Fight Poverty! Raise taxes?

[PetraG]

What does paying a just wage have to do with raising taxes on the rich to fight poverty?

I’m saying that raising taxes doesn’t solve the problem of income inequality. If we believe that people who aren’t working still have the right to support in certain situations (and the Church teaches that we do), then that is something that requires taxes. Having said that, we’re not going to tax our way out of an unjust economic system.

There isn’t just one single just way to run a society. There are, rather, boundaries we need to put onto ourselves as we work out our choices in a way we believe in good faith will lead to social justice, such that private charity won’t be left to make up for damage done by an overarching setting of an unjust economic system. If, for instance, the strong are left to exploit workers so their work is not enough to support their material needs, private charity won’t be enough to make up for that. It shouldn’t be left to make up for that, because it is wrong for people who ought to have the dignity of supporting themselves by their own labor left begging the good-hearted for enough to live on.

Having said that, let’s say that we, as a society, believe that just as it is in our best interest to pay for public infrastructure such as an interstate highway system that is beyond the capacity of private industry to provide with the same level of shared benefit, we could decide that it is the best to have a public system to provide health care with a sliding co-pay so that employers could employ laborers at a dignified wage at a level that more business enterprises could support. It is easily possible that the economic benefits would pay for the tax burden of doing it, depending on how it was implemented, just as the economic benefits of an interstate freeway system easily justify the tax investment required to do it.

What isn’t working is having working-class families economically wiped out by what is routine health care in other countries. There are countries that have universal or safety net health care as part of their economic infrastructure, just as airports and freeways are part of what makes their economies work in a way that is both just and yet also allows businesses to operate effectively and profitably. We don’t have to do it that way, but we could. It would not be inherently unjust, although there are of course ways to do it that would be either unjust or would discourage productive work that is recognized by the Church as necessary to human dignity in those capable of working.

 

[Elizabeth3]

@PetraG @Crocus

The disagreement here isn’t on finding newer and just ways to help the lower and middle classes. My problem with the “raise taxes on the rich” idea is that our government has proven itself to be woefully inept at handling other people’s money in any kind of just way or in a way that provides more than a negligible help to those it proposes assist. The red tape, the loopholes, the robbing of funds designated for one thing and using the money for something else, indicates to me at least, that if we want to fight poverty, this is one of the least efficient means to do it. To me, this will not cause any real human flourishing and will do very little to aid the common good. In theory, it sounds good if you have a government that has proven itself responsible, efficient and benevolent towards it’s citizenry but with the current level of corruption in our elected officials and the irresponsibility of handling funds, it’s just not an idea that I can support at this time.

 

[Crocus]

I understand your frustration. It’s a cross we bear as Catholics, all the while committing to fight for what is right and just. Together?

My problem with the “raise taxes on the rich” idea is that our government has proven itself to be woefully inept at handling other people’s money in any kind of just way or in a way that provides more than a negligible help to those it proposes assist.

Maybe a good place to start: to own the concept of community, society in which we are responsible for each other. Those tax monies you called other people’s money, are the shared revenue allocated for just use and distribution by our elected representatives.

 

[Theo520]

So they don’t trust the government to use their money wisely

They want to control how their wealth is utilized

 

[Elizabeth3]

Maybe a good place to start: to own the concept of community, society in which we are responsible for each other. Those tax monies you called other people’s money, are the shared revenue allocated for just use and distribution by our elected representatives.

I’m more supportive currently in finding creative ways for incentivizing the rich to voluntarily invest in helping the poor in the areas in which they live or in poorer nearby communities because I agree that it’s their responsibility to use their wealth for the benefit of their neighbor. The government doesn’t allocate tax money for just use nor does it distribute it wisely.

 

[Crocus]

With respect to healthcare, there is a growing movement among some physicians to rid themselves of the two greatest obstacles which they see as the primary impediments to providing excellent medical care: government, and insurance companies. They want to be doctors and not coders, clerks, and functionaries for insurance companies and bureaucrats who dictate how they can operate their own medical practice.
Other docs have just given up and settled in to become employees of hospitals and medical conglomerates who tell them what to do.

It’s not working for a lot of people right? Maybe ok for people who aren’t sick or not injured, or who have lots of disposable cash; insurance companies can just raise premiums, drug companies - prices, lawyers - fees.

Alternatives were proposed once, twice, hacked. Don’t know what to say. It’s quite a pickle you’ve got yourself into.

