What about Africa/debate
Jump to navigation Jump to search
- Pretty much everyone in the US is in the top 33% globally. Also, pretty much everyone who has a computer is in the top 5% globally.
- What conclusion is this arguing against?
- Anti-taxers only apply this argument selectively.
- Objector only raises this claim where Pro-Taxer is not rich.
- This implies an unequal burden, i.e. the Pro-Taxer must empty their wallet before any rich people would need to contribute, rather than each contributing according to their ability.
Nope, this is a complete mis-characterization of the argument. The argument is really about who decides how much is taken and from whom. Pro-Taxer wants to be the one to decide when it's someone else's money, but they also want to be the one to decide when others may want to take Pro-Taxer's money. As such, they deem, whether implicitly or explicitly, they know better than others how to decide such matters.
- This is a statement without evidence.
- Again, those who own a computer are most likely in the top 5% globally. They should therefore contribute to their ability. Oh, but again, Pro-Taxer is the one who wants to decide what each person's ability is and how much each person can spare.
- The principle of next-rung assistance tends to maximize income inequality.
- The states' bias towards inflation increases income inequality.