arguments/taxation-is-harmful/
You're making the "Tax itself is the problem" argument against a wealth tax. Tax funds the courts, roads and security that make wealth possible — and the current system hammers wages while barely touching wealth. A wealth tax makes it fairer. https://wealthtax.now/arguments/taxation-is-harmful/
The bottom half of workers pay 3% of all taxes — it should be zero.
“People have confused money for real resources. And I think I think we live in an age where like money is kind of the new religion. And people confuse money for ”
Raised as a counter-argument to rebut. “whatever you do don't tax Rich because it's bad for you”
Raised as a counter-argument to rebut. “the other narrative is that tax is essentially synonymous with waste so tax is essentially waste”