|
On October 25 2011 14:22 0neder wrote:
Jeremy, your complaints ironically display an even more simplistic viewpoint than you claim us Americans have. There is a reason that Republicans won back the House, and nearly the Senate. We looked at Europe, which is in some measure gradually learning that unbridled socialism is not sustainable, and at dozens of other examples from the last hundred years, and decided that maybe we passed the threshold at which government size is appropriate relative to our private sector's size.
Yes, European more social oriented approach to capitalism is unbridled socialism. Would you please check some historical and academic definitions of the terms before you throw them around? Or are you just using them like your politicians as buzz- and scarewords. And funny how unbridled socialism does not work in a world were the world still suffers from the aftershocks of a financial crisis that originated in an american sector where governmental oversight failed.
On October 25 2011 14:22 0neder wrote:
Jeremy, are you aware that when Bush lowered taxes, revenues went up? How is that possible? I thought that tax rates had completely linear relationships with revenues?
Here is something for you: What if all debt was paid off
Here the chairman of the Bush economic advisory team Glenn Hubbard (not related), responsible for the Bush tax cuts, clearly says from 14:30 onwards: Tax cuts do not pay for themselves by increasing economic activity. Not by a long shot. No reputable economist claims that. Tax cuts are a revenue loss.
I just wish this myth would die.
|
On October 25 2011 13:17 WTFZerg wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2011 13:04 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:50 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 12:47 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:34 Muffinman53 wrote:On October 25 2011 12:03 jeremysaint wrote:
i swear americans live on another planet sometimes. the usa is going broke because of its ridiculously low taxes. 3rd lowest in western world. you dont need a tax cut, and unless you really hate people with low income you dont need a federal sales tax or any kind of flat tax.
sometimes complex problems and systems don't have a simple answer, and a tax code you pulled out of your ass on a whim will not help your finacial woes. if there are problems with the current system fix the problems, close the loopholes, force republicans to cooperate with the us govt and president for the good of the country, at least once. Yeah it's almost like no other country is in debt. Damn those Americans. Speaking for Sweden, we've been reducing our debt since the mid 90's, while still doing quite well in all major political areas (domestically and internationally). Sure, everyone has debt, but not everyone has a system that's heading for a trainwreck. The economy of Sweden and the economy of the United States are not even remotely comparable in any way. What works for one will not work for another. "Debt" is not a bad thing. Ridiculous, run away spending resulting in hilariously high debt is. On October 25 2011 12:47 aethereality wrote:Wikipedia:
Perry graduated in 1972 with a Bachelor of Science degree in animal science with a 2.5 GPA.
Hahahaha. A public state university, and he couldn't even try hard enough to get a GPA over 3.0? People actually want to elect a slacker? I mean, you'd have to be sitting around all day with your thumb up your ass to get a GPA that low. I truly do not trust people like this to run an entire nation. J.R. Bob Dobbs help us TT Edit: Also, animal science? Hmm.... A 2.5? How the hell... Why in the world would it not be comparable? You have a different system, that much is true. How that leads you to conclude that one could not adopt (let alone compare) the others system, not even in theory, is lost on me however. And I never said debt in itself is a bad thing. Thank you so much for putting words in my mouth. Sweden has a fraction of the GDP and population of the United States. You simply cannot compare the economic ideologies of the two nations at any relevant level. Also I didn't put words in your mouth. I'll be sure to get your permission next time I start another train of thought in the same post. Edit: Not that I'm saying there's all that much wrong with Sweden. They're probably the only EU nation that is worth half a damn (excluding the big three) and their government showed incredible wisdom in rejecting the idea of using the Euro for currency.
