Is Income Tax robbery?

[fredfertang]

So no monopoly and no competition.. so what do you suggest?

There's an old Ealing Comedy, Passport to Pimlico, that I think you'd enjoy

 

[sledger]

Yeah it is a lot of the times. In India we have Reliance Jio backed by ruling government though run by a private a player which is trying to get Vodafone out of our country.

On the other end we have inefficiently run government entities which can't compete with private players like in the airlines sector.

I guess privatisation wherever and slowly is the best recourse.

The best case scenario for this type of thing is to frame it in terms of "if there is an area where the private sector is not providing a service, the government should step in to fill the gap". I still have severe reservations about this, but it's better than "the government should actively compete with the private sector", which is just a totally unpalatable prospect.

 

[harsh.ag]

There is no reason for Air India to exist. That, however, has nothing to do with what the thread is about.

 

[Uppercut]

The best case scenario for this type of thing is to frame it in terms of "if there is an area where the private sector is not providing a service, the government should step in to fill the gap". I still have severe reservations about this, but it's better than "the government should actively compete with the private sector", which is just a totally unpalatable prospect.

The government regularly competes with the private sector on things that are non-identical substitutes. E.g. publicly-owned trams compete with private buses.

I think you're being too equivocal. In principle you don't want situations where the government has an ability and strong incentive to abuse its power, but public involvement in the marketplace doesn't necessarily imply that. There are plenty of situations in which it works tolerably.

Such a system might not be any more exploitable than what currently exists. Governments are inherently open to abuse and corruption, and good governance always requires goodwill somewhere along the chain of command. It's unsettling how much society depends on politicians not being dicks, but we haven't really found anything much better.

 

[GIMH]

The government regularly competes with the private sector on things that are non-identical substitutes. E.g. publicly-owned trams compete with private buses.

I think you're being too equivocal. In principle you don't want situations where the government has an ability and strong incentive to abuse its power, but public involvement in the marketplace doesn't necessarily imply that. There are plenty of situations in which it works tolerably.

Such a system might not be any more exploitable than what currently exists. Governments are inherently open to abuse and corruption, and good governance always requires goodwill somewhere along the chain of command. It's unsettling how much society depends on politicians not being dicks, but we haven't really found anything much better.

Then in principle you don't want situations where government exists tbh

 

[sledger]

The government regularly competes with the private sector on things that are non-identical substitutes. E.g. publicly-owned trams compete with private buses.

I think you're being too equivocal. In principle you don't want situations where the government has an ability and strong incentive to abuse its power, but public involvement in the marketplace doesn't necessarily imply that. There are plenty of situations in which it works tolerably.

Such a system might not be any more exploitable than what currently exists. Governments are inherently open to abuse and corruption, and good governance always requires goodwill somewhere along the chain of command. It's unsettling how much society depends on politicians not being dicks, but we haven't really found anything much better.

I think the key word here is "involvement". What I was trying to get across was that the government regulating marketplace activities, or actually actively participating in them with the objective of preventing market failures are things I can see the logic behind. As alluded to above I still do not necessarily feel very comfortable about this, but I can see why this might be an attractive approach to some.

What I was trying to warn Pratters off was the idea that it would somehow be good for governments to be profit driven in the same way a private company would be. IMO this would be a recipe for severe horribleness.

 

[Uppercut]

Then in principle you don't want situations where government exists tbh

Haha exactly! But then everyone has the ability and incentive to abuse their own power.

My proposed solution is for government to exist but for politicians to be subject to endless abuse.

 

[sledger]

Haha exactly! But then everyone has the ability and incentive to abuse their own power.

My proposed solution is for government to exist but for politicians to be subject to endless abuse.

Not everyone has a legion of people wielding guns at their disposal though

 

[Uppercut]

Not everyone has a legion of people wielding guns at their disposal though

Not yet, but our experience of post-government states in Libya and Somalia suggests that it doesn't take long.

 

[sledger]

Not yet, but our experience of post-government states in Libya and Somalia suggests that it doesn't take long.

I've always fancied a "Sledger's Army" tbh.

 

[honestbharani]

Agree with sledger here.. There is a difference between the Government being involved in a service and taking steps to make that self sustainable and then profitable as we go on, while playing fair by the market rules and the Government actively entering the market to make money and profits being the main consideration. The latter is just a stupid idea any which way you look at it.

 

[Lillian Thomson]

The tax itself isn't theft, but the creative accountancy that calculates the different thresholds is fraud.

 

[Flem274*]

sledger now I'm curious on your stance on state owned companies supplying essential services i.e. state power companies, mines, trains, airlines etc

Think about it. If you're playing a game and your opponent is the one setting the rules (and responsible for changing the rules and capable of making up new rules as the game progresses), the game would be manifestly and inherently unfair.

They called it the Champions League T20 iirc

 

[GIMH]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ax-plan-as-expected-fails-miserably-in-norway

Couldn't decide where to put it. Interesting article

 

[silentstriker]

Is income robbery? By receiving an income, are you robbing the state of the money that belongs to it for social betterment?

 

[Furball]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ax-plan-as-expected-fails-miserably-in-norway

Couldn't decide where to put it. Interesting article

If anything that article shows exactly why taxation is necessary and how unrealistic the libertarian wet dream is.

 

[Uppercut]

If anything that article shows exactly why taxation is necessary and how unrealistic the libertarian wet dream is.

Yeah it's exactly the type of exercise you might give to a class to illustrate collective action problems. As right-wing fables go I don't think this is a particularly good one.

 

[Ausage]

If anything that article shows exactly why taxation is necessary and how unrealistic the libertarian wet dream is.

I think you're after the charity figures.

https://givingusa.org/giving-usa-20...014-highest-total-in-reports-60-year-history/

 

[Magrat Garlick]

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/arti...ax-plan-as-expected-fails-miserably-in-norway

Couldn't decide where to put it. Interesting article

"Left-of-center opposition parties claimed the tax cuts would benefit the richest and boost inequality. Jonas Gahr Store, the wealthy Labor Party contender who is leading in the polls ahead of the September 11 elections, has so far refused to take up the government’s offer.
Ironically, it was Store, whose net worth is $8 million, who prodded the government into action by complaining earlier this year that he had ended up paying less taxes under the current administration.
“This is an election campaign showcase by the government,” said Harald Jacobsen, a political adviser at the Labor party, who argues that the scheme has cost more than what it has generated.'

This is the key paragraph for mine. There was no desire for this (and the Norwegian state does not for the moment need additional revenue sources, given the size of its sovereign wealth fund), but it's still being championed as a rhetorical device. All the while the notionally right-wing government has presided over ballooning state expenditure and half-hearted local government reforms.

There have been considerable income tax cuts as well, but mostly they've gone to people who have no idea what to invest their profits in. So all they have achieved is to fuel a real estate boom.

 

[fredfertang]

Just got home to my tax bill that's due on 31 July - feeling some sympathy with the OP