# Justify a Progressive Income Tax Structure **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [November 4, 2010, 9:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515 "2010-11-04T21:56:00Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 6
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2010, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/101 "2010-11-06T23:34:47Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > That’s an argument for _some_ taxation, but not progressive taxation. I’m more than willing to pay taxes. I’m more than willing to contribute to make society better, and thereby improve my quality of life. But we’re looking for a justification for progressive taxation. It’s the best justification for a progressive taxation. > [@](#): > > The other guy has just as much a need for society as I do, if not more since his profit margin is razor thin. When the economy goes to shit, I’ll be fine, he’ll be screwed. Nope. The other guy has less need for this particular society than you do. You already said that society has preferred you, or specifically your product. It’s kind of like being a casino owner in Cuba in the summer of 1959 and suggesting that you and the fruit stand operator on the corner have an equivalent need for the society you live in. Do you think that both you and the fruit stand owner felt equally pained at the end of January, 1960? > [@](#): > > What is happening in society that requires me paying taxes in proportion to my income? Why is society so dependent on my taxes to begin with? You are benefiting from society greatly. Why wouldn’t you have greater motivation to perpetuate it? You’d be a fool not to, in fact. > [@](#): > > Two carpenters can use the same amount of wood/time/labour to produce vastly different chairs. Society will decide which one they are willing to pay for. Check out this bear a guy carved out of a piece of wood. He can charge $2500 for that. I can’t do that. Given the same chainsaw and piece of wood I would not be able to charge $25. Here, take your example for example. Do you and that carpenter both rely equally on the infrastructure that provides the wood, chainsaw and fuel? Would you both lose out equally if you were not able to get wood, chainsaw parts and fuel? I think it’s obvious that you would not - he would obviously suffer more from the loss of those things, right? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [November 6, 2010, 11:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/102 "2010-11-06T23:56:35Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Two carpenters can use the same amount of wood/time/labour to produce vastly different chairs. Society will decide which one they are willing to pay for. Check out [this](http://www.chainsawcarving.net/7ftbear.htm) bear a guy carved out of a piece of wood. He can charge $2500 for that. I can’t do that. Given the same chainsaw and piece of wood I would not be able to charge $25. Do you think he was born knowing how to do that? What about the years when he was still learning, couldn’t sell his sculptures for firewood, and living on food stamps; does he now owe more to make up for the support he received to get where he is? ---
**Author:** ![Walmarticus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/f9ae1b/32.png) [@Walmarticus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Walmarticus)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/103 "2010-11-07T00:01:15Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Run that one by me again. > > I used to think we had progressive taxation because it was “easier to earn the second million than it was to earn the first.” So you tax the first at 20% and the second at 50%. Now I’m pretty sure we do it because we can. The second post in the thread talked about marginal utility. It diminishes. You drink one can of Coke, you get one happy unit. Drink another you get 9/10ths of a happy unit, another 8/10ths and so on. The richest man in Example Land can buy ten cans, the poorest man can buy zero cans. Drinking all those cans alone, the rich man gets 5.5 happy units. Example Land has 5.5 units of happiness. Drinking them together, they each get 4 happy units. Example land has 8 units of happiness. … of course all this depends on mind reading and my counting abilities :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:14am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/104 "2010-11-07T00:14:42Z")
> [@Walmarticus](#): > > The second post in the thread talked about marginal utility. It diminishes. > > You drink one can of Coke, you get one happy unit. Drink another you get 9/10ths of a happy unit, another 8/10ths and so on. The richest man in Example Land can buy ten cans, the poorest man can buy zero cans. Drinking all those cans alone, the rich man gets 5.5 happy units. Example Land has 5.5 units of happiness. Drinking them together, they each get 4 happy units. Example land has 8 units of happiness. > > … of course all this depends on mind reading and my counting abilities :dubious: Oh, I thought this was an argument against progressive taxation. If the poor guy can get a free can of coke, and hence 4 happy units, he has no reason to bother going for 2 cans, especially since the marginal utility gained from the second can, doesn’t exceed the marginal crap he has to put up with at his shitty job. But now we can’t take it away, because he’ll go berserk and kill the rich guy. Except, next year he’s going to feel entitled to 1.5 cans because inflation means he’s only getting 3.8 units of happiness… ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/105 "2010-11-07T00:20:33Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > Here, take your example for example. Do you and that carpenter both rely equally on the infrastructure that provides the wood, chainsaw and fuel? Would you both lose out equally if you were not able to get wood, chainsaw parts and fuel? I think it’s obvious that you would not - he would obviously suffer more from the loss of those things, right? This is in direct odds with the “pain” concept expressed earlier. Remember we can tax rich guy more because he feels less pain from it. If society has problems, he can afford a pay cut in the same proportion as you’re willing to tax him. Remember how the poor guy feels the pain of taxes more? Well, he’ll suffer more from instability in society. > [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Do you think he was born knowing how to do that? What about the years when he was still learning, couldn’t sell his sculptures for firewood, and living on food stamps; does he now owe more to make up for the support he received to get where he is? Is that how we’re calculating it now? Based on what people owe in the past? That’s fine, I’m cool with that. So what does he owe per year of being poor? Let’s again take two identical chainsaw carver guys, one took a year of being poor, the other took 5. Should they be taxed differently now that they both make the same income? