Boy I disagree with this article. It doesn't make a concerted argument for lower taxes and instead just attacks Gates for not giving more volunteraliy to the government which isn't even really an argument.

Then it totally ignores that there might be reason to prefer some types of taxes even if keeping government expenditure the same.

For example sales taxes are inheriantly regressive because the fixed percentages that take out of consumption result in much larger impacts on the poor. Estate taxes are also good because they help prevent a permanent upper class from forming.

Ignoring the author’s pretty simplistic argument (government bad), Bill Gates doesn’t suffer a whole lot from a larger income tax, vs a wealth tax or higher capital gains taxes. So it’s hard to say he has skin in the game with this recommendation.

What a garbage article. There's not even any substance to disagree with. Why is this on HN? Because it uses Bill Gates as the representative of a progressive income tax?

Washington state is hamstrung by its constitution, which forbids an income tax. As a result, this "progressive" state has one of the most regressive tax systems in the country.

Washington is also hamstrung by knee-jerk anti-tax grifters in the mold of Grover Norquist (our local guy is Tim Eyman, a man who made the news recently for stealing a chair from Office Depot because he thought nobody was looking, and is now running for governor).

> You apparently believe that private philanthropy is better than government, but you want the rest of us to give our hard-earned money to government?

That's not his argument at all. This argument is poorly written. Income tax != wealth tax.

I mean sure, general libertarian "musings" about government=inefficient, whatever.

The actual point he is arguing is unrealistic though, what wealth tax could possibly lead to anyone being taxed 50% of all net-value!?

This family that's scrimping and saving for their 2M slice, either made that money in one fiscal year and so could arguably just be happy with any profit, or as indicated in the thesis didn't.

So sure, don't take half of everything someone has every year. Doesn't really last.

> There is nothing more inefficient than government.

You can stop there. There are valid arguments on the topic but they’re not here.