Income Limit

Should there be a limit on the amount of money an individual may attain? If there is, what should be done with any extra money made?


10 Comments on “Income Limit”

  1. gregw89 Says:

    I believe there should be a limit on how much money one individual can amass for personal use. I see no reason why one would need more than one billion dollars or so. I recommend that all income after a certain amount be used for the benefit of society, as in donating to verifiable charities or other beneficial causes.

    To decrease corruption, wealthy individuals would have to confirm their donations with a government agency to make sure they are not donating to a false charity created to benefit themselves.

  2. danielg92 Says:

    Any limit on income is a violation of natural rights. As a libertarian, I adhere to the idea that every individual owns himself and has a moral right to control over his or her body. All the wealth we amass through the exertion of our labor becomes a part of ourselves.

    If the government decides to take the fruits of my labor through coercion, it has transformed me into a slave for it’s own benefit. When the government gives my wealth to others, I have become their slave. Therefore, any cap on income is immoral.

    • gregw89 Says:

      If there were a cap on income, that would not be taking the fruits of one’s labor, as they are allowed to amass wealth. I don’t see the necessity of somebody amassing multi-billions of dollars. There is no possible reason to have that much.

      A possibly more acceptable policy would be to heavily tax all income after a certain amount. For example, after one makes $1 billion, all income thereafter must be taxed at 50%.

  3. danielg92 Says:

    Any tax or confiscation of wealth by the government for its own purposes effectively makes that person a slave of the government in proportion to the amount that is taxed or confiscated.

    After all, slavery is when one party uses the labor of another party for its own purposes. If the government takes away the benefits that any individual gains from his labor, then it is essentially using that labor which allowed the individual to amass his wealth for it’s own purposes. Therefore, there is little real difference between taxation and slavery. This is why I consider taxation to be a necessary evil at best.

    Regardless, there is no reason why the government has a right to decide who has enough wealth. I would agree that no one needs a billion dollars if by “need” you mean necessary for survival. However, why become inflamed with envy at the sight of billionaires? Why not say to Bill Gates, “good for you” and leave him be?

    • gregw89 Says:

      Your definition of slavery seems to be manipulated to make your point. Slavery, by definition, is is “a system in which people are the property of others. Slaves can be held against their will from the time of their capture, purchase or birth, and deprived of the right to leave, to refuse to work, or to demand wages.” Obviously, what I proposed of higher taxes after a certain income does not fall into this category.

      I am not inflamed with envy at Bill Gates, Warren Buffet or any other billionaire for that matter as you suggest, but see no logical reason for one person to have that much money without having to contribute to the society in which that wealth was amassed.

      As I previously stated, a perfect system would be where an extremely heavy tax is placed on all income after a certain limit. This will continue to benefit the individual, as they are allowed to continue making money, but it will also benefit society as a whole.

  4. danielg92 Says:

    I have expanded my definition of slavery, but regardless, it is similar to taxation because both involve the forceful confiscation of labor or the fruits thereof for the use of the party exerting control over the slaves (or taxpayers). Regardless, moral arguments aside, there are still economic issues to be addressed when dealing with income limits or progressive taxes.

    Among the wealthy, each new dollar is less useful than the last. This is because money is first used to cover material needs. After material needs and wants have been met, the wealthy generally invest their money. These investments are used by corporations to expand operations and create jobs. If you take money from the wealthy, there will be less for them to invest and fewer jobs will be created.

    Just for fun, though, let us say that a miserly billionaire just decides to bury $1 billion under the sand of some godforsaken island in the South Pacific. He has just decreased the nation’s money supply by that amount. However, since cash has no intrinsic value, no actual wealth has been lost which means that all the money still in circulation has increased in value by a total of that $1 billion that was buried. In which case, the effect is almost exactly the same as if the billionaire had simply given away all his cash.

    • Gary Drake Says:

      Another note on “disposable income” or “excess income” of the wealthy: they usually end up giving most of it to various charitable causes. I have no idea how that money going to museums, hospitals, research facilities, etc. affects our economy, but I think private philanthropy is preferable to taxpayer support.

  5. whitelocust Says:

    Greg must be a communist. Any tax or confiscation of wealth by the government for its own purposes effectively makes that person a slave of the government in proportion to the amount that is taxed or confiscated.

    If you steal MY money that I earned you are stealing, no matter who does it. wages and salaries are compensation for hours (life energy) given, Since I don’t think I will live forever, you are stealing a part of my life, at 40 working years, 25% tax, that’s 10 years I’ve lost. Years that I will have worked for free. I’m no ones property, my wages are my own, and no one else. I don’t work for the communities common good, (communism) If that were true, let your wife give me some common good, lets redistribute her sex organs for the common good. I work for myself, its my natural universal right as a sovereign being.

    • danielg92 Says:


      you forgot to take into account state sales taxes (do you pay state income tax?), excise taxes and tariffs which would add a couple years slavery to the ten you already mentioned.

      Other than that, I agree with your post.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: