Justificatory Argument
Progressive Tax System is Pivotal for Our Nation’s Progressive Growth
As the 2016 presidential election nears, the debate on tax reforms is heating up. In the latest presidential candidate debate in November, the Republican candidate Ben Carson proposed the adoption of flat-tax rate: “Everybody should pay the same proportion of what they make”. At least four other Republican candidates have talked up their support for replacing the current tax system with a flat tax system, saying that it will substantially simplify the tax collecting process. However, it is important to note that the use of progressive tax system is necessary for effective wealth redistribution and the subsequent maximization of social utility.
Now,
…show more content…
Based on research, New York Times is the newspaper that is read by people in different age group (the proportion was fairly equal across different age groups), and the 80% of the readers have received college educations. The topic brought up here is definitely something that people with higher education will be more interested. This article also tries to receive support from non-Republicans (87% of NYT readers are non-Republicans), and at the same time, it tries to persuade Republicans to rethink about the tax reforms.
Goal: The goal of this writing is to convince the reader that the US government should continue using progressive tax rates in order to alleviate the income inequality issue. Although the current government is using the progressive tax system, there have been many attempts to introduce different systems such as flat tax system, and this is an argument against those attempts.
Plan: The article first provides some background information about the Presidential election, and start explaining the relationship between progressive tax system and wealth redistribution. After that the article lists out different reasons why progressive tax system contributes more to the society than other tax systems like flat tax
…show more content…
The United States wealth inequality has reached its record-high level.
(Thus) The US government should continue using progressive tax system over the flat tax system.
Second Paragraph
(What) Progressive tax system enhances social stability by reducing the financial gap between the rich and the
The goal of Daneri research is to gauge the effect a NIT would have on labor supply, tax rates, savings rate, and general welfare of citizens. Daneri hopes the NIT will address the problem of households with similar incomes, that pay different tax rates due to the complexity of the present tax code. Additionally, Daneri believes the NIT can lessen the burden that low and middle-income families feel when their income rise, along with their marginal tax rate, and they are phase-out of welfare programs making them worse off. The implementation of the NIT would be a combination of a constant marginal tax rate and a lump-sum transfer payment to all households. The NIT would work as the following, at the beginning of
The share of after-tax income received by the top 1% of households increased from 8.5% to 12.3% during this time frame, indicating a concentration of income at the top. The majority of tax savings from Reagan's policies went to the top-income earners, while the middle-class and lower-income groups gained much less. The hoarding of wealth at the top hindered the economic gains of lower-income groups This disparity in the distribution of tax benefits raised calls into question the equity of Reagan’s tax policies and how it was strong enough to affect all earners in America
“The policies of the Reagan and first Bush administrations, which openly favored the rich, abetted a secular trend already in motion, causing inequality to increase measurably between 1981 and 1992.” (Loewen, 215) The wealthy already had their advantage when they gained their wealth. The wealth they had helped greatly in the process
The content of the petition mainly reveals the tension and conflict between the government and citizens on tax issues in the early days of the founding of the country. This poses a major challenge to the authority of the newly formed government. Given the economic, social, and political conditions of the time, rural populations felt marginalized and opposed taxation, which many saw as an infringement on their personal freedom and an unfair burden. The importance of consultation and compensation in government decision-making processes was also emphasized, as failure to do so could lead to unrest and rebellion. At the same time, the government's insistence on collecting taxes without proper compensation and consultation with the people has fueled the anger and frustration of farmers who see the tax as a sign of government indifference to their
The Income Tax Act establishes the liability for tax and the tax responsibility of Canadian residents. Every resident in Canada is responsible for paying an income tax on taxable income for that taxation year. The taxable income includes that year’s taxable income including any additions and excluding any deductions that are permitted by Division C. It also includes non-residents that held employment, carried on business, or disposed of Canadian property that is taxable. (Income Tax Act). Tax policy plays an important role in making the distribution of post-tax income less unequal.
One of the arguments used is that we could regulate and tax the 1% income because that would be “fair” but these numbers show how harmful that way of thinking is. 18% of taxes for the “bottom” of the bracket which is around 20% of the U.S population.
One of the goals of the progressives was to address the wealth gap and reduce income inequality by transferring power to the people through
Why should the poor and rich have to pay the same amount of taxes if they make extremely different incomes? Brooks focuses on the social and migration problems of progressive taxing and doesn’t apply his thought to the economic issues, as he
The article says, “While the top 1 percent have seen their incomes rise 18 percent over the past decade, those in the middle have actually seen their incomes fall.” (Stiglitz 2011) While the rich are getting higher incomes prices the poor are getting higher income by taking it from the one in the middle which therefore, makes them get a lower income percentage. America has fallen behind because of not being an equal country to the population by the income equality there is a huge gap between the income being earned by the poor and the rich. The rich are wealthy and the poor depend on the government for everything. As stated in the article, “America lags behind any country in the old, ossified Europe that President George W. Bush used to deride.
Luxury tax is not a solution to inequality within society. Introduction A real challenge for many economists is to find a way to decrease the financial inequality within society. Several economic and political possibilities exist to decrease the big differences between the rich and the non-rich.
The federal tax system is plagued with issues: It doesn 't raise sufficient revenue to back government spending, it is unpredictable, it makes results that are unreasonable, and it impedes monetary productivity. This part examines a few approaches to enhance charges, including making an esteem included duty, expanding natural taxes, improving the corporate expense, treating low-and center pay workers evenhandedly and productively, and guaranteeing suitable tax collection of high-wage family units. A good tax system raises the incomes expected to fund government spending in a way that is as basic, evenhanded, and development well growth as could reasonably be expected. The United States does not have a good tax system.
Taxes have been around in consideration of the beginning of organized society. The greater common is income taxes both from federal and local government, not from the state taxes. This essay will give some insight on taxes. It informs the different types of taxation, Why we have them, who benefits from them, and who gets screwed by them.
Many people are strongly debating whether or not the rich should pay higher taxes. I believe it should be that the rich do pay higher taxes. When times in the economy are rough, the government needs to look consider at how they could bring in more money. Charging the wealthy higher taxes could be a strategy the government could use., and the wealthy people are the ones who could afford it.
Although Trudeau’s policy included balancing the tax rate with an increase and a decrease, a measure will have to be taken in order to balance the budget in the future. It is possible that in the long run, the government will have to increase its tax rate. After a huge deficit budget, the government will need more income to return the nation’s economy to budget surplus. One of the way to induce a budget surplus is by increasing the tax rate and increasing the government’s income. The increasing tax rate will reduce the household’s income and saving thus can reduce the standard of living of the
Do you ever think of why should or shouldn’t the rich people pay more tax than others? Nowadays, people are arguing about the fairness of paying more tax. Statistics have proven that the rich have paid the majority of U.S. income taxes. A person making $100,000 will pay a higher percentage of his income in taxes than a person making $20,000 for instance. According to the Congressional Budget Office, “The 10% of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes.