In DOF I've argued vigorously against James Meade's (a Nobel prize winner in economics) arguments for an inheritance tax. John Rawls took on Meade's arguments to propose a dramatically enhanced welfare state with strong redistribution.
An article in The New York Times today by Russell Roberts (who is a research fellow at Stanford University’s Hoover Institution and professor of economics at George Mason University) and co-author of Cafe Hayek prompted me to make a comment on the Cafe Hayek blog.
I encourage you to read Russell's argument but note two other key arguments that I've made in DOF. Let me reproduce the entire section:
If you found this post useful, then consider subscribing to my blog by email:
Join the Freedom Team of India or become a Freedom Partner.
- The case against inheritance tax #2
- The Vikram Buddhi case
- The case for the progressive tax
- The case against the flat tax
- The challenge of educating prodigies: the case of the Indian child Tanishq Abraham
- Brain drain from India to the West – case study and ongoing research
- The Case Against RSS
- The amazing distortion of the OPEN AND SHUT case against Narendra Modi
- Kiran Bedi’s case: not corruption? Well, what else is it?
- Compulsory voting in India – the case has not yet been made