Actually the government (and almost all political parties) wanted to introduce the Euro. They opted for a national referndum, though, in which the people voted no. The then sitting prime minister even went so far as to say that the people chose "incorrectly", but upheld the (consultative) result of the vote. Thank god for that.
|
On October 25 2011 23:37 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2011 13:17 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 13:04 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:50 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 12:47 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:34 Muffinman53 wrote:On October 25 2011 12:03 jeremysaint wrote:
i swear americans live on another planet sometimes. the usa is going broke because of its ridiculously low taxes. 3rd lowest in western world. you dont need a tax cut, and unless you really hate people with low income you dont need a federal sales tax or any kind of flat tax.
sometimes complex problems and systems don't have a simple answer, and a tax code you pulled out of your ass on a whim will not help your finacial woes. if there are problems with the current system fix the problems, close the loopholes, force republicans to cooperate with the us govt and president for the good of the country, at least once. Yeah it's almost like no other country is in debt. Damn those Americans. Speaking for Sweden, we've been reducing our debt since the mid 90's, while still doing quite well in all major political areas (domestically and internationally). Sure, everyone has debt, but not everyone has a system that's heading for a trainwreck. The economy of Sweden and the economy of the United States are not even remotely comparable in any way. What works for one will not work for another. "Debt" is not a bad thing. Ridiculous, run away spending resulting in hilariously high debt is. On October 25 2011 12:47 aethereality wrote:Wikipedia:
Perry graduated in 1972 with a Bachelor of Science degree in animal science with a 2.5 GPA.
Hahahaha. A public state university, and he couldn't even try hard enough to get a GPA over 3.0? People actually want to elect a slacker? I mean, you'd have to be sitting around all day with your thumb up your ass to get a GPA that low. I truly do not trust people like this to run an entire nation. J.R. Bob Dobbs help us TT Edit: Also, animal science? Hmm.... A 2.5? How the hell... Why in the world would it not be comparable? You have a different system, that much is true. How that leads you to conclude that one could not adopt (let alone compare) the others system, not even in theory, is lost on me however. And I never said debt in itself is a bad thing. Thank you so much for putting words in my mouth. Sweden has a fraction of the GDP and population of the United States. You simply cannot compare the economic ideologies of the two nations at any relevant level. Also I didn't put words in your mouth. I'll be sure to get your permission next time I start another train of thought in the same post. Edit: Not that I'm saying there's all that much wrong with Sweden. They're probably the only EU nation that is worth half a damn (excluding the big three) and their government showed incredible wisdom in rejecting the idea of using the Euro for currency. Actually the government (and almost all political parties) wanted to introduce the Euro. They opted for a national referndum, though, in which the people voted no. The then sitting prime minister even went so far as to say that the people chose "incorrectly", but upheld the (consultative) result of the vote. Thank god for that.
Adverse selection at work. The states that act fiscally responsible, that would be the greatest contribution to a common currency and would benefit the most don't have to join. States that act more irresponsible and with less to lose will want to join the common currency, which in turn might put off the responsible states.
Having said that, from the perspective of 2003, it was irrational for Sweden to opt out.
|
lol, in socialist netherlands if you make over 50k a year you pay 52% income tax
In any case Sale Tax is always 19% hahahahah
We're being fucked so hard by the Govt.
|
On October 26 2011 00:44 frontliner2 wrote:
lol, in socialist netherlands if you make over 50k a year you pay 52% income tax
In any case Sale Tax is always 19% hahahahah
We're being fucked so hard by the Govt.
But it's clearly the better system, amirite? Why do people bash the US for having such low taxes, just because they themselves are so used to being screwed so hard by the government that anything else seems really weird.....The problem with people is they want it both ways, they want no taxes AND free health care, Social Security, etc. I myself would rather keep my money and decide what to do with it, get my own insurance, etc., rather than the ever so thrifty government controlling it and spending it so wisely on things like useless wars and policing the planet. Obviously you need roads and other public services so don't go raging at me, saying I want zero taxes, period. I just want the government to be as minimally involved in every aspect of my life as possible. I want insurance? I should probably get off my butt and get a job.
|
On October 26 2011 00:44 frontliner2 wrote:
lol, in socialist netherlands if you make over 50k a year you pay 52% income tax
In any case Sale Tax is always 19% hahahahah
We're being fucked so hard by the Govt.
