What taxes a billionaire?

[dimreepr]

This is for you @Peterkin... 

[Peterkin]

You're asking me?

OTOMH, government, ex-wives and spiral staircases.

Did I guess any right? Do I get to cross the bridge?

Edited September 18, 2021 by Peterkin
correction

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Do I get to cross the bridge?

Did you build it?

[Peterkin]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pWS8Mg-JWSg

12 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Did you build it?

How old do you think I am?

[dimreepr]

4 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

How old do you think I am?

Not old enough...

[Peterkin]

Is there a purpose for this thread?

Why is it in Ethics?

Edited September 18, 2021 by Peterkin

[TheVat]

The endless drudgery of finding loopholes.   Very taxing.  Sometimes they need a long massage and a nap,  after. 

Pretty much EVERYTHING  that allowed you to amass a billion came from what taxes support -- roads,  ports,  railways, bridges,  access to raw materials, skilled workers,  healthy workers, military and police defense of lands and properties and supply chains,  government organizations and councils that promote your country's products to the world,  etc.   CHIP IN,  ASSHOLES.   (excuse my French -- just really tired of all the entitled whining from rich people)

[swansont]

https://www.facebook.com/MontyPython/videos/890758175061804/

[Peterkin]

It's a cognitive gap, apparently. The Craig. T. Nelson problem. Granted, he's only a millionnaire, so maybe that doesn't count.

Quote

 

 

Edited September 18, 2021 by Peterkin
skipped one post; not intended as response to Tim the Mage

[Sensei]

Quote

What taxes a billionaire?

If we're on taxes and taxing billionaires, there's the question of which country with which people in government, and whether they're willing to spend the money they raise more optimally than a billionaire can do himself/herself..

If a billionaire spends money on luxury items, the money barely reaches the bottom of the economic food chain..

If he/she invests money (in non-financial industries), new jobs, new industries, new opportunities are created..

This is a mathematical equation with many variables that change over time and space.... rather than an ethical one....

Bees, ants, termites etc. social animals work for the goodness, prosperity, happiness of the entire group and family to which they belong without any money..

Can you create more and efficiently with your neighbours and family than if you paid them or they paid you?

Money has degenerated human.. degradated human.. unequalled human.. partitioned humans..

People started doing many evil/inappropriate  things they wouldn't do if money wouldn't exist.

Edited September 18, 2021 by Sensei

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, Sensei said:

Money has degenerated human.. degradated human.. unequalled human.. partitioned humans..

That's the best sentence I've read all week. It could crown a pyramid of economic, sociological, psychological and historical scholarship. Alas, such an edifice would not fit into the available space.

As things do stand, humans, if they hope to prosper as a species, must learn to control money; reduce its status from deity to the medium of exchange that its advocates assert it to be. Taxation is one mechanism whereby that could be achieved - if government were not in thrall to money. There are other devices. Christian, Judaic and Muslim scriptures urge charity on the prosperous faithful, and they have had much influence.  A sense of obligation to some particular institution or organization, such as the one Jared Isaacman holds for St. Jude's hospital or Alex Trebek did for his alma mater, often prompts generous contributions to the betterment their fellow humans. A  personal interest in some cultural activity makes some wealthy people lifelong supporters of the arts and art education. Love and friendship. Concern for the future. Popularity; social standing.

Very rich people are as motivated by the same feelings and ideas as the rest of us. Unfortunately, one of the most compelling of these feelings is "I want mooooore!" and one of the most pervasive ideas is "Anything I own this, nobody else can. " It's at this end of the scale that government needs to step in, like a good parent, and regulate the uncouth child's behaviour. Siblings and peers can help!

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, Sensei said:

If a billionaire spends money on luxury items, the money barely reaches the bottom of the economic food chain..

 

Why do you say that? I'm thinking of, say, a yacht. That pretty much screams luxury.

Just about everything on that boat started out with a minimum wage worker, then skilled manual labor, highly skilled manual labor, engineers, managers, high tech, low tech, service industry, and on and on.

[dimreepr]

20 hours ago, Peterkin said:

Is there a purpose for this thread?

Why is it in Ethics?

The purpose is to explore the nuances of taxes and the value to society for those that don't pay.

"Why ethics?" Where would you suggest?

20 hours ago, TheVat said:

The endless drudgery of finding loopholes.   Very taxing.  Sometimes they need a long massage and a nap,  after. 

Pretty much EVERYTHING  that allowed you to amass a billion came from what taxes support -- roads,  ports,  railways, bridges,  access to raw materials, skilled workers,  healthy workers, military and police defense of lands and properties and supply chains,  government organizations and councils that promote your country's products to the world,  etc.   CHIP IN,  ASSHOLES.   (excuse my French -- just really tired of all the entitled whining from rich people)

OTOH A lot of the infrastructure, rail/road's, canal's, bridge's etc. were built by the billionaire's of their day to facilitate their trade; much like China's belt and road initiative.

