Things I did non say

One of the strange things most the blogosphere is that I oftentimes respect myself beingness surprised past times positions that are attributed to me.  For example, Matthew Yglesias says:

Many proponents of depression taxes on high-income individuals are "supply-siders" who claim that such a revenue enhancement policy volition maximize overall welfare. But other proponents of depression taxes on high-income individuals such every bit Greg Mankiw deny that this is the relevant consideration, together with only enjoin that progressive taxation is immoral.

If you lot follow the link that Mr Yglesias gives here, you lot volition respect it is to my newspaper "Spreading the Wealth Around: Reflections Inspired past times Joe the Plumber." Does this paper say that progressive taxation is immoral? No. In fact, spell advocating what I telephone phone a "Just Deserts" approach to taxation, it says the following:

Public goods together with Pigovian subsidies Pb naturally to a revenue enhancement organisation inwards which higher income individuals pay to a greater extent than inwards taxes. Surely, those amongst higher income together with greater belongings create goodness to a greater extent than from a governmental organisation that protects belongings rights. Moreover, the monetary value attached to other world goods (such every bit parks together with playgrounds) together with to positive-externality activities (such every bit basic research) real probable rises amongst income every bit well. Indeed, if the income elasticity of postulate for these services exceeds one, every bit is plausible, a progressive revenue enhancement organisation is perfectly consistent amongst the Just Deserts Theory.

What most transfer payments to the poor? These tin live justified along similar lines. As long every bit people tending most others to roughly degree, antipoverty programs are a type of world good. [Thurow 1971] That is, nether this view, the regime provides for the pitiful non only because their marginal utility is high but because nosotros accept interdependent utility functions. Put differently, nosotros would all similar to alleviate poverty. But because nosotros would prefer to accept someone else selection upwardly the tab, private charity can’t create the job. Government-run antipoverty programs solve the free-rider work amid the altruistic well-to-do.

Does that audio similar someone who believes that progressive taxation is immoral?
Sumber http://gregmankiw.blogspot.com/