myiW Current Conditions and Forecasts Community Forums Windsurfing Videos Buy and Sell Services
 
Hi guest · myAccount · Log in
 SearchSearch   ProfileProfile   Log in to check your private messagesLog in to check your private messages   RegisterRegister 
Trusts
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1387

PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:31 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

isobars wrote:

No systematic tax structure in history has been researched as thoroughly as has the Fair Tax.


If you say so.

Anyone who has not lived under a rock in the late summer of 2008 knows that the biggest danger to the economy is accumulation of wealth without movement of capital. What happened then was that investors became gun shy because of risk and basically stuffed their capital into their mattresses.... and the economy ground to a halt. Guess what will happen under the so called "fair tax".

No matter what your ideological bias, you'll have to agree that in order for money to trickle down, money has to trickle first. Now why would anyone still seriously propose a tax system that penalizes the transaction? Don't we want the government to FACILITATE commerce instead of taxing it?

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/


Last edited by feuser on Mon Sep 27, 2010 12:38 pm; edited 1 time in total
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4671

PostPosted: Mon Sep 27, 2010 11:57 am    Post subject: Reply with quote

feuser--I think there is more going on. While the consumer society built a certain level of material comfort, it required deep cultural change from the Calvinist ethic, and was built on a mountain of easy credit. That same mountain that the lemmings leaped off yet again. What I'm not yet convinced of is that the new economy is going to be the same as the old economy. I think the middle class is also being pretty penurious, and looking at accumulated debt. So one of the things that I think is behind the current political mood is a deep suspicion of borrowing, based on the crash of the economy and the bailout of the bankers. I think we need to wait a while to see whether this is simply part of the contracting of the economy, or an actual cultural change.

Some elements of a consumption tax might be healthy. The amount of energy it takes to produce a given unit of economic development has been shrinking for 30 years, and a modest consumption or carbon fee/tax would accelerate that change. But not the current proposals of the far right, which are intended to protect accumulated wealth.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4671

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 12:09 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Anyone interested in economic growth, the net effect on employment and concentration of wealth, and public policy should read Emmanuel Saez's work. He was in the paper this morning for winning the McArthur Genius award. Not surprisingly, he teaches in Berkeley, not in the Tri-Cities. Here is a link: http://elsa.berkeley.edu/~saez/saez-UStopincomes-2008.pdf

To give a quick summary. For the period 1993 to 2008 incomes of the top 1% grew at nearly 4%/year, while those of the rest grew at 0.75%. The expansion periods, during Clinton and Bush, had higher growth rates, 10.3 and 10.1% arespectively. But growth in the bottom 99% was markedly lower during the Bush expansion, 1.3% vs. 2.7%.

Now most of us know that correlation is not causation, and there is much to be thought about in public policy. Certainly the high tax relief associated with the Bush tax cuts contributed significantly. But the disadvantages of the American labor market continue to influence wages. Similarly, as California has found, tying State revenue disproportionately to the highest earners leads to great swings in revenue streams, as the capital gains that lead that growth vcirtually disappeared during the Great Recession.

Take homes. The Middle Class needs to pay more for the benefits that they demand from both parties. Legislative bodies need to establish reserve funds that smooth the swings in revenue streams. Who said this best? Campbell, the moderate Republican in California that couldn't get the time of day from the party base.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1387

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 1:28 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

mac wrote:

Some elements of a consumption tax might be healthy. The amount of energy it takes to produce a given unit of economic development has been shrinking for 30 years, and a modest consumption or carbon fee/tax would accelerate that change. But not the current proposals of the far right, which are intended to protect accumulated wealth.


I didn't say you shouldn't tax items that constitute a real and/or projected future cost to society. Oil, plastic bags in SF, you name it. We have the ability to crunch the numbers and put a price on these things. Collecting that tax can be done at various levels - not only during their sale to the end-user, but it certainly makes that process transparent and involves the consumer in directing demand where it perhaps should go.

What does not make sense is to shift the entire burden of collecting the revenue needed for collective action (including defense, law enforcement, etc) to the providers of goods and services. It is hard enough to make a sale in a recession. In theory, the best way to jump start the economy would be the exact opposite: Invest now, you can't take a cent above x into the new fiscal year. Just MHO.

