You’ve dodged most of my questions, I answered the important aspects of your question. Taxing capitalists at a higher rate would not qualitatively transform China’s economy. Do you have a reason for picking 1 billion USD/RMB/Francs/etc. as a wealth cap beyond vibes?Why is the taxation rate in China insufficient?"
You can convert the amount to RMB if that makes it easier to answer. You can even take 1/5th out of it too to make it a different amount. I’d just like to hear the answer to that question, since it is sorta important in understand your point
I already said I would not oppose China changing the taxation rate. I’m asking why you are fixating on an arbitrary level of wealth, and are now abandoning that goalpost in favor of the blanket point “China needs to tax at higher rates.” Do you know what China’s tax rates are? If they raised the tax rates 10%, is that enough to satisfy you? How would you know without knowing China’s tax rates?
My point is that your issues with China are arbitrary and constantly shifting.
I already did, I said I wouldn’t oppose China changing their taxation rate. My point is that your issues with China are arbitrary and constantly shifting. It’s you that won’t answer my questions.
Probably, but it would have tradeoffs, including lower rates of socialization of production due to restricting the flow of capital in underdeveloped industries. I already said I wouldn’t oppose China changing the taxation rate, especially as production does continue to socialize. You’ve repeatedly dodged my questions, though, which is extremely dishonest and clear evidence of bad-faith.
No matter what taxation rate China picks, the general strategy of marketization for competitive, small and medium firms as a method of socializing production persists, and inevitably results in capitalists with a larger degree of wealth. When you pick an arbitrary level to be satisfied with, you are making the judgment that the present level of taxation is insufficient. This requires concrete reasoning, reasoning you have not provided, and even said doesn’t actually matter.
The idea that increased taxation for the mega wealthy would be bad for the economy is something those liberals waiting for free market China actually say too, in a funny twist.
I was just using billionaire as a shorthand to the mega wealthy, meaning those who have ridiculously more wealth than the average person. It’s not actually strictly that number that I care about, it’s just easier to discuss.
The taxation rate (as in, allowing those mega wealthy to exist) is bad imo because there’s no sensible reason one in vidual needs to hoard that amount of wealth. And it’s through the exploitation of the workers. After a billion (or other ridiculously high amount, you can pick another) you could just distribute the extra wealth to the workers in higher wages. So what would be a good taxation rate after that set amount (whatever we decide on)? 100%.
So, to conclude, you do disagree with the socialist market economy of China, and instead would prefer a Gang of Four style economy based on equal poverty, and a rejection of Marxism in favor of dogmatic collectivization. You cannot have the socialist market economy without capitalists and therefore the creation of wealthy individuals, and without the socialist market economy China would be less developed and their working classes would be behind where they presently are. China already taxes, and already directs this towards social services and infrastructure.
You’ve dodged most of my questions, I answered the important aspects of your question. Taxing capitalists at a higher rate would not qualitatively transform China’s economy. Do you have a reason for picking 1 billion USD/RMB/Francs/etc. as a wealth cap beyond vibes? Why is the taxation rate in China insufficient?"
You can convert the amount to RMB if that makes it easier to answer. You can even take 1/5th out of it too to make it a different amount. I’d just like to hear the answer to that question, since it is sorta important in understand your point
I already said I would not oppose China changing the taxation rate. I’m asking why you are fixating on an arbitrary level of wealth, and are now abandoning that goalpost in favor of the blanket point “China needs to tax at higher rates.” Do you know what China’s tax rates are? If they raised the tax rates 10%, is that enough to satisfy you? How would you know without knowing China’s tax rates?
My point is that your issues with China are arbitrary and constantly shifting.
You’re not going to answer my question, are you?
I already did, I said I wouldn’t oppose China changing their taxation rate. My point is that your issues with China are arbitrary and constantly shifting. It’s you that won’t answer my questions.
With the taxation rate do you mean taxing it so that billionaires wouldn’t exist? Would that allow the current Chinese strategy to still work?
Probably, but it would have tradeoffs, including lower rates of socialization of production due to restricting the flow of capital in underdeveloped industries. I already said I wouldn’t oppose China changing the taxation rate, especially as production does continue to socialize. You’ve repeatedly dodged my questions, though, which is extremely dishonest and clear evidence of bad-faith.
No matter what taxation rate China picks, the general strategy of marketization for competitive, small and medium firms as a method of socializing production persists, and inevitably results in capitalists with a larger degree of wealth. When you pick an arbitrary level to be satisfied with, you are making the judgment that the present level of taxation is insufficient. This requires concrete reasoning, reasoning you have not provided, and even said doesn’t actually matter.
Why is China’s current taxation rate bad?
What would be a good taxation rate, and why?
Stop dodging.
The idea that increased taxation for the mega wealthy would be bad for the economy is something those liberals waiting for free market China actually say too, in a funny twist.
I was just using billionaire as a shorthand to the mega wealthy, meaning those who have ridiculously more wealth than the average person. It’s not actually strictly that number that I care about, it’s just easier to discuss.
The taxation rate (as in, allowing those mega wealthy to exist) is bad imo because there’s no sensible reason one in vidual needs to hoard that amount of wealth. And it’s through the exploitation of the workers. After a billion (or other ridiculously high amount, you can pick another) you could just distribute the extra wealth to the workers in higher wages. So what would be a good taxation rate after that set amount (whatever we decide on)? 100%.
I hope that answers your questions
So, to conclude, you do disagree with the socialist market economy of China, and instead would prefer a Gang of Four style economy based on equal poverty, and a rejection of Marxism in favor of dogmatic collectivization. You cannot have the socialist market economy without capitalists and therefore the creation of wealthy individuals, and without the socialist market economy China would be less developed and their working classes would be behind where they presently are. China already taxes, and already directs this towards social services and infrastructure.