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/106 "2010-11-07T00:25:04Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Is that how we’re calculating it now? No, I’m just trying to point out that there aren’t any two people in the country using exactly the same social resources to get to where they are. ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/107 "2010-11-07T00:25:59Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > This is in direct odds with the “pain” concept expressed earlier. Remember we can tax rich guy more because he feels less pain from it. If society has problems, he can afford a pay cut in the same proportion as you’re willing to tax him. > > Remember how the poor guy feels the pain of taxes more? Well, he’ll suffer more from instability in society. I’ve not made any argument based on the wealthy person feeling less pain. You just keep repeating the same thing without addressing the substance of my point. I’ll try one last time: if I’m making a million dollars a day, and due to societal “instability” I end up penniless tomorrow, I’ve lost a great deal more than the guy who has been penniless the whole time, right? ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/108 "2010-11-07T00:49:49Z")
> [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](#): > > I’ve not made any argument based on the wealthy person feeling less pain. You just keep repeating the same thing without addressing the substance of my point. I’ll try one last time: if I’m making a million dollars a day, and due to societal “instability” I end up penniless tomorrow, I’ve lost a great deal more than the guy who has been penniless the whole time, right? Wrong, for at least three of reasons. The first being that if you made a million dollars a day, presumably you saved more than one penny. So if the US outlaws burgers tomorrow, I can at least coast for a few days before being penniless. The guy with razor thing margins can’t. This is part of what keeps rich people rich. Savings and insurance, combined with the realization that everything might go to shit tomorrow. Second, unless everything I earned was based on some sort of luck or fad, I still have some usable or marketable skills. Unless I’m a one trick pony, I can switch from burgers to making something else. This is also part of what keeps rich people rich, diversification. Third, what you’re describing is pretty massive “instability” which as far as I can tell has nothing to do with the amount of taxes I pay. Your example: Cuba. So as far as instability goes, perhaps we could agree I should be taxed the bare minimum to maintain stability, and nothing more. If my income goes up next year, does the threat of instability go up with it? Are they in any way related? Now, as a complete counter to your point. If instability is so likely, isn’t that justification for letting me have more of my earnings? Obviously I’m going to need it, because I don’t know what will happen tomorrow, and you can’t guarantee me anything. Why am I even paying you taxes in the first place, if you can’t maintain stability? ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:51am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/109 "2010-11-07T00:51:09Z")
If there’s enough instability, your savings are worthless. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/110 "2010-11-07T00:52:13Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > No, I’m just trying to point out that there aren’t any two people in the country using exactly the same social resources to get to where they are. Well, that’s fine, but as far as our current method of taxation goes, we do have people paying exactly the same amount of taxes. So shouldn’t taxation have something do with use of resources? And we’ll throw in a couple extra bucks to keep poor people from having pitchforks, and general stability issues. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:53am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/111 "2010-11-07T00:53:58Z")
> [@Raygun99](#): > > If there’s enough instability, your savings are worthless. Are we now talking about world wide instability? Are my taxes really going towards that? Do you think I’m dumb enough to keep all my money in one place and one form? Seriously, if there is that much instability my taxes are worthless and we’re all doomed. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/112 "2010-11-07T00:55:09Z")
Then if you’re that well protected, you can afford slightly higher taxes on the marginal end of your income. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 12:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/113 "2010-11-07T00:57:58Z")
> [@Raygun99](#): > > Then if you’re that well protected, you can afford slightly higher taxes on the marginal end of your income. No I can’t, I have to keep socking it away in the event of all this damn instability (as after tax dollars). I’m left to live on a very small income as a result. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/114 "2010-11-07T01:00:17Z")
So you’re getting no utility from the money you’ve saved? Such as, say, peace of mind that you’re protected in case of instability? Also, if you do have a downturn, you’re protected by the fact that the progressive income tax will cost you much less of a proportion of your income. Also, you apparently have a very bad accountant. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/115 "2010-11-07T01:04:33Z")