I'm with you on your "CHIP IN,  ASSHOLES.", I just think we need to find a way to persuade them that they're not better than a bin man, just equally useful.

17 hours ago, zapatos said:

Why do you say that? I'm thinking of, say, a yacht. That pretty much screams luxury.

Just about everything on that boat started out with a minimum wage worker, then skilled manual labor, highly skilled manual labor, engineers, managers, high tech, low tech, service industry, and on and on.

The trickle down theory doesn't work, it's an excuse to avoid tax; far more job's are supported by the average tax payer, buying a widget.

17 hours ago, Peterkin said:

As things do stand, humans, if they hope to prosper as a species, must learn to control money; reduce its status from deity to the medium of exchange that its advocates assert it to be. Taxation is one mechanism whereby that could be achieved - if government were not in thrall to money. There are other devices. Christian, Judaic and Muslim scriptures urge charity on the prosperous faithful, and they have had much influence.  A sense of obligation to some particular institution or organization, such as the one Jared Isaacman holds for St. Jude's hospital or Alex Trebek did for his alma mater, often prompts generous contributions to the betterment their fellow humans. A  personal interest in some cultural activity makes some wealthy people lifelong supporters of the arts and art education. Love and friendship. Concern for the future. Popularity; social standing.

First we have to understand the parable of the industrious mouse.

 

20 hours ago, Sensei said:

If he/she invests money (in non-financial industries), new jobs, new industries, new opportunities are created..

Why would he/she want too do that?

 

Edited September 19, 2021 by dimreepr

[dimreepr]

It's not money for nothing, it's very entertaining...

 

[zapatos]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

The trickle down theory doesn't work, it's an excuse to avoid tax; far more job's are supported by the average tax payer, buying a widget.

Be specific. What part of my statement was incorrect?

[dimreepr]

7 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Be specific. What part of my statement was incorrect?

That's the problem, it's not incorrect... It's just a different version of correct...

[zapatos]

1 minute ago, dimreepr said:

That's the problem, it's not incorrect... It's just a different version of correct...

No, the problem is that you are confusing what I said with and economic theory.

[Peterkin]

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

The purpose is to explore the nuances of taxes and the value to society for those that don't pay.

You might have articulated that in the opening post, if only to save on confusion. The title question is rather obscure.

But, on the principle of "better late", which nuances of taxes do you wish to explore? For that matter, what do you mean by  'nuances'?

Still don't know how you frame the the issue of 'value to society'.

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

"Why ethics?" Where would you suggest?

It's not for me to suggest; it's for you to clarify what aspect of ethics you wish to discuss.

1 hour ago, dimreepr said:

First we have to understand the parable of the industrious mouse.

Enlighten us, please.

[dimreepr]

3 minutes ago, zapatos said:

No, the problem is that you are confusing what I said with and economic theory.

I'm often confused by the economy of thought, perhaps you can explain... 

8 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

Enlighten us, please.

Didn't he entertain us???

[zapatos]

15 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I'm often confused by the economy of thought, perhaps you can explain...

I talked about jobs involved in creating a yacht. You talked about an economic theory involving taxes.

[dimreepr]

17 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

It's not for me to suggest; it's for you to clarify what aspect of ethics you wish to discuss.

I have, in posting this ethically; it's your job to prove me wrong...

6 minutes ago, zapatos said:

I talked about jobs involved in creating a yacht. You talked about an economic theory involving taxes.

Do you not see the difference? 

[zapatos]

9 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

Do you not see the difference? 

Yes I see the difference. What I don't see is the similarity.

[Peterkin]

18 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I have, in posting this ethically; it's your job to prove me wrong...

About what? You made no opening comment, no statement, no ethical proposition.

You addressed this thread to me specifically. If you have something to tell me or ask me or argue with me regarding the ethics of taxation or billioonairehood or mice, please state it clearly so that I can respond without becoming any more trollish than I already am.  

 

Edited September 19, 2021 by Peterkin

[dimreepr]

8 minutes ago, zapatos said:

Yes I see the difference. What I don't see is the similarity.

We are only human, after all...

3 minutes ago, Peterkin said:

You addressed this thread to me specifically. If you have something to tell me or ask me or argue with me, please state it clearly so that I can respond without becoming any more trollish than I already am. 

I don't think you're a troll, I think you're very smart; I'm just asking...

[Peterkin]

59 minutes ago, dimreepr said:

I'm just asking...

Go ahead. Ask.