The Instigator
brian_eggleston
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
imabench
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

The wealthiest ten per cent of citizens should be exempted from paying tax

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
imabench
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/16/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,246 times Debate No: 26263
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (5)
Votes (2)

 

brian_eggleston

Pro

My family tree has just been completed and I have discovered that I am, in reality, an extremely posh personage with an aristocratic heritage - I am related to the Norwegian royal family no less, and I have duly written to the King of Norway asking him to send me a cheque for my share of the family fortune at his earliest convenience.

However, when I bank this cheque I will have to pay capital gains tax on the amount, and possibly inheritance tax too, and the prospect of this is making my blue blood boil, especially as I know that my wealthy forefathers here in Britain were never required to pay any sort of tax. Indeed, back in medieval times, the paupers in rural England used to pay the nobility handsome sums for the privilege of farming the common land that used to collectively belong to them before the ruling classes annexed it all and forced the snivelling little peasants into serfdom.

One of my Victorian ancestors: Lord Montmorency Wright-Farquhar Saveloy Eggleston d'Eggleston von Gobbscheit, the fifth Earl of Sunderland; famously said "The idea that the upper classes should be asked to make a financial contribution to the Government just so filthy commoners can educate their children, have access to medication and enjoy the protection of the law is as ludicrous as the idea that they should be allowed to vote."

Sadly, these days working class scum not only enjoy free education and health care, paid for through taxation, but also the 'right' to elect wishy-washy, namby-pamby, bleeding-heart lefties as Members of Parliament - and this country is going to hell in a hand-cart as a result.

Like most financially privileged toffs, I have an enormous sense of self-entitlement, and that's why I affirm that income tax should remain in place, but only the lower classes should pay it, and that the revenue raised from income tax should not be wasted on publicly-funded schools and hospitals but, rather, be used to replace the capital gains and inheritance taxes which are such a tedious burden on socially superior citizens, such as my good self.

As my friends in the Conservative Party point out, taxing high net worth individuals drives wealth creators out of the country and into low tax regimes overseas, and because they sack their chauffeurs, valets, butlers, chefs, gardeners, sommeliers, footmen and maids as they leave, this exodus of prosperous people actually damages some of the poorest members of society - the very people those commies in the Labour Party claim to represent.

The fact is, if the richest ten per cent of citizens were exempted from tax, not only would all those servants keep their jobs but rich people from abroad would be tempted to move to Britain to take advantage of our low tax policies, and employ domestic staff of their own here - which would be a fantastic boost to the economy.

We can expect objections from certain quarters of the media if the Government adopts my proposal, of course, but as Conservative MP, Andrew Mitchell, recently told some upstart policemen who tried to tell him what to do "Best you learn your f------ place. You don't run this f------ government. You're f------ plebs" (1) and this is the message that must be extended to any other proles who dare to question the Government's new policy to exempt the wealthiest citizens from tax.

Thank you.

(1) http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
imabench

Con

"My family tree has just been completed and I have discovered that I am, in reality, an extremely posh personage with an aristocratic heritage - I am related to the Norwegian royal family no less"

I congratulate you on your v'ecent discovery of your aristocratical blood lines. I myself have ties to ze greatest leader of Germany of all time, ze great Adolf Hitler, zo I know vhat it iz like to earn large payment simply for being related to powerful people in ze past.

"However, when I bank this cheque I will have to pay capital gains tax on the amount, and possibly inheritance tax too, and the prospect of this is making my blue blood boil."

I feel your pain mein friend. I too had to deal with preposterous taxes when I earned my inheritance. It is a despicable practize to take ones hard earned inheritance is it not?

"Indeed, back in medieval times, the paupers in rural England used to pay the nobility handsome sums for the privilege of farming the common land that used to collectively belong to them before the ruling classes annexed it all and forced the snivelling little peasants into serfdom."

Ze paupers of England had ze v'ight idea too.

" One of my Victorian ancestors: Lord Montmorency Wright-Farquhar Saveloy Eggleston d'Eggleston von Gobbscheit, famously said "The idea that the upper classes should be asked to make a financial contribution to the Government just so filthy commoners can educate their children, have access to medication and enjoy the protection of the law is as ludicrous as the idea that they should be allowed to vote." "

Zis man Montmormency vas a man ahead of his time, I applaud him for his boldness.

"Sadly, these days working class scum not only enjoy free education and health care, paid for through taxation, but also the 'right' to elect wishy-washy, namby-pamby, bleeding-heart lefties as Members of Parliament - and this country is going to hell in a hand-cart as a result."

Ze same thing is happening in my beloved Deutschland and it sickens me more zhan vatching a jew be able to work while good blooded Germans languish in unemployment....

"Like most financially privileged toffs, I have an enormous sense of self-entitlement, and that's why I affirm that income tax should remain in place, but only the lower classes should pay it, and that the revenue raised from income tax should not be wasted on publicly-funded schools and hospitals but, rather, be used to replace the capital gains and inheritance taxes."

I must disagree with you on zhis one. I vill explain my position on zhis issue later in zhis debate, but virst I vould like to address your other points.

