Jump to content

Moral Argument for paying higher taxes


Recommended Posts

  • Replies 70
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

If patriotism is moral here is a good reason. hahahahaaaaa

April 12, 2012. Washington Times. As part of the Obama administrations push to raise more taxes from the wealthy, Vice President Joseph R. Biden told an audience in New Hampshire Thursday that paying higher taxes is patriotic.

Nope. Patriotism is not a moral argument.

 

What I mean is not paying more in general. But paying more than someone else.

 

How is it moral to demand more from one person and not the other?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like for someone to take an attempt at making a moral argument for why someone who earns more money (especially through earned income) should pay a higher tax amount or rate than others.

 

I look forward to your responses.

 

"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required ... " --Luke 12:48

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required ... " --Luke 12:48

That's wrong on so many levels. That line is not even about money.

 

But even if it weren't. I am talking about earned money, not given money.

 

 

 

 

And if bible verses were proof of moral certitude then...

 

26 For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is against nature: 27 And likewise also the men, leaving the natural use of the woman, burned in their lust one toward another; men with men working that which is unseemly, and receiving in themselves that recompence of their error which was meet. (Romans 1:2627 KJV) [19]

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A simple question about a very complex topic. The universal moral argument is that taxes should be "fair". Exactly what is fair is debatable.

 

Should a poor person pay the same in taxes as a rich person? Say a man who earns $10,000 a year and a man who earns $1,000,000 a year each pay $1,000 in taxes. That would mean the poor man is paying 10% of his income in taxes while the rich man is paying 0.1%. I say no, not even close.

 

Should a poor person pay a larger percentage than a rich person? I say no.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A simple question about a very complex topic. The universal moral argument is that taxes should be "fair". Exactly what is fair is debatable.

 

Should a poor person pay the same in taxes as a rich person? Say a man who earns $10,000 a year and a man who earns $1,000,000 a year each pay $1,000 in taxes. That would mean the poor man is paying 10% of his income in taxes while the rich man is paying 0.1%. I say no, not even close.

 

Should a poor person pay a larger percentage than a rich person? I say no.

Just for argument sake, why not?

 

Why does one man owe more than another?

 

And remember, because he can is not an acceptable answer.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just for argument sake, why not?

 

Why does one man owe more than another?

 

And remember, because he can is not an acceptable answer.

 

Every tax scheme is unfair to some and beneficial to others. No way around it. If we're going to be unfair to one group I'd think the rich are the ones who will be least adversely affected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Every tax scheme is unfair to some and beneficial to others. No way around it. If we're going to be unfair to one group I'd think the rich are the ones who will be least adversely affected.

This thread is not about what you think. It's about developing a moral argument as to why one should be taxed more.

 

I realize it is an impossible task. Hence the post.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Talking on a single track of moral interpretation of right and wrong. but during the same time there is right ways to remain balanced within self containment as a whole physical universe doesn't add together the same details twice within the same way all the time spacing current events apart now here individually.

 

You have ethical and legal interpretations of the same events as well. But you isolate and insulate each when they exist simultainiously.

 

Why? Self evident it is to mislead anyone stuck thinking about space time continuum where everything exists on separate planes like layers of an onion bulb between roots and stems that make up the sphere of everything adding together exactly as it does never outside this moment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Are you saying that morality comes from God?

 

I recognize and accept truths wherever I find them.

 

Are you familiar with the Religious Society of Friends (also known as the "Quakers?)

That's wrong on so many levels. That line is not even about money.

 

 

 

Correction - "that line is not just about money" - but it's about money as well as a lot of other things in life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I recognize and accept truths wherever I find them.

 

Are you familiar with the Religious Society of Friends (also known as the "Quakers?)

 

 

Correction - "that line is not just about money" - but it's about money as well as a lot of other things in life.

No. It's not. Reading comprehension 101. Take it!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If patriotism is moral here is a good reason. hahahahaaaaa

April 12, 2012. Washington Times. As part of the Obama administration’s push to raise more taxes from the wealthy, Vice President Joseph R. Biden told an audience in New Hampshire Thursday that paying higher taxes is “patriotic.”

 

It is not patriotic to subsidize immorality.

 

Most poverty is produced by homosexuality, adultery and drugs.

 

Progressives, Liberals, Atheists, Socialists and Democrats (PLASDs) are evil people (cold blooded killers) because they advocate homosexuality, adultery and drugs that lead to disease, death, destruction and poverty.

 

Christians are good people because they warn people about the dangers of homosexuality, adultery and drugs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

"For unto whomsoever much is given, of him shall be much required ... " --Luke 12:48

 

The Bible verse if very true, but.

 

It is immoral to subsidize immorality.

 

Most poverty is produced by homosexuality, adultery and drugs.

What if you believed, as I do that not only is my money confiscated, not only am I less able to do good with it, but it is being confiscated to support evil.

 

Amen, Amen and AAAmen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The Bible verse if very true, but.

 

It is immoral to subsidize immorality.

 

Most poverty is produced by homosexuality, adultery and drugs.

 

Amen, Amen and AAAmen.

 

So they should just be allowed to die in the streets? How very Christian of you.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

OK. Morality comes from God. So when an atheist here tells me I have a moral obligation to help people, I should tell them they are hypocrites and to go away?

Morality comes from the faith there is a God, gods, Karma, supernatural beings. extraterrestrial existence planted life here. anything but understanding simple self containment.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I would like for someone to take an attempt at making a moral argument for why someone who earns more money (especially through earned income) should pay a higher tax amount or rate than others.

 

I look forward to your responses.

 

Would you like to hear from Republican Teddy Roosevelt on that?

 

""No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollar’s worth of service rendered — not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective — a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate."

 

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/new-nationalism-speech/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

Would you like to hear from Republican Teddy Roosevelt on that?

 

""No man should receive a dollar unless that dollar has been fairly earned. Every dollar received should represent a dollars worth of service rendered not gambling in stocks, but service rendered. The really big fortune, the swollen fortune, by the mere fact of its size acquires qualities which differentiate it in kind as well as in degree from what is possessed by men of relatively small means. Therefore, I believe in a graduated income tax on big fortunes, and in another tax which is far more easily collected and far more effective a graduated inheritance tax on big fortunes, properly safeguarded against evasion, and increasing rapidly in amount with the size of the estate."

 

http://teachingamericanhistory.org/library/document/new-nationalism-speech/

You point is what?

 

I agree with this. What does that have to do with this thread.

 

I clearly defined "earned" income as did Teddy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


×
×
  • Create New...