The rich are extremely mobile, already have wealth and assets that will keep appreciating.
The poor and middle class would need to disproportionately gain wealth if they were to rise to the same position in the power hierarchy, and they are not mobile. High taxes are like fixing positions in place, like a moat to make it difficult for others to rise, since it isn't going to retroactively take money.
Historical data further shows that taxes keep rising but so does inequality.
It's blatantly obvious that you cant control the laws of every country when the game theory makes it obvious that lower taxes makes you more competitive at attracting wealthy people.
>Historical data further shows that taxes keep rising but so does inequality.
I don't know if you're aware of this, but taxes in the west are significantly lower than they were in the 50s, 60s and 70s. The top marginal income tax rate in the 60s was 90% in the UK and 91% in the US. Currently it is 45% in the UK and 37% in the US. Corp tax is currently 18% in the UK and 21% in the US. In the 60s it was 45% in the UK and between 11% and 55% in the US.
The poor and middle class would need to disproportionately gain wealth if they were to rise to the same position in the power hierarchy, and they are not mobile. High taxes are like fixing positions in place, like a moat to make it difficult for others to rise, since it isn't going to retroactively take money.
Historical data further shows that taxes keep rising but so does inequality.
It's blatantly obvious that you cant control the laws of every country when the game theory makes it obvious that lower taxes makes you more competitive at attracting wealthy people.