Should anyone be taxed with a tax rate above 50 %?

Probably a Scandinavian country, taxes are high as hell there

Most government jobs are busy work to keep the vast unskilled liberal arts educated portion of the population afloat anyways. What's the number at now? 1/3 of our economy is public sector? It's (largely) a self perpetuating cancerous graft to take from those who do, to give to those who never could.

this

...

Taxation is theft.

Then don't use the roads, don't put your kids in school, if you have a fire or emergency you better not fucking call anyone you fucking leech

Ok I won't if you gave me the option not to do that.

>Then don't use the roads

You don't allow private roads.

>don't put your kids in school

I don't

>if you have a fire or emergency you better not fucking call anyone

There are no private fire fighters. I would pay for them if I had the option to.

And these are retarded arguments, it's not like it's voluntary, since I'm paying taxes anyway(because I have to) I will continue to use them. But that doesn't mean I support them.

>Then don't use the roads, don't put your kids in school, if you have a fire or emergency you better not fucking call anyone you fucking leech

yet if you deny all these public services to non tax paying 'merican Niggers, that would be WAICIST

Income tax? No.

The government has a lower veclocity of currency than consumers. All you get is the gurauntee that it won't be spent on exports, which is for Eurocucks to worrh about, not us.

Just because peasants be mad jelly doesnt mean you need to tax the rich a bunch.

>muh STEM

>muh vast population i'm superior to

>muh cancer

stay edge my friend

Why not? I thought Veeky Forums of all places wouldn't obsess over magic numbers.

No.

But as for the 50% thing, its almost always a meme, unless the tax payer is just a complete fucking idiot.

Most people making over $500k a year are paying something more like 35% - 40% after they figure in deductions and other things.

Their are wealthy people out there making $1 mil+ per year that are paying as little as 25% thanks to their accountants.

Fail. If it were Berny, he would say Scandamerickerr.

We pay 51,5% if we make more than 100k in euros in Finland. Actually the tax is 49,9%, but once your earnings break 100k limit, you get an additional " tax for the rich" which is 1,5%.

Don't you worry my sweet summer child. TTIP is never going to pass. We don't want you here.
regs. Scandinavia

If you make enough to get taxed 50+%, then you can afford to pay the extra tax.

But how is it morally justifiable to steal over half of someone's belongings from them?

>government is so SHIT
>let's pay them even less, surely that will improve our service

you need sharia son, tax is bullshit.

Extremely high salaries have diminishing returns for society.

of course, i mean a janitor does the same work as doctors and engineers yet doctors and engineers get paid waaaay too much just because they have a certificate, so it is extremely required that they contribute an extreme percentage of their income to the gubmint. there's no doubt that the government and gov employees to live off of doctors and engineers.

[citation needed]

Go live in Mexico then asshole

You're neither a doctor or an engineer, because you would know how much work the government generates for both of these professions.

Tell me, do mommy and daddy pay for you to spout autism on the internet, or are my tax dollars going towards this?

The government creates sick people?

No they dont retard.

The only thing the government does better with money is spend it on national assets and not imports. It spends it less efficiently otherwise.

Statements like that one are just poorfag cope.

Every billionaire. There is literally no point in any individual having that much.

>Every billionaire. There is literally no point in any individual having that much

Who made you the king to decide how much of someone's property is too much or not?

Are you also going to say "That house is too big for you, there is literally no point in any individual owning a house that large, so the government worker is here to redistribute your belongings to someone else"?

lmao

When you realize that private individuals and organizations can blow money on worthless shit that generates negative GDP growth, come back to me.

Until then enjoy slurping cum from your textbook.

>Are you also going to say "That house is too big for you, there is literally no point in any individual owning a house that large, so the government worker is here to redistribute your belongings to someone else"?

Yeah, sounds good to me. That money is better for society when its circulating throughout the economy as opposed to being hoarded offshore. More money than can be spent in any lifetime.

I'll own up to it, yeah. That excess should be redistributed.

>That money is better for society when its circulating throughout the economy as opposed to being hoarded offshore. More money than can be spent in any lifetime

What makes you spent it will be "circulating throughout the economy" rather than simply taken by the government and used for whatever they want?

Government officials are just regular people, they are prone to corruption and when you give them such power they are more likely to use it.

Also would you be okay if that happened with your home or your parents' home?

Yes, government officials are so corrupt we need to put actual corrupt people and their cronies who are also corrupt in power, and also remove all oversight. Nothing bad can come out of this, we will have huge growth. Hayek said so.

