Interesting or ironic?

[sdduuuude]

It’s a margarita glass, people.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=CA renter]Gosh, looks like a great reason to pass a flax tax instead of a (steeply) progressive income tax!

/snark[/quote]

Because this aggregates many countries, it doesn’t suggest either is good or bad.

Assume this scenario: You have one country with 80% of the wealth and 20% of the people, but all the people were equally wealthy; then another country with 80% of the people and 20% of the wealth but all the people are equally wealthy within that country. Assuming they don’t share taxes with each other, it seems the tax system in either country wouldn’t really have an effect on the balance at all.

Would be interesting to see how this looks on a country-by-country basis. It only takes a few Saudi Arabian Princes to skew this pretty heavily, and I suspect they won’t want to tax themselves to balance the power but you can call them and suggest they give it a try.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=CA renter]Gosh, looks like a great reason to pass a flax tax instead of a (steeply) progressive income tax!

/snark[/quote]

Because this aggregates many countries, it doesn’t suggest either is good or bad.

Assume this scenario: You have one country with 80% of the wealth and 20% of the people, but all the people were equally wealthy; then another country with 80% of the people and 20% of the wealth but all the people are equally wealthy within that country. Assuming they don’t share taxes with each other, it seems the tax system in either country wouldn’t really have an effect on the balance at all.

Would be interesting to see how this looks on a country-by-country basis. It only takes a few Saudi Arabian Princes to skew this pretty heavily, and I suspect they won’t want to tax themselves to balance the power but you can call them and suggest they give it a try.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=CA renter]Gosh, looks like a great reason to pass a flax tax instead of a (steeply) progressive income tax!

/snark[/quote]

Because this aggregates many countries, it doesn’t suggest either is good or bad.

Assume this scenario: You have one country with 80% of the wealth and 20% of the people, but all the people were equally wealthy; then another country with 80% of the people and 20% of the wealth but all the people are equally wealthy within that country. Assuming they don’t share taxes with each other, it seems the tax system in either country wouldn’t really have an effect on the balance at all.

Would be interesting to see how this looks on a country-by-country basis. It only takes a few Saudi Arabian Princes to skew this pretty heavily, and I suspect they won’t want to tax themselves to balance the power but you can call them and suggest they give it a try.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=CA renter]Gosh, looks like a great reason to pass a flax tax instead of a (steeply) progressive income tax!

/snark[/quote]

Because this aggregates many countries, it doesn’t suggest either is good or bad.

Assume this scenario: You have one country with 80% of the wealth and 20% of the people, but all the people were equally wealthy; then another country with 80% of the people and 20% of the wealth but all the people are equally wealthy within that country. Assuming they don’t share taxes with each other, it seems the tax system in either country wouldn’t really have an effect on the balance at all.

Would be interesting to see how this looks on a country-by-country basis. It only takes a few Saudi Arabian Princes to skew this pretty heavily, and I suspect they won’t want to tax themselves to balance the power but you can call them and suggest they give it a try.

[sdduuuude]

[quote=CA renter]Gosh, looks like a great reason to pass a flax tax instead of a (steeply) progressive income tax!

/snark[/quote]

Because this aggregates many countries, it doesn’t suggest either is good or bad.

Assume this scenario: You have one country with 80% of the wealth and 20% of the people, but all the people were equally wealthy; then another country with 80% of the people and 20% of the wealth but all the people are equally wealthy within that country. Assuming they don’t share taxes with each other, it seems the tax system in either country wouldn’t really have an effect on the balance at all.

Would be interesting to see how this looks on a country-by-country basis. It only takes a few Saudi Arabian Princes to skew this pretty heavily, and I suspect they won’t want to tax themselves to balance the power but you can call them and suggest they give it a try.

[Arraya]

If you break down resource consumption. The top 10% consume 60% of all resources and the top 30% consume 85% of all resources. So you could kill off the bottom 50% of the population and we would only have a negligible effect on environmental degradation, if you believe in that sort of thing.

Of course, according to capitalist “natural selection” the top consumers are of a better genetic stock or have superior morals. Ensuring the finest members of our species are the most comfortable.

You can see this system work with such fine specimen like Blankfein from Goldman or Mozilo from Country Wide as evolution in progress and being on our way to a better world.

[Arraya]

If you break down resource consumption. The top 10% consume 60% of all resources and the top 30% consume 85% of all resources. So you could kill off the bottom 50% of the population and we would only have a negligible effect on environmental degradation, if you believe in that sort of thing.

Of course, according to capitalist “natural selection” the top consumers are of a better genetic stock or have superior morals. Ensuring the finest members of our species are the most comfortable.

You can see this system work with such fine specimen like Blankfein from Goldman or Mozilo from Country Wide as evolution in progress and being on our way to a better world.

[Arraya]

If you break down resource consumption. The top 10% consume 60% of all resources and the top 30% consume 85% of all resources. So you could kill off the bottom 50% of the population and we would only have a negligible effect on environmental degradation, if you believe in that sort of thing.

Of course, according to capitalist “natural selection” the top consumers are of a better genetic stock or have superior morals. Ensuring the finest members of our species are the most comfortable.

You can see this system work with such fine specimen like Blankfein from Goldman or Mozilo from Country Wide as evolution in progress and being on our way to a better world.

[Arraya]

If you break down resource consumption. The top 10% consume 60% of all resources and the top 30% consume 85% of all resources. So you could kill off the bottom 50% of the population and we would only have a negligible effect on environmental degradation, if you believe in that sort of thing.

Of course, according to capitalist “natural selection” the top consumers are of a better genetic stock or have superior morals. Ensuring the finest members of our species are the most comfortable.

You can see this system work with such fine specimen like Blankfein from Goldman or Mozilo from Country Wide as evolution in progress and being on our way to a better world.

[Arraya]

If you break down resource consumption. The top 10% consume 60% of all resources and the top 30% consume 85% of all resources. So you could kill off the bottom 50% of the population and we would only have a negligible effect on environmental degradation, if you believe in that sort of thing.

Of course, according to capitalist “natural selection” the top consumers are of a better genetic stock or have superior morals. Ensuring the finest members of our species are the most comfortable.

You can see this system work with such fine specimen like Blankfein from Goldman or Mozilo from Country Wide as evolution in progress and being on our way to a better world.

[sdduuuude]

I think you’d be hard-pressed to find any capitalist that even hints at the idea that the top consumers have superior morals. You’ve pulled that comment out of your ass and should probably put it back.

[sdduuuude]

I think you’d be hard-pressed to find any capitalist that even hints at the idea that the top consumers have superior morals. You’ve pulled that comment out of your ass and should probably put it back.

[sdduuuude]

I think you’d be hard-pressed to find any capitalist that even hints at the idea that the top consumers have superior morals. You’ve pulled that comment out of your ass and should probably put it back.

[sdduuuude]

I think you’d be hard-pressed to find any capitalist that even hints at the idea that the top consumers have superior morals. You’ve pulled that comment out of your ass and should probably put it back.

[Author]

Posts