But whos country is on the verge of bankruptcy, not the netherlands.
|
On October 25 2011 12:10 benjammin wrote:
let's see.. some countries with a flat tax system: bulgaria, albania, kazakhstan, iraq, hungary, kyrgyzstan, russia, ukraine
countries with a progressive tax system: most of western europe and scandinavia?
i think anyone on earth who knows about the US tax code would agree that it needs simplified, but a flat tax seems like it would do nothing but maintain income disparities. eliminate tax shelters and follow finland's tax bracketing, imo.
well now he'll never be nominated, i can see the ads now
|
On October 25 2011 12:05 memcpy wrote:Show nested quote +In essence he wants to allow taxpayers to choose between one of two systems: the current tax code, or a flat 20% tax + Show Spoiler +
well played sir
|
On October 26 2011 01:05 NoobieOne wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2011 00:44 frontliner2 wrote:
lol, in socialist netherlands if you make over 50k a year you pay 52% income tax
In any case Sale Tax is always 19% hahahahah
We're being fucked so hard by the Govt. But whos country is on the verge of bankruptcy, not the netherlands.
very true,, just most people don't see that shit doens't pay for itself, they think that when national taxes(income for example) goes down, they are paying less taxes, while in fact the government just gives less money back to indivual states and city's, who then have to increase taxes just to not go bankrupt..
most americans(not all, but hey, it only takes 51%). are too fucking stupid to realize the're country is going to shit. that they think when they lower taxes i save more money to buy payTV and watch oprah winfrey all fucking day instead of getting a fucking job. jzus christ people are so stupid(this is general so don't feel offended if you're american) you probably belong to the 49% who isn't a total fucking idiot
|
This whole issue is always and only tackled from a pragmatic standpoint. If a 50% tax rate is the most efficient rate on the laffer curve, then thats what people advocate.
Does no one ever stop to ask if it is MORALLY right to take half of peoples income? Its not money your taking, its time and labour. I personally find it reprehensible that morality is not only disregarded, but it is never even considered.
Should we have a 20% flat tax? The 9-9-9? Keep the progressive tax?
These questions have their root in the root in the public perception that the government OWNS you and can arbitrarily take what ever they want. They are loaded questions. The only reason the tax rate isnt 100% is because they know no one would work.
I might sound like a Ron Paul type, but Ron Paul fails this litmus test too.
Of course to agree with any of this you have to reject utilitarianism, which seems to be the default moral position for most people.
|
On October 25 2011 23:37 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2011 13:17 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 13:04 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:50 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 12:47 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:34 Muffinman53 wrote:On October 25 2011 12:03 jeremysaint wrote:
i swear americans live on another planet sometimes. the usa is going broke because of its ridiculously low taxes. 3rd lowest in western world. you dont need a tax cut, and unless you really hate people with low income you dont need a federal sales tax or any kind of flat tax.
sometimes complex problems and systems don't have a simple answer, and a tax code you pulled out of your ass on a whim will not help your finacial woes. if there are problems with the current system fix the problems, close the loopholes, force republicans to cooperate with the us govt and president for the good of the country, at least once. Yeah it's almost like no other country is in debt. Damn those Americans. Speaking for Sweden, we've been reducing our debt since the mid 90's, while still doing quite well in all major political areas (domestically and internationally). Sure, everyone has debt, but not everyone has a system that's heading for a trainwreck. The economy of Sweden and the economy of the United States are not even remotely comparable in any way. What works for one will not work for another. "Debt" is not a bad thing. Ridiculous, run away spending resulting in hilariously high debt is. On October 25 2011 12:47 aethereality wrote:Wikipedia:
Perry graduated in 1972 with a Bachelor of Science degree in animal science with a 2.5 GPA.
Hahahaha. A public state university, and he couldn't even try hard enough to get a GPA over 3.0? People actually want to elect a slacker? I mean, you'd have to be sitting around all day with your thumb up your ass to get a GPA that low. I truly do not trust people like this to run an entire nation. J.R. Bob Dobbs help us TT Edit: Also, animal science? Hmm.... A 2.5? How the hell... Why in the world would it not be comparable? You have a different system, that much is true. How that leads you to conclude that one could not adopt (let alone compare) the others system, not even in theory, is lost on me however. And I never said debt in itself is a bad thing. Thank you so much for putting words in my mouth. Sweden has a fraction of the GDP and population of the United States. You simply cannot compare the economic ideologies of the two nations at any relevant level. Also I didn't put words in your mouth. I'll be sure to get your permission next time I start another train of thought in the same post. Edit: Not that I'm saying there's all that much wrong with Sweden. They're probably the only EU nation that is worth half a damn (excluding the big three) and their government showed incredible wisdom in rejecting the idea of using the Euro for currency. Actually the government (and almost all political parties) wanted to introduce the Euro. They opted for a national referndum, though, in which the people voted no. The then sitting prime minister even went so far as to say that the people chose "incorrectly", but upheld the (consultative) result of the vote. Thank god for that.