"As my friends in the Conservative Party point out, taxing high net worth individuals drives wealth creators out of the country and into low tax regimes overseas, and..... this exodus of prosperous people actually damages some of the poorest members of society."

Ze conservative party have good intention vith zhere ideas, but zhey vail to distinguish between taxing ze high income individuals too much and taxing ze high income individuals at all. I have problems with ze former, but not ze ladder. I believe zat ze wealthiest 10% should not face incredibly high taxation vates, but zhay should not be exempted from it. I vill explain why in a moment.

"The fact is, if the richest ten per cent of citizens were exempted from tax, not only would all those servants keep their jobs but rich people from abroad would be tempted to move to Britain to take advantage of our low tax policies, and employ domestic staff of their own here - which would be a fantastic boost to the economy."

Zis is vhat I vas vearing. You mistake that ze top 10% of citizens are ze best people to create jobs and lower unemployment, and zhat ze only vay they can do this iz if ve give them no taxes. In glorious Nazi Germany, ze country under Hitlers rule faced the fastest drop in unemployment ever recorded by drastically increasing military production vich created thousands of jobs very vast. Zhey also annexed numerous industries and suspended ze rights for common workers to protest or unionize, and ze country flourished. However, tax vates never climbed more zhan 14% the entire time, as you can see from zhis article I vound on zis website called "Vikipedia".

http://en.wikipedia.org...

My point iz, you dont need to abolish taxes only on ze top 10% to spur job creation, because in Nazi Germany the economy vlourished simply vrom taking control of major industries to decrease unemployment. In today's day and age though, zis cannot be done because ze people vill protest too much and vote you out of power, so governments can only try to spur job growth in vays that ze public will not protest, and your plan of cutting services to ze lower 90% and eliminating taxes of ze upper 10% vill anger zhem.

Lets look at ze idea zhat lowering taxes on ze top earners leads to a drop in unemployment though. In capitalist America for example, ze government gives billions and billions of dollars to oil companies like Exxon-Mobil and their owners in ze hopes zhat zhey vill use zese zubsidies to hire more workers. Zhis hasnt happened though because vhen you look at how many people zhey have employed from 1999 to 2007, you can see zhat Exxon has actually DECREASED the number of people vorking for zhem from 107,000 in 1999, to 80,800 in 2007. Currently in 2012 zhey only employ 82,000 people vich is a decrease of 25,000 jobs despite receiving billions in funding from ze government.

http://fightforbetterus.blogspot.com...
http://en.wikipedia.org...

Ze point iz, eliminating taxes vor ze top 10% doesnt necessarily mean that unemployment will drop because eliminating taxes for ze companies and going even further by actually giving zhem more money when they are making record profits also does not reduce unemployment. to reduce unemployment, numerous other measures must be utilized to try to drive down unemployment as vell. You mentioned that cutting spending can also be utilized to encourage unemployment, however the zervices zhat ze government funds also emplys and influences countless numbers of people. Public education and hospitals and defense all employ thousands and thousands of people all across Europe and America as vell, so if ve cut services too much, jobs vill be lost, and if zhat same money instead goes to high income earners it vill not encourage zhem to create as many jobs as those that vere lost.

That is vhy your proposal vill not work. Cutting funding to schools and hospitals vill increase unemployment since people vork in zhose industries, but giving more money to high income earners and corporations vill not create as many jobs as was lost, as you can zee from my Exxon-Mobil analysis.

Zhere are better vays to reduce unemployment besides giving tax breaks to the wealthy and cutting services to the middle class scum to pay for it.
1) Zhe government can ease up on regulations in key areas to help new industries be born or flourish
2) Zhe government can run up massive spending deficits for people to consume more goods and allow industries to expand to meet the demand (like vhat happened in America under Reagan)
3) Zhe government can lower zhe benefits people can receive from things like Zocial Zecurity and allocate those funds elsewhere in the economy to spur job growth
4) Ze government can tinker vith their monetary policy to increase job creation
5) Ze government can invest in programs to help ze unemployed find and occupy jobs that are available.
6) Ze government can also heavily invest in military production to icnrease jobs (Something I am in favor of)

http://useconomy.about.com...

Zhese are a few ways the government can decrease unemployment and are ze veason vhy ve dont need to exempt ze upper 10% vrom taxes vile ze middle class is forced to suffer for it.
Debate Round No. 1
brian_eggleston

Pro

I would like to thank the esteemed I. A. M. A. Bench, Esq. for accepting this debate (I assume at least one of his given names must be Adolf in honour of his infamous relative) and for duly posting his rebuttals.

Ladies and gentlemen, I didn't realise Hitler had any surviving relatives but if Herr Bench can prove he is, indeed, the Fuehrer's sole remaining descendant then, not only will he inherit the deceased dictator's castle in Bavaria but also the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Nazi gold that is currently stashed in Swiss banks. With this being the case, I would expect him to join me in arguing that the richest 10% of citizens should be exempted from tax, but in the meantime, I would like to respond to his objections as follows:

The proletariat would, indeed, protest if this policy was announced prior to an election, which is exactly why the Republican American Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is so evasive about his tax policies: all he will is say is that he wants to cut them; but he won't say who will benefit (although I personally suspect the rich will benefit more than the poor).

