Just Taxation :: essays research papers

IndexI. approach2II.Introducing the problem2III.Income vs. Consumption Tax3IV.A just tax base?5V.Liberutopia6VI.Conclusion8VII.References9Table of FiguresFigure 1 Consumption vs. income tax3Figure 2 Floating money and deposit money4I.IntroductionIn the debate of just taxation an subscriber line came up, which insisted that each tax that distorts individual preferences should be considered as unjust. This argument is known as the fairness-to- upholdrs-argument. The intention of this essay is to formulate of what the fairness to savers argument consists, how to approach it and first of all why it is wrong.At first I impart therefore explain the argument on the basis of its most common recitation. The by-line chapter will then provide a better insight into to call for circumstances, under which the fairness to savers argument might arise. Here the functionalities of the, in the example presented, tax bases will be addressed. To approach the rejection of the argument correctly , it will be necessary to determine what exactly just means and this will sensation us to some assumption, which need to be made to prove the argument wrong. But before that, I will present the approach white potato vine and Nagel make in their book The myth of ownership and why they be not able to reject the argument completely. Afterwards I will introduce my approach, which basically will show, that any kind of taxation will distort individual preferences and there from I derive, that the fairness to savers argu-ment must be invalid.II.Introducing the problemThe basic problem of the fairness to savers argument, is the effect of different tax bases on individual preferences. The name of the argument follows from its most bright example, which I want to address at first, for a better sagacity of the issue. The example is often illust deemd with the comparison between two individuals preference for saving, twain taxed once under an income tax and once under a intake tax. Lets consider two people, Steve and John, both earn in t0 100$, the array of return is in every period ceaselessly at 10% and they are in every aspect on the whole similar, despite their individual time preference, which is for Steve at 3% and for John at 9%. That means exactly, that Steve is willing to save his money as foresighted he gets at least a cabbage return rate of 3% and John is willing to save his money as keen-sighted he gets at least a net return rate of 9%. In case their time preference is higher than the net return rate, the utility they derive from immediate consumption will be greater than the utility they derive from saving, thus they wont save their money.