John Smith wrote on Dec 25
th, 2014 at 8:07pm:
Swagman wrote on Dec 25
th, 2014 at 4:50pm:
Regressive taxes still benefit the downtrodden the most.
rubbish ... they benefit the rich the most, thats why the rich like them so much
No, Swagman’s right. The very purpose of taxation is to help those who can’t help themselves. This is why we form societies - to provide
mutual benefits we couldn’t possibly achieve on our own.
This isn’t a "leftard" slant, it’s the whole purpose of civilization. Children and old people can’t fend for themselves. They require support.
Likewise, business can’t function without healthy labour, training, licensing regulations, civil courts, a rule of law. Taxes provide funding for all these things.
The tax burden falls on middle income earners because there are more of them. And yes, the big ticket items are welfare, health and education. These benefit low income earners more than anyone else. The rich don’t get Newstart payments and rarely use public hospitals. They can afford private schools. They don’t need subsidized or state housing. They don’t even need to use public transport.
The rich, however, benefit from a safe and stable society. They don’t have to worry about their children being kidnapped or being carjacked at the traffic lights or paying for private security and bodyguards. In countries like Brazil, the Philippines and South Africa, these things are the norm. In Australia, the rich can feel part of society as opposed to bubblewrapped jetsetters.
Our sense of fraternity does set us apart from many hierarchical, deeply entrenched class-based societies, and it’s worth every cent. This is not a leftard argument, it’s deeply conservative. The rich have a duty. Before the rise of neoliberalism, this was called
nobless oblige. Today, we’ve replaced this with taxation, but the moral obligation still exists.
MUTUAL benefits... your words.