If you want to live in a libertarian society so bad, how about you just bend over so I can fuck you in the ass now? I'll fuck your wife afterwards while you watch and we can call it even.

>Government officials are just regular people, they are prone to corruption and when you give them such power they are more likely to use it.
Corruption due to ties with big business. Let's not mix up the cause and effect here. Big Business and private actors have been corrupting government for many decades now; not the other way around like ancaps think. The rise of Trump is proof of that.

>What makes you spent it will be "circulating throughout the economy" rather than simply taken by the government and used for whatever they want?
Well the government (despite being prone to corruptive influences from private actors) has done lots of good things. Public health centers, libraries, parks, consumer protection, environmental regulation, etc...you know...things that benefit society?

>Also would you be okay if that happened with your home or your parents' home?
If they were billionaires, sure. If I were a billionaire, sure.

>es, government officials are so corrupt we need to put actual corrupt people and their cronies who are also corrupt in power, and also remove all oversight

That is literally what you're doing by giving the government so much power.

They now have the right to use force to put you in jail if you do not give them money which they may or may not spend on evil, if they wish.

>If you want to live in a libertarian society so bad, how about you just bend over so I can fuck you in the ass now? I'll fuck your wife afterwards while you watch and we can call it even.

Not an argument.

>Corruption due to ties with big business. Let's not mix up the cause and effect here.

Precisely. Remove the government and there can be no corruption.

>Well the government (despite being prone to corruptive influences from private actors) has done lots of good things.

It has done countless evil things as well.

>Public health centers, libraries, parks, consumer protection, environmental regulation, etc...you know...things that benefit society?

It is morally wrong to threaten to put people in jail for refusing to pay for things they do not use and thus do not find a need to contribute to.

>If they were billionaires, sure. If I were a billionaire, sure.

So which omniscient person do we elect to decide who has *too much* and should be thoroughly punished for being an evil, hoarding capitalist scoundrel?

Would you still support it if it was determined that you cross that line?

Friend, you're arguing with a Berniebot. Just let him be as much of a useless faggot on Veeky Forums as he is in real life. It ain't worth your time.

>Poor people never waste money on worthless shit
>Poor people waste less of their money
>Poor people waste money at equal rates with non-poor people
Carry on with your self delusion.

>Precisely. Remove the government and there can be no corruption.
Corporate corruption

>It has done countless evil things as well.
That is has. All in all, the existence of a government is a net benefit on society.

>It is morally wrong to threaten to put people in jail for refusing to pay for things they do not use and thus do not find a need to contribute to.
The food you eat is subject to government-mandated health standards. The foundation of what would be known as the internet you're currently on was created by the military. The GPS you drive with receives signals from the Department of Defense. You may not realize it but you're enjoying the benefits of society and have been since you were born directly or indirectly. So when you make it, you are very much obligated to give back. Because that is what it means to live in a civilized society.

>So which omniscient person do we elect to decide who has *too much* and should be thoroughly punished for being an evil, hoarding capitalist scoundrel?
It has nothing to do with punishment at all. It's about giving back to the society that helped you achieve what you achieved so that the next guy can come along and have a chance too. Specific tax rates are debatable.

I was going to ask how anyone can possibly afford living in a city in Finland, but I'm going to have to add up my income tax, my social security tax, my medicare tax, and my health premiums before I ask that.

God I hate retards so much.

Well buddy... you're in the wrong neighborhood.

Stop with the strawman bullshit.
The only way your argument works is if everyone you're fucking with a punitive tax rate actually hoards money offshore, which isn't even true.

Everyone else who invests their money (you know, "circulating through the economy" - it's not under a mattress) gets screwed under your plan, because you believe the government is a better steward of their money than they are.

If you want to stifle growth, sure. Believe it or not there is an optimum tax rate for return on taxes and return on revenue. Higher tax rates =/= more tax revenue.

Try reading up on Laffer sometime

>Higher tax rates =/= more tax revenue
Actually, it depends on the country. Reagen and his office lards thought they were on the right side of the curve and though lowering taxes would bring more revenue.

Protip: it didn't.
The thing is, the US is on the left side now. So higher taxes = more revenue

Forgive me, I didn't realize that poor people never bought imported goods from wallmart.

Isn't there a Bernie rally you're missing out on?

>the US is on the left side now
Lots of people on the left have been saying this for decades.
Forgive my cynicism, but it really seems like more of a political position, and less of an honest assessment of the current situation.

Really, how could we always be left of the curve (or right, for that matter)?

People who make over 500k a year