Doug, this last statement is ridiculous. If all or most taxes come from the poor and working class, there can be no net redistribution between rich and poor.
[mbs] No no a thousand times no. If taxes are roughly proportional to income, and spending is roughly proportional to population, that's redistributive right there, even if all you're doing is spreading cash around.
Secondly, for the thinking s-d, the spending is for stuff the individual can't buy as easily or as cheaply, so there is an efficiency gain by virtue of the public sector replacing the market. The gain is progressively distributed, since the higher your income, the more easily you can substitute the market for the public sector.
NN: Because of the particular political constraints in each of the countries in the Luxembourg Survey, the trend you mention may exist, but that says little about the issue at hand, whether taxing the rich in the US is possible.
[mbs] the actual experience ought to be relevant to any consideration of what is possible, just like the experience with leninism or market-ism is informative as to its potential value.
NN: . . . But throwing all that in just seems at times in the discussion of the 1993 tax bill as a way to avoid the basic issues of tax policy, whether taxing the rich can usefully add to the receipts of government. I know you were once a fan of Jerry Brown's flat tax proposal (although I thought you had repudiated that enthusiasm) but I do find it disturbing that you and Max seem to be rushing to give ideological comfort to the conservatives who deny that taxing the rich will generate any serious revenue.
[mbs] I would like to meet a conservative who gets ideological comfort from me. That would be a first.
[mbs] One of the little secrets of tax politics is that rich folks and corps are in no hurry to implement consumption taxation. They like things pretty much the way they are -- an income-based system that is loaded with holes and yields low revenue.
NN: To state the bottom-line once again-
the richest 1% of taxpayers right now, with all the loopholes available, pay $300 billion per year in income taxes. If their tax burden was doubled, that would generate another $300 billion per year.
Why should we even think about taxing working class folks when there is that much potential revenue from those riding high on the economy? -- Nathan Newman
[mbs] because you ain't gonna double taxes paid by the people who own the country.