> [@Raygun99](#): > > So you’re getting no utility from the money you’ve saved? Such as, say, peace of mind that you’re protected in case of instability? Holy crap, are you taxing me on that now? > [@Raygun99](#): > > Also, if you do have a downturn, you’re protected by the fact that the progressive income tax will cost you much less of a proportion of your income. Well, I guess then I can be happy I’m making less. But so is the government, so isn’t it in their best interest to keep things stable? Why am I the only one paying for it? And why am I living in such an unstable place? > [@Raygun99](#): > > Also, you apparently have a very bad accountant. Why? Because I’m saving in after tax income? If society is going to shit, the last thing I want is my money tied up in some bullshit 401K. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/116 "2010-11-07T01:08:29Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > Holy crap, are you taxing me on that now? No, no one that I can see in this thread has suggested taxing wealth (though such schemes do exist). > [@](#): > > Well, I guess then I can be happy I’m making less. But so is the government, so isn’t it in their best interest to keep things stable? Why am I the only one paying for it? And why am I living in such an unstable place? Everyone’s paying a portion of it, with what’s hoped to be an equal amount of pain to their pocket book. What constitutes an equal amount of pain can certainly be debated, of course. > [@](#): > > Why? Because I’m saving in after tax income? If society is going to shit, the last thing I want is my money tied up in some bullshit 401K. If the world goes to shit, post-, pre-, it ain’t going to matter. ---
**Author:** ![emacknight](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/3ec8ea/32.png) [@emacknight](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/emacknight)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:21am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/117 "2010-11-07T01:21:09Z")
> [@Raygun99](#): > > No, no one that I can see in this thread has suggested taxing wealth (though such schemes do exist). So why did you mention it? You said I get some sort of utility for saving my money, why did you say that? > [@Raygun99](#): > > Everyone’s paying a portion of it, with what’s hoped to be an equal amount of pain to their pocket book. What constitutes an equal amount of pain can certainly be debated, of course. Okay, we’re back to the pain concept again. So now we can look again at this instability issue, where it was suggested that the rich person will feel more pain if society goes to hell, and so should pay more in taxes. > [@Hentor the Barbarian](#): > > If I’m making a million dollars a day, and due to societal “instability” I end up penniless tomorrow, I’ve lost a great deal more than the guy who has been penniless the whole time, right? If everyone should feel the same pain when things are good, shouldn’t everyone feel an equal amount of pain when society goes to shit? > [@Raygun99](#): > > If the world goes to shit, post-, pre-, it ain’t going to matter. So why did you mention it? ---
**Author:** ![Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/8edcca/32.png) [@Hentor\_the\_Barbarian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hentor_the_Barbarian)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:24am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/118 "2010-11-07T01:24:15Z")
> [@emacknight](#): > > No I can’t, I have to keep socking it away in the event of all this damn instability (as after tax dollars). I’m left to live on a very small income as a result. Hey, save a whole bunch. You can use it to heat your hovel. It probably makes for good eats, too. I’ve thought about it, and you’re so right. The guy making $500K and the guy making $50K are really benefiting exactly the same from society. It’s so clear now. ---
**Author:** ![magellan01](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@magellan01](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/magellan01)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/119 "2010-11-07T01:25:47Z")
> [@Robot\_Arm](#): > > Sure it does, I thought that’s what this whole thread was about. > > Good luck defining what’s “fair” though. We’ve already discussed equal utility, equal burden across all cumulative taxes, equal hours worked, equal pay for equal services, equal rates, equal incentives, and equal social mobility. (We even covered feudal precedents, were those equal, too?) > > And even if you could get everybody to agree on what sort of “fairness” we’re trying to implement, you then have to encode it in a written, enforceable document that would maintain that fairness. > > I agree with **Measure for Measure** , there’s no clinching argument for it. I don’t think there’s one against it, either. I just think the real world is too complex for that. My posts barely scratch the surface of that complexity. I asked because I’ve yet to here an argument from fairness for a progressive tax. Why is it fair to tax the 500k guy more than ten times the 50k guy? I’ve heard arguments from utility, and ability to pay, but not fairness as it applies to the payers. So, if you do think fairness has a role to play, and we can build a strong case for a flat tax being fair, shouldn’t we consider it. If we could raise the same money through a fairer system, would you be in favor of it? ---
**Author:** ![Robot\_Arm](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/robot_arm/32/18280_2.png) [@Robot\_Arm](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Robot_Arm)\ **Post date:** [November 7, 2010, 1:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515/120 "2010-11-07T01:30:05Z")
> [@magellan01](#): > > I asked because I’ve yet to here an argument from fairness for a progressive tax. Why is it fair to tax the 500k guy more than ten times the 50k guy? I’ve heard arguments from utility, and ability to pay, but not fairness as it applies to the payers. What about the equal burden across all cumulative taxes? The progressive income tax offsets the regressive nature of other taxes, and everyone winds up paying about the same rate relative to income. That sounds like a fairness-based argument in favor of the progressive income tax. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515.md?page=5) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/justify-a-progressive-income-tax-structure/559515.md?page=7)