So... you want to tax the rich....
Does it make sense that the rich got rich by providing a service or product? That they own businesses and corporations? Well...., if you tax them at a higher rate, does it make sense that they will just pass that cost on down to the consumer?
Sure, bring it
Side Score: 6
|
 |
Not any more
Side Score: 12
|
|
|
|
|
1
point
1
point
1
point
What I'm saying is that if we tax the rich, they will get pissed off and pass the cost down to the consumer which will piss the consumers off. Since people are viewing this as class warfare, then there are two sides (the rich and the consumer in our case). If the rich are pissed and the consumers are pissed and it all started with raising taxes, then I say.... Let's raise taxes and piss everyone off ;) Side: Sure, bring it
1
point
|
No, it's a personal income tax, not a business tax. First of all, not all wealthy individuals own businesses. Secondly, the only costs that do get handed down to customers are increases in business expenditure. Products and services are going to remain at whatever price allows them to make the most profit, if the cost of running a business has not increased and the demand for the given products and services has not risen, then it makes no business sense to increase prices. Most wealthy business owners operate their businesses based on profit and not on their own personal income. For these reasons personal income taxes do not translate well into market prices, and this has been the excuse for giving wealthy undue advantages, that in many cases is not even asked for. Side: Not any more
1
point
Which "rich" people are not a part of a business? Whether you tax a "rich" person or a "rich" persons business doesn't matter (in most cases) anyone in business does not want to make less money, it is the nature of business (and consequently its owners, CEO, managers and employees) to make more money. So if you take money away from a business or a person they will try to make it up in some or several ways raising prices of their products in a very common way another is cutting labor (ie. employees). In my opinion higher taxes on the "rich" help absolutely no one. Side: Sure, bring it
I said not all wealthy people own businesses, and you rendered this statement as no rich people are part of businesses. Do you know the difference between owning something and participating in it? Owning something means you can dictate the price. Not all wealthy people can dictate the price of the industry they are in. Stockholders, bankers and investors for example. Do you honestly think that if for example we raise taxes on an oil tycoon he is going to raise the price of gas for everybody? Of course not the amount of money he loses from the tax increase would pale in comparison to the amount of business he would lose for raising gas prices unnecessarily. Since when have market prices ever been determined by personal income taxes, ever? Prices are determined by supply and demand. Income tax has been lowered on the rich consistently over the last 20 years or so and it has never resulted in a better economy. The only thing we can safely say it has accomplished is to make the rich even richer. The policy your talking about has been the justification for stratifying the American people. The gap between the rich and poor has consequently grown over the years as a direct result. It is to their benefit to make you believe that this benefits me and you, but it doesn't. Side: Not any more
1
point
So long as business owners decide not to increase their income to offset their loses to taxes, it shouldn't affect their profit margins. Their profit should be at an approximate maximum, and taxing a small population of society higher shouldn't affect demand for most productions too much, so the maximum profit should still occur at roughly the same price. Increasing the price will lower the demand, so attempts by owners to pass on personal income taxes though their business will likely result in even greater loses in profits; which means less capital gains and less income growth in the long term. So a rational owner wouldn't attempt to pass on personal income taxes down though their company product price, so long as their in the business for the long term. If their in it for the short term, then either the business will disappear and long term concerns about jobs and such are moot, or someone in it for the long term will eventually take over. Side: Not any more
Don't believe me? See for yourself: http://www.faireconomy.org/files/images/tax_gdp.gif http://www.faireconomy.org/files/images/tax_emp.gif Warren Buffet explains that Trickle-down economics hasn't worked: Side: Not any more
|