 

[Domer90]

I know I am coming in late to this discussion, but there are so many things broken in our country right now. However, I try to live on the principles that Pope Saint John Paul II lived by. Both my parents came from large Polish families. Like many Poles where they grew up, the worked in the coal mines. My parents helped support their parents. My husband’s family were far better off, as they were both college graduates and attended graduate school. However, they were very peculiar with their money. The were lucky enough to retire early with a large nest egg. However, my husband did not look for handouts from them, and I am so proud that he worked extremely hard for his degrees. I am also proud that I was able to attend a good school and support my husband when he went to graduate school. We were blessed with one child, and I stayed home to raise him. Many of my classmates did the same. None of us felt that we “wasted” money on our education. But along the way, my husband and I were in sole agreement that God comes first in our lives, and we gave to charity and the church first. We then took care of bills and saved for rainy days and retirement. God gave my son many challenges, and I was able to advocate for him, and my husband’s job allowed us to give him extra therapy. When things got tight, we didn’t waver in cutting back our donations. I knew God would see us through.

DS was diagnosed with lymphoma a little over a year ago. So many kind people are praying for him. God has blessed us with in making prudent decisions. We also helped support my dad after my mom’s sudden death. We didn’t realize he was in the early stages of dementia. We know have him in a safe place. We live in a modest house, donate to local charities who do good things in the community and live a rather boring life, as I like to put it. I think my husband puts it best: Money is a great servant but a terrible master.

Life is not easy nor fair. But we were never promised a rose garden life. We were promised God’s unfailing love. I often have to remind myself of that.

We as a country need to come together rather than hating for the sake of winning. Pride was the first sin. I try never to forget that.

 

[PetraG]

The disagreement here isn’t on finding newer and just ways to help the lower and middle classes. My problem with the “raise taxes on the rich” idea is that our government has proven itself to be woefully inept at handling other people’s money in any kind of just way or in a way that provides more than a negligible help to those it proposes assist. The red tape, the loopholes, the robbing of funds designated for one thing and using the money for something else, indicates to me at least, that if we want to fight poverty, this is one of the least efficient means to do it. To me, this will not cause any real human flourishing and will do very little to aid the common good. In theory, it sounds good if you have a government that has proven itself responsible, efficient and benevolent towards it’s citizenry but with the current level of corruption in our elected officials and the irresponsibility of handling funds, it’s just not an idea that I can support at this time.

Um, we didn’t raise taxes on the rich. We dropped taxes on the rich. The question is whether to put the taxes back where they were, which did not by any means impose an undue hardship on the wealthy.

Do you want to talk about loopholes and gaming the system? Look no farther than at how our tax code is written. The amazing thing is that people who game the tax code are sometimes just considered smart, but people who game the system for any other reason are considered crooks (especially if they work for the government and don’t do a bit more than they’re paid to do, for instance).

As for some combination of government programs and private charity being the worst way to fight poverty, well, look at how well past ways worked. It was not pretty. As for corruption of our public servants, I think the evidence is that we have one of the least corrupt governments in the world. It has room for improvement, but compared to the alternatives what we already have is actually quite remarkable.

 

[PetraG]

I think my husband puts it best: Money is a great master but a terrible servant.

I think you meant to put that the other way around; I know you are describing the life of people who know that no one can serve both God and money.

We as a country need to come together rather than hating for the sake of winning. Pride was the first sin. I try never to forget that.

I think we need to remember, too, that most people who have politics very different than ours don’t actually hate us. They’re told we hate them and we’re told they hate us, but neither is true.

 

[Domer90]

Thank you! You are right on both points. Terrible what happens when I stay up too late.

 

[Domer90]

As a tax preparer, the people who gamed the system the most paid no tax and received money back from the EITC. So, these loopholes are not one sided…meaning only the wealthy game the system.

 

[Peeps]

No, I think it is immoral to whine about having to pay more taxes when your “addiction” pays you nine times the median pay while someone else is holding down two or three jobs and barely making rent and hoping their kids don’t get sick, which would bankrupt them. The immorality is in thinking that you make that much more because you’re just that much better than other people out their working their backsides off just to keep their noses above water and pretending that they would do as well as you are if they only had the “paradigm” you have, as someone here has seemed to suggest.

I hope you were not addressing me.

My brother doesn’t make nine times the median pay–he makes what an extremely experienced welder/mechanic makes, which is a good salary, but well-deserved. Even though he is over 60 years old, he still goes up in the crane–70 feet up!–to do welding on big machines. Because of his mechanical ability, he has often saved his company hundreds of thousands of dollars that they would have otherwise had to spend sending a machine out of state to be repaired.

He has thought about retiring, but there don’t seem to be any replacements for him. For many years now, young people are not choosing trades, even though the jobs are there, they pay well, and only a few years of trade school are required to earn a certification. Apparently the push for STEM careers has seduced many potential welders and mechanics into going into massive college loan debt only to discover that they really don’t like engineering all that much (e.g., my brother-in-law).

And my brother also works several other jobs–he farms (although he rents his land out to two brothers who basically get to keep everything they make from his farm land). He owns rental properties, and I’ve talked about how he rents at far below the typical rent in this part of the country for his tenants who agree to contributing some “sweat equity”; e.g., mowing their lawn. He buys and sells old cars, antiques, copper wire, and other “junk” that many people just throw out to the curb. And he helps people who need help–if a farmer is ill, he will be one of the many farmers who take a turn doing the milking and other chores.

