The UK's tax burden is highest in decades.

A 75% marginal income tax rate will do one thing and one thing only: It will make sure that the wealthy (not only British as the UK attracts wealthy people from neighbouring countries) leave. We've been there before.

Likewise, a wealth tax would likely raise much less that they hope because people will actively work to avoid it (see the situation in France).

There is a sweet sporting taxation and going beyond actually reduces tax income.

Currently the highest marginal income tax rate is 45%, which was created during the financial crisis iirc (up from 40%) and very high incomes also lose their income tax allowance, I.e they are taxed from the first pound they make instead of having a £12,500 tax free allowance. That seems high enough and fair enough to me. The question is whether wealthy people really do pay this or find ways around it.

There is nothing patriotic or unpatriotic here, this is a mix of tax efficiency theory and political ideology.

If it doesn't affect quality of life it isn't a reason to pack your bags.

You cant have to much socialism and you cant have to much oligarchy. Or put differently: you cant have to much empathy and you cant have to much psychopathy.

If the balance is distorted (not saying it is) it will have to be corrected or you get a destructive runaway effect.

These people are of the opinion that the rich can afford to pay more tax and that the money can be used for under financed systems already in place. If that is the goal (not saying it should be) making a few millionaires run away would be beneficial. They would take with them a substantial amount of greed.

> If it doesn't affect quality of life it isn't a reason to pack your bags.

That's not how the real world works.

People see a huge tax bill here and a much lower tax bill there and they move, at least for tax purposes.

Brits moved to France in the 70s. French move to Belgium and the UK now.

We all do this within our means.

Yes we should all pay our fair share of tax to finance public services but we work to make money for ourselves, not the state, hence why I think important and highly symbolic that the marginal income tax rate stays below 50%. Beyond that you're working for the state not yourself.

There's a term here in the UK: Champagne socialist.

Imaginary mobility. The rich are more stuck in their country than anyone. Poor people can pack their bag and leave, the middle class is slightly less mobile and the rich are stuck where they are. The drive to leave the country, the suffering, when you cant find work and/or cant pay your bills and/or cant buy food is endlessly larger than "suffering" taxes. The UK is a profitable environment and the country isn't shitty enough to just run away - it's quite fine and dandy actually.

But all that is besides the point really.

It is preferable to have successful people who move towards things. People trying to move away from things are useless regardless how much money they have. They are beyond useless! Who needs them with there unambitious greed? What good will come from them? As you describe, all they care about is themselves? Their money will do nothing but build the next rent seeking scheme simply to take it away.

We should really buy them a large cruise ship and give them a going away party. Ill be standing there waving until she vanishes over the horizon. Then ill softly whisper: Goodbye angry men, may you find greener pastures elsewhere.

"On themselves". If anyone believes that, they could tell them that they're free to contribute more on top of what they're forced to pay.

As usual, "Patriotic" is used when the opposite is true.

Man, HN is generally so right wing.

Anyone can voluntarily pay extra tax beyond what they owe in the U.K., but very few people do (~200 between 2000 and 2017).

> “It’s absolutely in the self-interest of the wealthy to pay heed to the need for societies to be thriving,” Perry said.

Ok but why do they need the government to administer that money? If you want to do good with your money, just do it!

Hmm, maybe this is what the government is pushing for, and they get the ones who agree to push everyone else into also giving their money to government.

If government was held accountable for their decisions... maybe taxes would be a solution. However politicians do whatever they want, and RARELY do they have to only step down and that's it. Once I see real accountability, not just losing their jobs, but huge fines and potentially jail, we could start talking about taxes being a potential solution to anything.

So you are saying that it's better to rely on the charitable feelings of random individuals rather than having a democratically elected government determine where the money needs to be spend? And what about the rest of the millionaires who don't care about anyone other than themselves? Do they get to benefit from the collective effort of everyone else and pay nothing for it?

> So you are saying that it's better to rely on the charitable feelings of random individuals rather than having a democratically elected government where the money needs to be spend?

Why doesn't government make the profit themselves to then help people, instead of using taxes? Why not create more non-profits that are self-sustainable?

Yes, IMHO, all we have is to rely on the goodwill of others. Even when it comes to taxes, we're expecting people won't use loopholes and evade paying them, yet that's what happens anyway. Not only is government extremely slow and wasteful at solving problems, coercion is not effective.

I think we already pay more than enough taxes to solve most problems in society. For example, San Francisco has spent billions on trying to solve homelessness and failed pretty hard at it. I think billions of dollars should be enough to solve the homeless situation in one city, so I think the first question is why is it that the current taxes isn't enough? (and also as I mentioned, where is the accountability)

How exactly do you suggest the federal government create 4 trillion dollars in yearly profits?

I'm not suggesting they replace all taxes, but rather if they need extra money maybe they should create non-profits that are good enough to not need public funding, or at least not waste everyone's money with failing policies over and over.

There is nothing more important than freedom, including life, which is why real patriots will give their life to protect it.

Without property rights, there isn't freedom. Forced redistribution of wealth is slavery, and dysgenic.

Because one wealthy person can't fix society's problems.

Leaving aside the benefits of this, these millionaires could simply report their taxes without tax accountant tricks if they want to pay more.

Prisoners dilemna

They won't lose much if they 'cooperate' (pay more taxes) while others 'defect'. They'll still be very rich.