I
love reading Damien’s bi-weekly Herald Op-eds: he’s a breath of fresh air
amidst the fetid statism usually served up there. However, for once, I don’t
agree with him this week, in his contention that it’s the middle class who pay
tax disproportionately to the wealthy. I’ve covered this plenty of times on my blog.
Because
Granny Herald tends to be an old fossil
trying to run an internet portal like the internet doesn't exist, and I can
never guarantee a comment going up (and certainly not in real time), I’ll
simply copy my comment to his thread below. But keep up the good work, Damien.
Have to disagree with you on this one. It's not the middle class paying tax: why? Middle class welfare.Greg Manikew in the States has shown that since 2009, under the stimulunacy of net tax transfers to the middle class, their middle class are net tax takers, with the bulk of their tax thus paid by the 'rich'.In New Zealand under Working for Families, just under 50% of middle class families, also, pay no net tax. Indeed, the latest study shows that 40% to 50% of New Zealand's total tax take is paid by those in the top 10% income bracket.The tax burden in the West definitely falls most heavily on the wealthy, that's why the IR's have so much resource allocated to persecuting them. Oh this twisted world we live with morality turned on its head.Did you know that outside of the Olympics Usain Bolt will not participate in track events in England because their tax laws not only tax 50% of his earnings from a meet there, they tax his world-wide endorsement earnings while he is in England, meaning to take part in a track and field event in England incurs a higher tax payment than what he actually earns by his appearance fee to participate. 'Tax them' and he'll run, all right, but not on a track near you, if you live in the UK. And the policy makers who achieved that level of idiocy, call us freedom lovers mad.
Why will politicians never understand that there's no big pot of money out there they can just go and take without consequences. It's people's property.
(Hattip
Liberty Scott).
Thanks Mark,
ReplyDeleteIn my defense though, I was only writing about money raised, not how the middle class were impacted by net transfers.
Cheers,
damien
True, but one should never miss a chance for a blog topic. And I'd hate people to be left thinking that the 'answer' to any problem is more tax on anyone, especially those who pay the bulk of it.
ReplyDeleteActually I was saying that there is no point taxing the rich not that we need to close loopholes to force them to pay more!
ReplyDeleteI liked the idea that taxing the rich was pointless because it raised no more money, as opposed to saying it is immoral, which is how I usually frame the issue.
Seems I was not explicit enough.
No, you were. You've crossed over my comment ... I was referring to how 'people' would take your post :)
ReplyDeleteBy the way, do you ever go back and look at the comments to your op-ed's? I imagine that would be frustrating.
ReplyDeleteUsually not, I'd be tempted to post back and I do not think that is a good idea. The vast majority of readers do not post, so those that do are an unrepresentative sample, you can spend a life time debating with them.
ReplyDelete