One of his friends does restoration work on older homes, and he helps her out on occasions.

And he helps us out–his plumbing skills saved us several hundred dollars last fall!

I’ve known quite a few truly wealthy people, both old money wealthy and self-made wealthy. I’ve only known one man who gives the impression by his lack of skill in communicating with others that he thinks he’s “better than other people,” but I’m pretty certain that this is just evil gossip spread by jealous people who don’t realize how many philanthropic causes he supports.

But most wealthy people, including my brother, love helping out others and supporting many charities of their choice. Our parish is doing a much needed building project, and 5 million of the ten million dollars needed was raised by 5 families who each donated million dollars.

 

[Peeps]

Take student loans. Are those “good debt”? Not if students aren’t counseled to guage the debt they take on in light of the career they are choosing. If students pile up great amounts of “good” student debt to go to the “college of their dreams” and get a job in the “field they love” that won’t ever let them pay it off, that is terrible for the economy!! It is terrible for the political climate! What our society did not need was a bunch of people who took out a loan and worked for an “investment” that is actually going to be a financial albatross around their necks. That is a recipe for the high number of very bitter recent college graduates that we now have.

One thing that would help students pay off big student loans is marriage soon after college, or even during college.

My daughter married her teen sweetheart when she still had two years of grad school left. He is a mechanic, and made a decent wage. When she finally graduated (with a lot of debt), she landed a great job immediately, and the couple began living on her husband’s salary (as they had been doing for two years, so no great shock to their lifestyle!), and used almost ALL of her salary to pay off all her student loans in less than two years.

Unfortunately, the trend now seems to be “wait until the student loans are paid off BEFORE getting even thinking about getting married.” So couples end up waiting until they are in the mid-30s before marrying.

I think that my daughter and son-in-law grew closer in their marriage by making that wise decision to live cheap for a few years and pay off the loans. They are essentially debt-free and have been for several years.

 

[EndTimes]

Trickle down doesn’t work.

False …

THINK

w/o Trickle-Down, 98% of Americans would be out of a “JOB”

Economy? Is the Combo of Trickle-Down and Trickle-Up… That’s the Circular Flow of Moolah…

And when Jack and Jill get fired they don’t get Pizza and the Pizza guy fires Tony… etc etc etc

 

[Crocus]

more supportive currently in finding creative ways for incentivizing the rich to voluntarily invest in helping the poor in the areas in which they live or in poorer nearby communities

That is missing the point of Church teaching on creating conditions for work, recreation, spiritual fulfillment, dignity, that is rightfully expected of good government. People deserve the dignity of not having to beg due to entrenched social injustice, and Catholics are bound to work for that.

Sure you may feel your talents lie more in other advocacy areas, that’s fair. There will always be a need for direct charity. Do you at least assent intellectually to higher taxes on higher incomes?

 

[Socrates92]

Those of us who realize a very good return because we’ve had the opportunity to turn our talent and hard work to a very good profit can’t afford to rationalize that we have no responsibility to the poor, whether they are poor in funds or poor in mental or physical capabilities.

This is a given. The issue is when you conflate that responsibility with paying more taxes. Anyone who takes their responsibility to the poor seriously should logically oppose the vast majority of taxes on that grounds alone - that it inhibits his ability to be magnanimous.

 

[Socrates92]

Higher Taxes (at the top end only) can certainly reduce the excess of govt spend over income because they increase government income. And those taxes directed at the very wealthy will have no adverse impact on economic growth either because they will have no impact on personal spending

They could. Will they? If you know anything about government spending habits, you can be reasonably sure that any extra revenue will just be used to as collateral for more national debt. Also, since we are talking about taxes at the upper end, the Laffer curve becomes relevant. (Higher tax rates potentially meaning lower tax revenue). Your last sentence is simply the Keynesian fallacy that spending drives growth.

 

[Crocus]

They could. Will they? If you know anything about government spending habits, you can be reasonably sure that any extra revenue will just be used to as collateral for more national debt. Also, since we are talking about taxes at the upper end, the Laffer curve becomes relevant. (Higher tax rates potentially meaning lower tax revenue).

Since the tax cuts of Reagan, Bush, Trump have not increased government revenue on that curve, can we consider the experiment failed and try something else now?

Your last sentence is simply the Keynesian fallacy that spending drives growth.

In an economy, growth absolutely depends on the movement of money. More money in the hands of people who spend means more money in the hands of all.

 

[Socrates92]

Your brother sounds like quite the impressive character.

 

[EndTimes]

In an economy, growth absolutely depends on the movement of money. More money in the hands of people who spend means more money in the hands of all.

BINGO! …