Hacker News Reader

Comment by lastyearman | Hacker News Reader

That's why we have super majority and other means to combat tyranny by majority.

So how does one define the point at which taxation becomes immoral?

My argument wasn't that the tax itself is immoral, although I'm a flat tax guy, but rather that where the money is spent and how can easily be immoral.

I'm no expert. However, I think taxation becomes immoral when the amount you pay in taxes, is more than the amount that you keep... so anything above 50%?

Have you ever done the math of much taxes you actually pay (hint: products you buy include a ton of taxes)?

Anyway, taxes don't matter. All taxes return to circulation (unless government is radically changing economic policy). What people are really saying is that they want to be better off than some other group of people.

The wealthy in the U.S. are nowhere paying that high. I don't think the upper class in Europe even has to suffer that.

I don't know much about U.S taxes. I'm from Ontario, Canada and taxes are ridiculously high here.

Are you kidding? An upper income taxpayer in California pays 39.6% federal, 10% state. On top of that there are sales taxes, property taxes, payroll taxes, unemployment benefit insurance, the 3.4% Medicare surcharge, car registration taxes and fees, transfer taxes on assets, and estate taxes when you die. Explain to me how that doesn't add up to more than 50%?

Mitt Romney paid 14% in 2011, so I'm certain there are ways around paying the full price.

Mitt Romney paid 14% federal, that doesn't include state. And the person I was responding to said that there is "nobody" paying more than 50%.

FYI, he paid 14% federal because most of his money came from carried interest which is taxed like dividends. The 14% is only after the same income is taxed at the corporate level at 35%.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com