Rich pigopolists getting richer massively faster; troubling

[Einhander Sn0m4n]

I suppose one compromise would be to set the income tax rate extremely rate (60% or so) on the richest 1% of the country, and then allow them deductions when they invest the money productively, with productivity in this case being, entirely, a calculation about how many jobs the investment has created.

Preferably it'll be 'how many jobs times the salary to avoid gigantic spikes in McJobs.

[Coalition]

Preferably it'll be 'how many jobs times the salary to avoid gigantic spikes in McJobs.

They would have to make an equation referencing the minimum wage times a constant, and only count the number of jobs that exceed that paycheck. As the minimum wage gets increased, the paychecks get increased.

Also, I'd want to include a deficit in taxes if the jobs don't last. I.e. if you create 100,000 jobs, but the location folds at the end of the year, it counts against your job creation for the next year (so you don't 'create' the same jobs every year for tax purposes). Of course, the deficit would drop over time, so if a job fails after five years (or some other amount TBD) it doesn't count against the taxes.

Still, I can see where it would be a sneaky way for a billionaire to slowly get control of a country, by buying stock in different companies, until he owns 25% in all of them (a very nice voting share), or 51% (where he controls all the companies). Eventually you'll get a second Donald Trump, who looks over the list of the Fortune 500, and goes 'Mine, mine, mine', as he looks over the list.

After that, you have to wonder who runs the country. The President, or the guy who owns 51% in every company and can coordinate them faster?

[K. A. Pital]

The government being a mere facade of an aristocratic oligarchy is actually more or less common in the world. Even the First World is not insured against such style of governing.

[The Grim Squeaker]

You know I think there is something to be said for money that is re-invested being untaxed. An industrialist who makes $200 million a year taxed at 75% would be left with $50 million, which is still a whole fucking lot. However what if said industrialist spends that 75% in expanding a railroad? Or building a factory? Or sponsoring the arts? Or doing something else that society will benefit from? Whether the government takes a big share of the person's income should depend on how said person intends to dispose of it. If they decide to keep the $200 million, then sure tax the hell out of it, but why tax funds that are being put to good use?

I'll avoid any further commentary on this thread, but concerning the 75%+ tax - There are a few main problems with this.
First, the fact that the rich are the ones who actually leave your country, the richer they are, the less they'll care about having a mansion or two left there, and nationalizing their houses or left behind property is quite out of the question. (Barring a national emergency or somesuch).
Second, a system that lowers taxation on "job creating" is HORRIBLY open to abuse.
Seriously, assume that you'd cut up to 30% of the tax based on job creation - how many CEO's wouldn't be able to come up and claim
"The company was losing profits and headed for bankruptcy before I arrived. The credit for Every job goes to me".
And that's assuming a simple system, that hasn't been manipulated by lobbyists to allow for loopholes.
There's also the fact that there are quite a lot of rich people who worked their asses off to get where they are (I can think of a few, to say the least ), and many by just working harder, smarter and tougher than most people.
(Then again, I've never met a rich man over the age of 20 who was born rich and didn't intend to study and work hard and to make his own business or to expand. The US has a lot of the opposite, more wealth and "PAris hilton's". Obviously ) .

Now, before certain people start haranging me for those comments.
I support a high Income tax (It's fairer than flat taxes as well), up to 66-60% or so, and slashing away as many of the legal loop-holes as possible, but leaving some, such as charitable deductions.
Business deductions (The "job creating idea") is a dangerously unspecific idea (That would be done anyway, most people want to make more cash ), I'd prefer to tax purely luxury goods (Although that would be a nightmare of broadly defined things).

No taxation for the bottom 10% of income - You don't have that allready? Well, one point for Israel, I only pay for health, social security and local gov taxes (bottom 11 percent here - is around 12K dollars a year, bruto).
I'd also alter the Corporate taxation system to be scalable, a flat tax punishes only the weak, something going from 5 to 24.5 percent should be reasonable enough to allow grocery stores to start up easily, although capital/stock market/corporate fleeing makes this viable only in countries that are VERY attractive for investment. (Such as the US, for now).

Something will need to be done about the masses of super-conglomerates, Capitalism is a problem when forces in it game too much power, same as a democracy. (Too little capitalists).
Any ideas about that?

[K. A. Pital]

Then again, I've never met a rich man over the age of 20 who was born rich and didn't intend to study and work hard and to make his own business or to expand. The US has a lot of the opposite, more wealth and "PAris hilton's". Obviously

That's correct. The generation effect of wealth accumulation created the wealth dynasties and the oligarchic cabals in the US. Wait several more generations and it's not improbable that your country will get the same

[PeZook]

That's correct. The generation effect of wealth accumulation created the wealth dynasties and the oligarchic cabals in the US. Wait several more generations and it's not improbable that your country will get the same

It's a sad cycle that always happens. Democracy promised to end this (as did communism, incidentally) and both failed.

History will simply keep going in circles, only with bigger and bigger consequences each time. A new society forms, and needs rule of law. Some people set themselves up as rulers and accumulate wealth. This wealth grows, eventually it is inherited by people who never had to work for it, then they get removed from the real world which they're supposed to rule, grow fat and complacent, and then a violent revolution overthrows them. And usually kills them violently, too.

Well, at least even the lowliest proles today can enjoy a better living standard than the last time we had to prune the aristocracy. I'm just wondering when the new business-artistocracy will collapse. I'm guessing it will take one or two more generations.

[Ace Pace]

Then again, I've never met a rich man over the age of 20 who was born rich and didn't intend to study and work hard and to make his own business or to expand. The US has a lot of the opposite, more wealth and "PAris hilton's". Obviously

That's correct. The generation effect of wealth accumulation created the wealth dynasties and the oligarchic cabals in the US. Wait several more generations and it's not improbable that your country will get the same

It's already happening to anyone with a pair of eyes. This country is basically controlled by seven or so(rough number) of families with a dissapropiate percent of the wealth. While nothing like the absurd in the U.S. it's already quite noticeable.

I support a high Income tax (It's fairer than flat taxes as well), up to 66-60% or so, and slashing away as many of the legal loop-holes as possible, but leaving some, such as charitable deductions.

You're nuts. Theres a reason Israel has a massive brain drain and thats because no one wants to pay these absurd rates unless they're matched with actually efficient goverments(or reasonably so) like the European northen nations.

[Illuminatus Primus]

If the tax rates did not bother the rich, they would not have spent billions of dollars over the last 30 years in political campaigning, lobbying, and advertising to reduce them.

It bares repeating that the "Golden '50's" of conservative dogma featured 90% marginal tax rates on the highest earners, not the 35% bullshit featured today. Ah, selective memory. They just want the black porters back, saying "yessir" and delivering them Mint Juleps while they play golf.