作业代写:废除所得税的3个理由

现在似乎是不可能的,所得税曾被宣布为违宪,必须在19世纪废除。宪法,现在呢是如此复杂,为了遵守所得税法的不断变化的性质,已经出现了整个行业。

所得税不仅对所有必须支付的人造成财务损失。这也造成了企业放宽和消费者口袋中增加的资金,以节省和消费,因为他们认为合适的危害。这是为什么要取消所得税的三个原因。

不同于消费税,所得税对经济中的重要部门造成了损害:投资。投资推动企业利用这笔资金提高效率,扩大服务和/或雇用更多员工。当业务扩大时,增加其他业务的收入并帮助提高就业机会。投资的来源是从工资和劳动中获得的储蓄。

当一个人的自由支配收入较低时,他们会节省更少的钱。考虑一个每年赚100美元的人的例子:

如果这个虚构的人生活在一个没有所得税的国家,而在食物,水和住房方面的支出达到60美元,他将有40美元的自由支配收入。他可以在商店用这个钱(贡献营业税收入),或者把它放在银行里。银行是任何经济体的重要组成部分。银行将使用40美元的存款来资助贷款(并建立储备金),从而开始货币乘数效应。

如果再次这个人住在一个​​收入为10%的国家,他只能带回家90美元,60美元用于生活必需品,现在只有30美元可供银行使用。随着存款减少,银行更多地限于可用的贷款,使任何业务的扩张更加困难。当良好的企业不能获得贷款时,扩大将最终会对工人造成损失的就业机会造成损害。

所得税危害个人成长

上述例子中明显的所得税在现实生活中并不简单,但信息仍然是一样的:所得税阻碍了储蓄,最终损害了投资。请注意美国的储蓄率到底有没有增加,而不是由于所得税的任何变化,而是由于高消费债务限制性支出。

低储蓄的影响最好的看法是美国对信贷的高度依赖。没有一个可以节省相当数量(或全部金额)购买产品的动机,人们就被诱惑的诱惑所吸引,这永远是“以后偿还”的。另一个原因是经济增长放缓,特别是在经济衰退之后。由于债务负担沉重,消费者将扣除开支以偿还债务至可控的水平,尽管储蓄增加,但由于拖欠拖欠款项,银行不愿借款。这导致停滞,直到债务减少,这可能是几个月到几年。

3.消除所得税增加储蓄和消费

随着所有税收改变行为,废除所得税将允许人们为经济做出更多贡献,无论是否节省更多,甚至花费更多。储蓄更多的人将可以投资于退休账户,银行贷款和股票市场,以帮助社会融资未来的努力。选择花更多的人会为公司带来更高的利润,从而提高生产力。这又增加了企业的扩张机会,从而帮助失业人员找到工作。消费者然后从较低的价格和/或更高的质量中获益。

虽然客观主义者认为税收是不道德的,但在这个时候,简单地终止所有的税收是不利的。消除所得税只是一步,应该用对所有美国人平等和公平的税收来取代,以便政府降低债务负担。那么随着政府从不在目的范围内的地区撤出,可以及时降低税收。
3 Reasons to Abolish the Income Tax

It may seem to be impossible now, the income tax was once declared to be unconstitutional and had to be repealed, way back in the 19th century. Constitution, and now it is so complicated that entire industries have come up in order to comply with the ever-changing nature of the income tax code.

Income tax does not just cause financial harm to everyone who has to pay. It also causes harm in the forgone expansion of businesses and in the increased money in consumer’s pockets to save and spend as they see fit. Here are three reasons why the income tax should be abolished.

Unlike a consumption tax, income tax harms an important sector of the economy: investment. Investment drives businesses, who use this money to improve their efficiency, expand services, and/or hire more employees. When a business expands, it increases other business’ income and helps raise employment. The source of investment is the savings derived from wages and labor.

When a person’s discretionary income is lower, they will have less money to save. Consider this example of a person who makes $100 a year:

If this imaginary person lived in a country with no income tax, and spending on food, water, and shelter amounted to $60, he would have $40 of discretionary income. He can spend this at a store (contributing to sales tax revenue) or he may put it in a bank. Banks are an important component of any economy. The bank will use this deposit of $40 to fund loans (and establish their reserve), which starts the money multiplier effect.

If again, this person instead lives in a country with 10% flat tax on income, he would bring home only $90, with $60 being used on necessities, and now only $30 is available to the bank. With less deposited money, banks are more limited to what is available in loans, making expansion for any business harder. When good businesses cannot access loans, expansion will ultimately harm the worker in terms of lost employment opportunities.

2. Income Taxes Harm Personal Growth

Obviously income tax in the above example is not that simple in real life, but the message is still the same: income tax discourages savings, ultimately harming investments. Notice how America’s savings rate has increased as of late, not due to any changes in income tax but due to high consumer debt constraining spending.

The effect of low savings is best seen by the high dependence upon credit in America. Without the incentive to save a considerable sum (or an entire sum) of money to purchase a product, people become tempted by the lure of credit, which can always “be paid off later.” The other effect is slower economic growth, especially after a recession. Burdened by a high debt, consumers will withhold spending money in order to pay down the debt to a manageable level, and though savings are increased, banks are reluctant to lend money due to the higher rate of delinquent payments. This leads to a stagnation until debt is reduced which may be months to years down the road.

3. Eliminating Income Tax Increases Savings and Consumption

As all taxes change behavior, abolishing the income tax will allow people to contribute more to the economy, no matter if they save more or even spend more. Those who save more will allow investment into retirement accounts, bank loans, and the stock market that help a society finance future endeavors. Those who choose to spend more will result in higher profits for companies, allowing for an increase in productivity. This in turn increases expansion opportunities for businesses, which in turn helps unemployed persons find jobs. Consumers then benefit from lower prices and/or increased quality.

Though Objectivists see taxes as immoral, at this point in time it is not favorable to simply end every tax. Eliminating the income tax is only a step, and it should be replaced with a tax that is both equal and fair to all Americans, in order for the government to lower their debt burden. Then in time the taxes can be lowered as government withdraws itself from areas not within it’s purpose.

发表评论

电子邮件地址不会被公开。 必填项已用*标注