Furthermore, here in Britain, the Conservatives were elected and the first thing they did was slash public spending to pay for tax cuts for the top 5% of earners (they didn't mention this in their election campaign, of course, but that was always their plan).

This shows it is possible to squeeze the poor until their pips squeak and get away with it - and it's all made possible by ensuring you have the political and financial backing of the bosses of big business and media moguls - which is easy because they are wealthy people who benefit from tax cuts for the rich. You see, democracy may exist in theory, but in practice, members the old Establishment still control the levers of power.

Finally, I agree that the government shouldn't give money to big business to create jobs, if they have any money to spare, they should give it to toffs like me - I would happily use the money to employ some forelock-tugging skivvies to attend to my every whim and desire, but I"m not asking for that, all I'm asking for is to be exempted from tax, along with the other 10% most wealthy citizens.

Thank you.
imabench

Con

"Ladies and gentlemen, I didn't realise Hitler had any surviving relatives but if Herr Bench can prove he is, indeed, the Fuehrer's sole remaining descendant then, not only will he inherit the deceased dictator's castle in Bavaria but also the hundreds of millions of dollars worth of Nazi gold that is currently stashed in Swiss banks"

Yes, and with those vunds I can complete the mission of mein leader Adolf. Also my Middle name is Adolf, good call.

"The proletariat would, indeed, protest if this policy was announced prior to an election, which is exactly why the Republican American Presidential candidate Mitt Romney is so evasive about his tax policies: all he will is say is that he wants to cut them; but he won't say who will benefit (although I personally suspect the rich will benefit more than the poor)."

Yes he is a sneaky one..... One of the problems with running on a platform to cut taxes is that the politicians never zpecify vhich vons they want to cut until after they get elected, if they cut any at all.... Vait, vhat vas the resolution?

"Furthermore, here in Britain, the Conservatives were elected and the first thing they did was slash public spending to pay for tax cuts for the top 5% of earners (they didn't mention this in their election campaign, of course, but that was always their plan)."

And i guessing ze public acted very negatively to it yes? Zhat is von of ze mein problems cith cutting taxes on the top members of society and making the rest of zociety pay for it, it vill be very unpopular.

"You see, democracy may exist in theory, but in practice, members the old Establishment still control the levers of power."

Ah yes, zis is true, but zhey do not control as much as they did in ze glorious days in Nazi Germany, so Democracy has come a long way.....

"Finally, I agree that the government shouldn't give money to big business to create jobs, if they have any money to spare, they should give it to toffs like me"

But if giving money to ze top percent of companies in ze vorld does not create jobs, zhen vhy vould ve give money to ze top ten percent of earners in ze vorld and expect zhem to do any different?

Ze great jew bastard Einstein vonce zaid that "Insanity is doing the same thing twice and expecting different results" and giving money to ze top ten percent of earners to crate jobs vhen the zame thing clearly doesnt vork vor ze top ten percent of companies?

"I would happily use the money to employ some forelock-tugging skivvies to attend to my every whim and desire, but I"m not asking for that, all I'm asking for is to be exempted from tax, along with the other 10% most wealthy citizens. Thank you."

I applaud you vor pledging to use your tax cuts to make middle class people do menial tasks, but I vear zhat other vealthy people vould not do the same thing because zhey care about ze middle class or maybe are zelfish bastards. Either vay, its not guaranteed to succeed and vould be a big vaste of money in a crude attempt to help ze economy.

Vinal Remarks

Zhere are many ways to help ze economy. Zome believe zhat intervening in ze economy helps, others believe that letting ze vree market be ze vree market vill help ze most. Either way, my arguments stand zhat ze vealthiest 10% of citizens should still pay taxes and not vorce ze middle classes to foot ze bill. Zuch a policy has no major or net benefits to ze economy or to ze overall velfare of a country's people.

I thank ze Pro vor a good debate and wish hi the best of luck in receiving his hard earned inheritance money. May zis debate be remembered vor VON THOUSAND YEARS!!!!!

Vote Con
Debate Round No. 2
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by jakamadillo7 4 years ago
jakamadillo7
It should have been d'Eggleston von Gobbledick.
Posted by ConformistDave 4 years ago
ConformistDave
tl;dr
Posted by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
this debate is painful to look at. It really hurts my eyes.
Posted by Citrakayah 4 years ago
Citrakayah
I, as a descendent of Count von Drakul, vish to drain the blood of the voung maids Pro is suggesting be employed.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
"d'Eggleston von Gobbscheit"

Nice touch.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Rayze 4 years ago
Rayze
brian_egglestonimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: While both sides were amusing, Con had better arguments, which were augmented by the amusing German accent which may seem hard to decipher yet is not that hard to decipher in reality.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
brian_egglestonimabenchTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: S/G to Pro because I could barely understand Con's arguments. For that reason, I will not vote on any other category lest I misinterpret what Con meant.