Mark Tilley

address: firstname(dot)lastname domain: logix TLD:ca

Also at

Oh, and income tax is evil because it taxes goodness; it slows down the economy.

Sounds interesting, but capital is just the accumulation of income. Why is income good but capital not (since you advocate taxing capital below)?

Because capital is not the accumulation of income?? Income can be used to meet one's needs, be consumed as luxuries, or invested in the future in some form. Only the last is capital. For example, a house (an accumulation of income) is not a form of capital so long as you cannot rent or lease it, because it is being consumed to meet one's needs and/or as a luxury. So taxing capital means taxing power, not consumption, or necessities.

Would you advocate taxing badness (whatever that means!)? Certainly excessive income tax might slow down the economy, but I'm not sure that any income tax would.

Let's assume it doesn't. Doesn't it seem to you inelegant to tax a good thing? As for taxing badness, see luxury taxes!

And it's not a *benefit* tax that we should have but a *benefit from public goods* tax.

Please explain what you mean by a *benefit from public goods* tax. How does it differ from GovernmentServiceUserFees?? (And note that GovernmentServiceUserFeeList? includes ExtractionTax?.)

It differs from government "service" user fees because not all government services, let alone public goods, are "services" amenable to user fees. The existence of the economy, let alone its stability, is a perfect example of a public good. Capital represents a share of the economy, a share of a public good protected by the government. Yet you certainly can't leverage a user fee on capital. Moreover, the value of the public good (economy / economic stability) is directly proportional to an individual's capital. So a user fee doesn't recover an individual's benefit from this public service, only a tax does.

In addition, some public goods aren't government services, just services provided by the society as a whole.

Which would mean that capital taxes are good but income taxes are bad. As a side effect, capital taxes also speed up the economy instead of putting it to sleep. -- rk

Please explain how taxing capital speeds up the economy.

Search for negative interest currencies on google. Currencies are used as stores of value and as means of exchange. Unfortunately, these two uses are mutually exclusive and contradictory. So in order to make currencies function better as a means of exchange, you have to eliminate their usefulness as stores of value. You do this with negative interest currencies, a form of capital tax.

This also solves the problem that using notes of printed paper as a permanent store of value is the most braindead idiotic thing ever conceived in human history. Notes of printed paper have no intrinsic value. If people are to store value in something, then it should be in something of actual value, such as a house, farm or orchard. Storing value in this direct manner is far more elegant than storing it in notes of paper that represent a share of some indescribable portion of the economy. Not only is the relation direct and obvious, but private property stays private property instead of being a share of a public good managed by government.

Negative interest currencies tax the ugly and wasteful public good in order to encourage people to get rid of it in favour of the really beneficial private goods.

Some response on IntrinsicValue.

Please consider yourself the proud host of refsoc, and all who have/will sail in her. Please do a better job than I did! --Pete.


EditText of this page (last edited September 7, 2009) or FindPage with title or text search