This conversation is closed.

a global personal income limit and flat tax rate.

I don't understand how anyone could need more than $1000000 per year to live comfortably. With all the current problems in the world today that need money to solve, that anyone should live in the extravagant lap of luxury when others are starving or lack the basic neccessities to live I find criminally negligent and morally corrupt.

We should have a global treasury for collecting and distributing wealth, starting with a personal income limit and a flat tax with no deductions on all personal and corporate income.

  • Aug 13 2011: Absolutely not. You can't tell a person "You're not allowed to accomplish as much as you can". It's a toxic idea. Now, as far as the wealthy using their money to get wealthier etc., there are already mechanisms in place to stop this, we juust don't use them, because we're too busy watching "Two and a Half Men".

    As far as taxation goes, a flat tax with no deductions won't work because people will still find ways to hide their wealth.

    The solution in my opinion, is a consumption tax. Everyone keeps all their earnings. You pay a flat percentage on everything you consume, and it is built right into the price, so you can't avoid it. Now people's taxation will adequately refelct what they utilize. This goes all the way from raw materials for manufacturing, all the way to consumer goods. (Yes there will be double and triple dipping as a result, but there already is, so this isn't new or necessarily wrong).
  • thumb
    Aug 12 2011: Money doesn't solve problems. Give everyone 1,000,000 dollar bills and see how quickly the world stays the same.
    I agree the current wealth/resource distribution is corrupt and morally irresponsible but money is not the solution.

    On a flat tax with no deductions; I'm tempted to argue that deductions can stimulate progress, but I wouldn't be able to muster much defense for the case so I'll leave that to the experts (I'm sure they're around here somewhere).
  • Aug 16 2011: The wealthy do not spend all their money to make themselves richer. Many do work in charities and such.

    Medical research, treatment and education are all good. Food needs better distribution. But who decides how much money and where it goes. That person will have tremendous powers for abuse. Bill gates has used his billions himself to aid causes he believes in. Why didn't he entrust his money to millions of charities that basically does his charity work. Simple. He does not trust them to use it right. People are self serving even in charities. Show me a world where money is used as intended and that will be a world where your system will work.

    Although i might sound negative, I wish that world was reality.
  • Aug 13 2011: Just because you do not understand why a person desires something does not mean it should be limited.

    Maybe those people with millions or billions of dollars want to start relief funds for starving people or to educate children. Look at all the charity done by the rich. (ex. bill gates and melinda foundation)

    Maybe you should be more concerned with your own income.
    • Aug 14 2011: If the majority of people with millions or billions donated significantly to charity , or did some good for mankind other than the token amount to qualify for tax deductions we would have a much better world. Sadly this is not the case, the majority spend there wealth on obscene luxury.

      There is a serious problem with mankind when wealth gives some kind of entitlement rather than a responsiblity to other people. It is time for the class structure of society to end, we all have a responsiblity to our fellow man. I fully understand greed, hatred, bigotry and abuse that doesn't mean I have to condone any of them..

      I earn a decent income, thank you very much, I own a horse and dog rescue in Duncan BC, and help the less fortunate more than I can. Its too bad others can't exhibit comapssion, generosity and kindness rather than self indulgence.
      • Aug 14 2011: To be blunt Paul, I was tempted to give Bob a bit of an e-slap for the "Maybe the billionaires want to start relief funds..." crap. I can't tolerate pathetically weak arguments like that.

        Maybe all the poor people aren't really poor and they're just hiding their wealth. Maybe those abused women aren't really abused and they actually enjoy getting punched in the face. Maybe the holocaust didn't really happen and it's just the most epic game of hide and seek in history.

        We can provide alternatives for anything. It neither makes it likely, nor worth considering. Data shows us that it is NOT the case that moast extremely wealthy people give away most of their income. For every Bill Gates, there are 100 Kenneth Lay's.

        I appreciate that your heart is in the right place Paul, but like I said below, that specific idea is toxic. We don't achieve progress by setting limits, we do it by ensuring that everyone pays their fair share towards the greater good by simplifying tax codes, removing things like tiered income taxes that penalize people for getting ahead and replace them with consumption oriented taxation that reflects peoples lifestyles.
  • thumb
    Aug 13 2011: No.
  • thumb
    Aug 13 2011: I think maybe a flat tax wouyld work. The very rich buy luxuries that are expensive and the poor people do not.
    With an exemption for food which would not be taxed maybe it would work. Then all the lawyers and CPAs would have to find work. Maybe farming ?
  • Aug 13 2011: Not possible for humans. It is in our genes to be greedy. If the people in charge of the money were saints and perfect, then the system would work. Unluckily they doesn't exist. what about the people receiving the money. What stops them from simply doing nothing? Gambling, smoking e.t.c Do rich people have to pay for these? I am not happy that the gap between rich and poor is getting bigger. I am not happy that the rich use their money and influence to get richer. But telling them that their ideas and innovation, that their effort, sweat and tears will all be for other people who don't work as hard is too much to swallow. A flat tax punishes those who work hard and those who don't. An inheritance tax would make more sense. When they die, their wealth would be distributed leaving a small percent for their children. At least this way you do not punish for success.
    • Aug 13 2011: Two questions Jaeyun

      What are you defining as success, just wealth accumulation?

      Has there really been any work or innovations by the wealthy that has helped society as a whole?

      I am not suggesting that anyone be given money, the money would be used for food production and distribution and medical research and treatment. and education.
  • thumb
    Aug 12 2011: Wow . . . that's quite a proposal. The flat tax is perhaps feasible.

    In my mind, it's better to work towards moving people to want to share their wealth. I do believe extravagance is a form of unconsciousness.
  • thumb
    Aug 12 2011: my proposal is to set this limit to USD 20,000 per year
  • Aug 12 2011: I agree completely with your statement "money doesn't solve problems ". However, at this time , in this reality, it seems problems can't be solved without it either.

    In reality, you don't feed people money, however we have governments that pay farmers NOT to grow food?? We can't find a cure for cancer without money but they seem more occupied discovering solutions like Viagra or cures for hair loss.

    I think the first step is to redistribute wealth enough that it becomes meaningless, then maybe we can concentrate on the things that are truly important.