CreateDebate


Debate Info

18
15
yes no
Debate Score:33
Arguments:21
Total Votes:36
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 yes (9)
 
 no (12)

Debate Creator

sierrastruth(524) pic



Is the "Robin Hood" tax a good idea?

yes

Side Score: 18
VS.

no

Side Score: 15
3 points

Historically we have had a very robin hood type taxation since FDR and we only shifted in the opposite direction when Reagan took office. In fact The robin hood taxation of that time didn't slow or impair business at all. The tax rate of the rich doesn't seem to have much of an affect on GDP at all. Also important was the fact that wealth distribution was much more equitable when we had this type of taxation, the wealth gap between the rich and the poor was much much smaller at that time than it is now.

For a comparison of the Rich tax rate:

http://pull.imgfave.netdna-cdn.com/image_cache/1314979557921390.jpg

Higher taxes for the rich is good for the country!

Side: yes
1 point

The colorful diagram of the tax rates is cute, but despite whatever political game that politicians play with marginal tax rates, every single year the federal government has taken 14 to 20 percent of the GDP no matter what. The average is 18%. The government is the entity that should be redistributing wealth because its historically, it is very bad at it and not just in the United States. The reason why it stays constant at 18% because human action changes, so people find loopholes in order to to pay the taxes in deductions to just not working as hard.

Why not raise the taxes to 100% marginal tax rates for the rich with no deductions of any kind? Do you think that the top 1% actual paid those high marginal tax rates during Truman to Nixon?

Supporting Evidence: Revenue (www.heritage.org)
Side: No
Bohemian(3867) Disputed
4 points

The colorful diagram of the tax rates is cute, but despite whatever political game that politicians play with marginal tax rates, every single year the federal government has taken 14 to 20 percent of the GDP no matter what. The average is 18%.

The margin tax rate has ranged everywhere from as low as 42% to 90%, and yet this as a function of our GDP has hardly budged. It's dubbed "Hauser's Law", and if anything I think it supports my argument. So why then do the wealthy get such generous tax breaks? Well, for the most part it's the wealthy who write the tax code.

Side: yes
1 point

Keep in mind that the rich don't use the programs and social support that the majority of their taxes pay for, and that cartoon doesn't include state taxes, corporate, property, sales or employment taxes so is not, in my mind, convincing. The robin hood tax they are proposing now isn't a direct tax on the rich it is a tax on all trading and buying of stock world wide. Arguments in support say this is a tax on the rich with the selling point being the money generated will be used to benefit the poor world wide, that means that money will go through the hands of thousands of people all over the world before it gets to whatever politically motivated (probably made up) group of people or agenda these self righteous "leaders" think is most deserving.

The truth is this tax can be paid by the rich, they have enough money. The people it will hurt the most is people like you and me who want to invest in the stock market. A tax very well could put that possibility out of the reach of the middle and especially the lower income class.

This tax is not a redistribution of wealth(which I don't agree with anyway) it is a blind attempt for Europe to take Americas money for their own under the guise of saving the poor.

Side: No
1 point

We must be talking about different taxes then. I am referring to an increase on the marginal tax rate for top income brackets.

Side: no
Troy8(2430) Disputed
1 point

Why is the said wealth gap between the rich and poor a bad thing? Maybe it truly reflects two distinct groups that are formed due to different levels of merit and workmanship.

Side: No
Bohemian(3867) Disputed
4 points

A small gap isn't a bad thing, unfortunately we have more than just a small gap, we have a canyon. The gap between the rich and the poor in the U.S. is enough to put some dictatorships to shame. The economic disparity we see in this country is more than simply the result of different abilities, it is due in large part to our socio-economic environment which gives the wealthy every advantage over the poor. Not everybody is playing on a level playing field and when you have policies which artificially exaggerate that gap that is a bad thing.

Side: yes
2 points

It's an excellent idea. You can't rely on charitable donations of rich people. They may support a charity here or there, but it will be at their whim. If you earn millions, you can afford to pay more tax. And if you don't like it, you will have the money to hire a "creative accountant" to sort it for you.

Side: yes
1 point

Rich people in America are the most generous rich people in the world (in general). They give millions and millions of dollars towards things they believe in and most of them do it because they care about what they donate to and not because they get a tax break.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2083034/posts

http://www.forbes.com/sites/andersonantunes/2012/01/11/the-30-most-generous-celebrities/3/

http://www.globalpost.com/dispatch/news/ regions/americas/united-states/111220/charity-us-most-generous-country-world-giving-index

America and Americans don't need the government deciding how much, when and to whom their money goes. We are completely capable of being unselfish and generous without someone making us do it. Why would you force an entire country to do something that only a few people refuse to do. Their karma will come.

Side: No
garry77777(1797) Disputed
1 point

"Rich people in America are the most generous rich people in the world (in general)."

What are you smoking?

"They give millions and millions of dollars towards things they believe in and most of them do it because they care about what they donate to and not because they get a tax break."

One of the most amazing things about the american crony capitalist model has been the ability of the elite class to make the average Joe contented with his servitude. It's as if so many of the 99% simply hold an opinion that says "oh, I better not rock the boat, I could be rich someday", everyone has bought into the false idea of the american dream, but it's like the lottery, of course if you buy a ticket you might win, but its much more likley you'll get hit but a bus tommorrow.

The rich have deprived most americans of many of things they are perfectly entitled to, this isn't some crazy marxist propaganda, in this age of scientific advancement free healthcare and education (up to 3rd level and beyond) are a human right, especially in a country with the largest GDP in the world.

"America and Americans don't need the government deciding how much, when and to whom their money goes."

The government is supposed to represent the will of the people, something tells me the majority of americans are not in favour of 1% controlling 40%, and 10% controlling 90% of the wealth.

"Why would you force an entire country to do something that only a few people refuse to do."

If a system is already corrupt you cannot plead "tyranny of the majority".

One of the saddest things about the tea party movement is the support they have, they have activists who really beleive they are fighting for the rights of individual americans, the reality is they are fighting for corporate interests i.e. the interests of a select few

Side: yes

No matter how smart you think your elected officials are they and the majority of Americans, let alone the rest of the world have no idea how the stock market really works. This lack of understanding however is not going to stop the government from jumping into a world wide tax with unforeseen and uncomprehended consequences. They are only capable of seeing into the near future and not at all capable of seeing the folly in there righteously named robin hood tax. Unfortunately the name alone will convince idiots world wide that nothing bad could happen if this was put into affect.

Side: No

http://www.cnbc.com/id/45583134

sorry i wanted to put this up earlier.

Side: No