One of the strange things most the blogosphere is that I frequently detect myself beingness surprised past times positions that are attributed to me. For example, Matthew Yglesias says:
Many proponents of depression taxes on high-income individuals are "supply-siders" who claim that such a taxation policy volition maximize overall welfare. But other proponents of depression taxes on high-income individuals such every bit Greg Mankiw deny that this is the relevant consideration, in addition to only enjoin that progressive taxation is immoral.If you lot follow the link that Mr Yglesias gives here, you lot volition detect it is to my newspaper "Spreading the Wealth Around: Reflections Inspired past times Joe the Plumber." Does this paper say that progressive taxation is immoral? No. In fact, piece advocating what I telephone outcry upwardly a "Just Deserts" approach to taxation, it says the following:
Public goods in addition to Pigovian subsidies Pb naturally to a taxation organization inward which higher income individuals pay to a greater extent than inward taxes. Surely, those with higher income in addition to greater belongings create goodness to a greater extent than from a governmental organization that protects belongings rights. Moreover, the monetary value attached to other populace goods (such every bit parks in addition to playgrounds) in addition to to positive-externality activities (such every bit basic research) really probable rises with income every bit well. Indeed, if the income elasticity of postulate for these services exceeds one, every bit is plausible, a progressive taxation organization is perfectly consistent with the Just Deserts Theory.
What most transfer payments to the poor? These tin live justified along similar lines. As long every bit people attention most others to to a greater extent than or less degree, antipoverty programs are a type of populace good. [Thurow 1971] That is, nether this view, the authorities provides for the pitiful non only because their marginal utility is high but because nosotros accept interdependent utility functions. Put differently, nosotros would all similar to alleviate poverty. But because nosotros would prefer to accept someone else selection upwardly the tab, private charity can’t create the job. Government-run antipoverty programs solve the free-rider occupation with the altruistic well-to-do.Does that audio similar someone who believes that progressive taxation is immoral? Sumber https://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/
