What is the benefit to society of Punitive Taxation?

I see a lot of threads and posts here that are constantly calling for more and more taxation on one group or another, and it usually seems to be just to tax people for taxing's sake without any reasoning beyond what the taxes would go for.

So I ask:
1. What is the point of punitive taxation just because somebody earns more than you do?
2. What would this extra money be used for?
3. Why do you believe that govt would somehow use this money in a wiser fashion than the citizens/companies themselves would?

We've all seen these posts and discussions go on and on and on, but I'd like to hear some justification behind why people believe such things. I'm sure we ALL agree that we ALL must pay taxes to support the basic and necessary functions of govt, however in the past half-century, there has also been a sharp increase in govt spending on specific groups of people by taking money away from other groups of people.

As I've stated in previous posts, I did live in a Communist country growing up where everything was controlled by the state, and I honestly dont get why a lot of free people in so many countries cling to and desire govt control so badly.

Thanks!

Quote from MISHNAH : 1. What is the point of punitive taxation just because somebody earns more than you do?

I'm not sure what you want here. Is this a flat tax question or an "everybody puts in $20k no matter how much they make" question?

Because even a flat tax is punitive, right?

Quote : 2. What would this extra money be used for?

Your vote decides this answer.

Quote : 3. Why do you believe that govt would somehow use this money in a wiser fashion than the citizens/companies themselves would?

Why would you believe that we all must agree that we all must pay taxes to support the basic and necessary functions of government? What are you, some kind of statist?

Quote : We've all seen these posts and discussions go on and on and on, but I'd like to hear some justification behind why people believe such things. I'm sure we ALL agree that we ALL must pay taxes to support the basic and necessary functions of govt, however in the past half-century, there has also been a sharp increase in govt spending on specific groups of people by taking money away from other groups of people.

I'd like you to back that statement up, please. I'd like to know what your definition of what you just wrote is. Just so I better understand.

Taxation is not "punitive."

Your tax percentage is determined by how much you benefit from this society and the government which makes it possible.

For instance, if your business requires and benefits from educated workers it is just for you to pay more to educate those citizens.

In any case, the alternative to making such decisions democratically is an aristocracy, which I reject.

Quote from MISHNAH : So I ask: 1. What is the point of punitive taxation just because somebody earns more than you do? 2. What would this extra money be used for? 3. Why do you believe that govt would somehow use this money in a wiser fashion than the citizens/companies themselves would?

First off, I don't actually agree with punitively taxing the rich to cover the poor but if I did I imagine it would go something like this.

1) They're so rich, they don't need all that $$. I mean, it's not like they can take it with them to heaven right?
2) Taking care of the less fortunate either through aid or by letting them pay less in taxes, or continuing to pay no taxes.
3) Income equality is growing and income equality is bad. It's clear that those on the upper side of things don't care about those on the lower end, or if they did they would just give all their extra $ to the lower end to help raise them up. So if the rich don't care enough to bring up the poor than they should be ridiculously taxed so that the $ they earned, on the backs of the poor mind you, is given back to them.

Sorry, could you link to some of those threads, for background?

There is only one way to kill capitalism, taxes, taxes, and more taxes!!!!! -Karl Marx


Now who do we all know who was mentored by a Marxist?...

How are we to answer a question based on a false premise?

Taxes are not punitive. They are not fines.

Quote from agent00f : Next up: "Why athiests love eating babies".

Ther's only one answer for that

Quote from BigBananaMess : There is only one way to kill capitalism, taxes, taxes, and more taxes!!!!! -Karl Marx Now who do we all know who was mentored by a Marxist?...

Lemmeguess...Hitler??

Amirite??

Quote from skiman : How are we to answer a question based on a false premise? Taxes are not punitive. They are not fines.

Dirty libbie trying to confuse and confound with devil logic.

Quote from skiman : How are we to answer a question based on a false premise? Taxes are not punitive. They are not fines.

Taxes are often used as social tools, as a means to drive behaviour.

I'd call 50% taxation punitive. I'm not sure where the breakpoint is, but excessive taxation of "the rich" has roots in jealousy and is meant as punishment.

Quote from skiman : How are we to answer a question based on a false premise? Taxes are not punitive. They are not fines.

So you don't think the 75% tax rate the French are going to implement is punitive?

I don't think a 35% rate is punitive when compared to a 33% tax rate but a 48% to 75% jump I would personally classify as punitive.

Assuming you don't find it punitive what word would you suggest the OP use? Perhaps that would be better for people, including yourself, to respond to.

Quote from Dr. J : Taxes are often used as social tools, as a means to drive behaviour. I'd call 50% taxation punitive. I'm not sure where the breakpoint is, but excessive taxation of "the rich" has roots in jealousy and is meant as punishment.

Okay, so what behaviors do you propose a 50% tax is intended to discourage or encourage?

Quote from LivninSC : So you don't think the 75% tax rate the French are going to implement is punitive? I don't think a 35% rate is punitive when compared to a 33% tax rate but a 48% to 75% jump I would personally classify as punitive. Assuming you don't find it punitive what word would you suggest the OP use? Perhaps that would be better for people, including yourself, to respond to.

Sure, the word is wrong, but beyond that, the OP goes on to elaborate upon what is a poorly conceived straw argument.

I don't think you'll find very many people- certainly those not passing the laws- who are advocating a tax structure based on punishment or reward.

If a high tax rate is a punishment, is a low tax rate a reward? Pretty silly.

You might also ask basic question, such as the motivation of rich folks who advocate a more progressive tax structure. Are Warren Buffet and Bill Gates punishing themselves? Has the tax code been co-opted for the flagellation of self-loathing billionaires?

Or- and I know this is crazy - there could be other reasons to justify a progressive tax structure.