What's better: unlimited tax rate and optimal welfare or optimal tax rate and the possible welfare?
And when do we stop increasing taxes to maintain the optimal welfare? Or we never stop increasing it because the best thing for a society is having a lot of "free stuff"?
If not free stuff, at least some critical facilities to be made available at concessional rates for the benefit of low-income people should be there in any welfare state. For meeting that purpose, some amount of playing around with taxes cannot be avoided.
Any increase in tax rates in any segment of economy will definitely create opposition from that segment. (For example, if you increase the tax rates for computers, all the computer related industries will oppose it). But Governments have to strike a balance and it is an unenviable task indeed!
but do you have to stop taxing at some point, whatever facilities you have (and you don't), or is it better to tax unlimitedly to give people everything they people ask for?
I don't understand what you mean by "stop taxing at some point". Taxes will always be there to run the government. Without tax collection, how will the Government get money for its infrastructure, staff salary, developmental projects, defense etc?
Maybe I didn't express well: should we have an established tax burden, for instance, the government decides that it can't be superior to 30%, and gives the benefits possible with that, or that people must have the benefits no matter how much taxes
by Stump Parrish 3 years ago
The tax cuts that are being debated in Washington have been described as a jobs creating nessessity by the republicans. These tax cuts have been in effect for 10 years now and I have to wonder where all the jobs they created during their existence, have gone. Are we to believe that they will...
by Alex J. Reissig 6 years ago
Would you support a flat 15% income tax?Would you support a flat 15% income tax in this country? Other than a personal deduction (possibly in the neighborhood of 25k per individual/50k per couple) there would be no deductions.
by karl 4 years ago
How many French millionaires will your country take?http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2013-12-2 … e-tax.htmlHow long do you think it will be before Frances economy will be on the big slide downwards?
by JaxsonRaine 6 years ago
was not being a better storyteller...With U3 unemployment above 8%, and real unemployment around 11%, and stories would have just make the last 3 years all better.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/07/1 … 69679.htmlA better story to inspire us and make us feel optimistic about the 8/11%...
by GA Anderson 2 years ago
Much is heard of a demand that corporations and the wealthy pay their "fair share" of taxes, but I have heard little of what that share should be.With only a single restriction; that the discussion is about legal tax actions, what should that "fair share" be?One could say that...
by SparklingJewel 6 years ago
I don't claim to be a big financial, economics know it all (how could anyone, frankly, but the link here is a conservative version of the current presidents tax creation scenario for next yearcan anyone that monitors similar information from the liberals post a comparison for us all to learn...
|HubPages Device ID|
|Login||This is necessary to sign in to the HubPages Service.|
|HubPages Google Analytics|
|HubPages Traffic Pixel|
|Google Hosted Libraries|
|Google AdSense Host API|
|Conversion Tracking Pixels|
|Author Google Analytics|
|Amazon Tracking Pixel|