EPT![[image loading]](http://www.dinocrat.com/wp-content/002p004.gif)
Economists say that it makes our economy better that products start becoming a ton cheaper proportionally from before free trade economics came in.
US Politics Mega-thread - Page 60
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14211 Posts
Economists say that it makes our economy better that products start becoming a ton cheaper proportionally from before free trade economics came in. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On January 06 2013 03:42 aksfjh wrote: Sales tax or a VAT. Basically, it's a tax you can "choose" to pay by the price and quality of products you buy, and when you buy them. Ah. How do you decide which things cost more and so on? Do you categorize commodities? Or is it just based on market values of things. I guess what I'm saying is can we tax stupid useless things more than things that aren't stupid and useless? | ||
|
TotalBalanceSC2
Canada475 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:00 GnarlyArbitrage wrote: Does this graph take into account technological advances? I mean, wouldn't there be an increase in productivity if one went from chopping down trees with an axe to using a chainsaw? Does it take into account just the employees productivity, or the company's? They are using this statistic to measure productivity from the Bureau of labor statistics "The Major Sector Productivity program publishes quarterly and annual measures of output per hour and unit labor costs for the U.S. business, nonfarm business, and manufacturing sectors. These are the productivity statistics most often cited by the national media." Which as far as I can tell does not seem to take into account technological advances. Does not change the fact people are getting more done but getting paid less for doing it. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
| ||
|
oneofthem
Cayman Islands24199 Posts
| ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:04 sam!zdat wrote: Ah. How do you decide which things cost more and so on? Do you categorize commodities? Or is it just based on market values of things. I guess what I'm saying is can we tax stupid useless things more than things that aren't stupid and useless? It really depends on the state. Five states in the US do not collect a traditional sales tax, and find means to raise revenue using alternative measures. For the other 45, however, a general sales tax applies to all consumer goods, which generally amounts to a combination of local and state rates. In terms of commodity categorization, however, you might be thinking more of Pigovian taxes, or sumptuary taxes, which are fees levied towards the consumption of goods and services that are considered to have negative externalities (alcohol, cigarettes, gambling). | ||
|
TotalBalanceSC2
Canada475 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:17 farvacola wrote: It really depends on the state. Five states in the US do not collect a traditional sales tax, and find means to raise revenue using alternative measures. For the other 45, however, a general sales tax applies to all consumer goods, which generally amounts to a combination of local and state rates. In terms of commodity categorization, however, you might be thinking more of Pigovian taxes, or sin taxes, which are fees levied towards the consumption of goods and services that are considered to have negative externalities (alcohol, cigarettes, gambling). It would be nice if we could add guns/bullet tax to that list, the NRA would never let that happen though. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:15 oneofthem wrote: no, that's what we call loss of labor bargaining power and policy disregard for unemployment. fine, but I still think there's diminishing marginal returns on doing stuff | ||
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
| ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On January 06 2013 03:33 TheFrankOne wrote: "Beginning in the 1970s, economic growth slowed and the income gap widened. Income growth for households in the middle and lower parts of the distribution slowed sharply, while incomes at the top continued to grow strongly. The concentration of income at the very top of the distribution rose to levels last seen more than 80 years ago (during the “Roaring Twenties”)." ![[image loading]](http://www.cbpp.org/images/cms/11-28-11pov-f1.jpg) http://www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=3629 Glad to see a more progressive tax code. Most people haven't been seeing the same gains as the 90+ percentiles since the mid 70s. There are a variety of reasons for this apart from taxes but, the more unequal income is the more progressive the tax code should be IMO. Sure (to an extent), but IMO the bigger problem isn't that the rich are getting richer - it's that the poor are not getting richer. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14211 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:15 oneofthem wrote: no, that's what we call loss of labor bargaining power and policy disregard for unemployment. Why would that have an impact on anything? The same labor that people providing is worth less and keeps becoming worth less in the face of cheaper labor in other parts of the world. How can "labor bargaining power" change a fundamental economic problem that opening our markets to cheaper sources of labor caused? | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:26 Sermokala wrote: Why would that have an impact on anything? The same labor that people providing is worth less and keeps becoming worth less in the face of cheaper labor in other parts of the world. How can "labor bargaining power" change a fundamental economic problem that opening our markets to cheaper sources of labor caused? They are part of the same process... edit: On January 06 2013 04:24 Souma wrote: Junk food tax! Junk food tax! Junk food tax! <3 | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:24 Souma wrote: Junk food tax! Junk food tax! Junk food tax! Lol you take that California hippy normative tripe elsewhere  | ||
|
JonnyBNoHo
United States6277 Posts
On January 06 2013 03:42 aksfjh wrote: Sales tax or a VAT. Basically, it's a tax you can "choose" to pay by the price and quality of products you buy, and when you buy them. Yep, France gets something like half the government revenue from their ~20% VAT. I'd consider a carbon tax to be a form of consumption tax too. | ||
|
Souma
2nd Worst City in CA8938 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:27 farvacola wrote: Lol you take that California hippy normative tripe elsewhere Psh, as if Seattle is any less hippy these days. Share some blunts will ya. | ||
|
TotalBalanceSC2
Canada475 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:25 JonnyBNoHo wrote: Sure (to an extent), but IMO the bigger problem isn't that the rich are getting richer - it's that the poor are not getting richer. The poor in other countries are getting richer though. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:30 TotalBalanceSC2 wrote: The poor in other countries are getting richer though. Less than you'd think, probably. Mostly the rich in other countries are getting richer. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18869 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:29 Souma wrote: Psh, as if Seattle is any less hippy these days. Share some blunts will ya. Don't even remind me, I'm already waiting with bated breath to see what sort of "blunt tax" we end up with. | ||
|
sam!zdat
United States5559 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:31 farvacola wrote: Don't even remind me, I'm already waiting with bated breath to see what sort of "blunt tax" we end up with. Look dude, if I can support municipal services by getting high, I'll count that as a victory | ||
|
Sabu113
United States11110 Posts
On January 06 2013 04:04 Sermokala wrote: Productivity became worth less as Jobs were sent off to third world countries in the name of "free trade" economics. Economists say that it makes our economy better that products start becoming a ton cheaper proportionally from before free trade economics came in. Small quibble You're putting scare quotes around free trade as if it is some sketchy out of the mainstream consensus idea. It's not and is quite mainstream for many reasons that will become pretty apparent if you spent maybe an hour studying the subject as a whole. | ||
| ||
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/45/Productivity_and_Real_Median_Family_Income_Growth_1947-2009.png)