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
mac



Joined: 07 Mar 1999
Posts: 4671

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 2:07 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Agreed. The full shift is what is wrong with Iso's idea. Besides, that is, his less than model research and explanation skills.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1849

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 8:13 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

I agree with you all.

And, since we can calculate the costs of carbon use and plastic bags on the environment and allow some consumer direction in the way taxes are levied and spent, maybe we can also start to address some other significant costs of some of our social programs:

The costs (largely from Medicare) spent on terminal medical care during the last days. Take a look at Dick Lamm's book "The Brave New World of Health Care".

Health care, or not, for legal and illegal immigrants. Separate health clinics vs ER care?

What does a crack baby cost us? Why do we keep cutting treatment for drug addiction?

What does a child, born and raised in poverty really cost us over his lifespan?

To present these numbers and really start to understand the entire implications and potential solutions, our politicians need have us cut them some slack.

If a Repub. politician even suggests laws or funding, targetting a particular ethnic group, he is labled by the left as a racist.

If a Demo. politican suggests that maybe we need to talk education (ie birth control), he is labeled an abortionist. The latest - "Death panels", if you talk about assisted suicide.

Discussing real reform in Medicare (not just cutting fees to providers), is political suicide (non-assisted) on either side.

I think, if taxpayers are shown the costs and the benifits directly, real tax and spending reform is possible.

Instead we are given sound bites that don't tell the whole story: "$$ to study aids in Africa", "$$ for medical care for illegals", "day care for welfare moms". On face value, I think I'm against all that - What? It saves me money? Wow!
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
keycocker



Joined: 10 Jul 2005
Posts: 3030

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 8:26 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

How do you move from informed taxpayer to responsive politico?
They live in a different world as soon as they are elected.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
coboardhead



Joined: 26 Oct 2009
Posts: 1849

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 8:27 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Independently wealthy (self earned), state school education, thick skin, serve only one term and then move to your private island.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
feuser



Joined: 29 Oct 2002
Posts: 1387

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 9:15 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

keycocker wrote:
How do you move from informed taxpayer to responsive politico?
They live in a different world as soon as they are elected.


No, not really. It's just that now is the time to go trolling for votes, not make sense. PR season now spans most of the term between elections, which is why the administration needed to get the most urgent stuff done in a hurry before our communal attention deficit disorder takes over.

Now, the defeated, moderate Republican candidate of the Delaware GOP believes that climate change is real and needs to be addressed, while the one whom the party is putting on their ballot believes that the earth is six thousand years old.

Why don't the Dems just come out and say it:
"If you don't believe that witchcraft will save your job, you must vote for us"

_________________
florian - ny22

http://www.windsurfing.kasail.com/
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
swchandler



Joined: 08 Nov 1993
Posts: 5476

PostPosted: Tue Sep 28, 2010 9:37 pm    Post subject: Reply with quote

Term limits is definitely not the answer. Frankly, I don't buy the "kick the bums out" hype, and I never did. We should vote for the folks that offer us a sensible approach to governance, and the spectrum of ideas to get it done. That doesn't happen in one term in office, not by a long shot. It wouldn't happen in business, or in any other profession, so why would it offer anything meaningful and productive in government?

Of course, it's getting harder and harder to find practical bi-partisanship and cooperation these days. We must understand that building a strong nation requires hard work and investment, and that unfortunately must incorporate the concept of fair taxation too. Let's cut to eliminate waste and a sense of entitlement, but let's do it with a mind to build our nation. Given the task at hand, I really don't think giving rich folks the exit door to continue their selfish path of personal greed and decadence serves our needs in today's world.
Back to top
View user's profile Send private message
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    iWindsurf Community Forum Index -> Politics, Off-Topic, Opinions All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3 ... , 9, 10, 11  Next
Page 10 of 11

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You cannot download files in this forum

myiW | Weather | Community | Membership | Support | Log in
like us on facebook
© Copyright 1999-2007 WeatherFlow, Inc Contact Us Ad Marketplace

Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group