论文部分内容阅读
我不知道目前究竟有多少人事实上真是把从工作得来的收入的绝对平等当作我们一定希望要实现的目标;就我来说,不论从权宜的观点还是从道义的观点来看,我都看不出这是可以接受的。我们赞成采取各种措施来减轻收入不平等。但我认为把累进税当做大家分摊共同负担的手段,和把累进税作为减轻不平等的手段来看待是有差别的。前者这样一种累进办法和达到这样目的,我觉得是良好的道义和常识。而累进若是专门为了减轻不平等,那我觉得这种论点就很难取信于人。虽然在收入问题上肯定还会继续发生很多激烈的论战,但我并不认为我们可能在普遍拉平收入的道路上走得更远些。我的看法认为不把它拉平倒是合适的。目前累进的程度太大了。现在的刺激不足以达到一个增加生产的合适比率。按照遗产数额累进征课继承税,可以成为促使财产分散的一个强烈刺激,遗嘱人把他的遗产分得愈小,所应负担的总税额便愈小。我认为这样一种安排是颇可取的。它是同维持财产私有制的民主政治精神完全符合的计划。但这个计划目前还不能付诸实施。
I do not know how many people really really regard the absolute equality of income from work as the goal we must hope for. To me, whether from a discretionary or moral point of view, Can not see that this is acceptable. We are in favor of taking various measures to reduce income inequality. However, I think there is a difference between using progressive tax as a tool to share the burden of common burden and treating progressive tax as a means of alleviating inequality. The former is such a progressive approach and to achieve such a goal, I think it is good morality and common sense. And if the progressive if specifically to reduce inequality, then I think this argument is difficult to win the trust of people. Although there will surely continue to be a lot of heated polemics on the issue of income, I do not think we may go further on the path to generally flattening incomes. My opinion does not think it is appropriate to level it down. The current level of progress is too great. The stimulus is not enough to achieve a proper rate of increase in production. The progressive inheritance tax levied according to the amount of inheritance can become a strong stimulus for the dispersal of property. The smaller the total amount of tax borne by the testator, the smaller the total amount of tax payable. I think such an arrangement is quite desirable. It is a plan that is fully in line with the spirit of democratic politics that preserves private ownership of property. But this plan can not be implemented yet.