Ah, I was under the impression it was a government choice.
Still, very smart choice.
|
On October 26 2011 00:44 frontliner2 wrote:
lol, in socialist netherlands if you make over 50k a year you pay 52% income tax
In any case Sale Tax is always 19% hahahahah
We're being fucked so hard by the Govt.
youre not getting fucked.
the government is making sure that the wealth gets somehow evenly distributed among the people. as opposed to a 20% flat tax, which basically only benefits the rich. (who clearly dont need the support at all)
|
On October 26 2011 01:29 Equity213 wrote:
This whole issue is always and only tackled from a pragmatic standpoint. If a 50% tax rate is the most efficient rate on the laffer curve, then thats what people advocate.
Does no one ever stop to ask if it is MORALLY right to take half of peoples income? Its not money your taking, its time and labour. I personally find it reprehensible that morality is not only disregarded, but it is never even considered.
Should we have a 20% flat tax? The 9-9-9? Keep the progressive tax?
These questions have their root in the root in the public perception that the government OWNS you and can arbitrarily take what ever they want. They are loaded questions. The only reason the tax rate isnt 100% is because they know no one would work.
I might sound like a Ron Paul type, but Ron Paul fails this litmus test too.
Of course to agree with any of this you have to reject utilitarianism, which seems to be the default moral position for most people.
Maybe it's not morally right to take half of people's income, but it's necessary if they want to run a welfare state and continue funding wars and spending $4 trillion a year. You could try distributing the taxation equally, but the poor people don't have much to give. Trying to gain the majority of your revenue from people that don't own the majority of wealth is unsustainable, IF you want to spend massive amounts of money.
Now if you think taxation in general is morally wrong, I don't think Ron Paul really fails this litmus, as far candidates go he wants to cut taxes more than any of the others. Now if you wanted total anarchy and zero government spending I suppose he fails. Although I'm having trouble finding any anarchy candidates to support. 0_o
|
On October 25 2011 13:04 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2011 12:50 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 12:47 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:34 Muffinman53 wrote:On October 25 2011 12:03 jeremysaint wrote:
i swear americans live on another planet sometimes. the usa is going broke because of its ridiculously low taxes. 3rd lowest in western world. you dont need a tax cut, and unless you really hate people with low income you dont need a federal sales tax or any kind of flat tax.
sometimes complex problems and systems don't have a simple answer, and a tax code you pulled out of your ass on a whim will not help your finacial woes. if there are problems with the current system fix the problems, close the loopholes, force republicans to cooperate with the us govt and president for the good of the country, at least once. Yeah it's almost like no other country is in debt. Damn those Americans. Speaking for Sweden, we've been reducing our debt since the mid 90's, while still doing quite well in all major political areas (domestically and internationally). Sure, everyone has debt, but not everyone has a system that's heading for a trainwreck. The economy of Sweden and the economy of the United States are not even remotely comparable in any way. What works for one will not work for another. "Debt" is not a bad thing. Ridiculous, run away spending resulting in hilariously high debt is. On October 25 2011 12:47 aethereality wrote:Wikipedia:
Perry graduated in 1972 with a Bachelor of Science degree in animal science with a 2.5 GPA.
Hahahaha. A public state university, and he couldn't even try hard enough to get a GPA over 3.0? People actually want to elect a slacker? I mean, you'd have to be sitting around all day with your thumb up your ass to get a GPA that low. I truly do not trust people like this to run an entire nation. J.R. Bob Dobbs help us TT Edit: Also, animal science? Hmm.... A 2.5? How the hell... Why in the world would it not be comparable? You have a different system, that much is true. How that leads you to conclude that one could not adopt (let alone compare) the others system, not even in theory, is lost on me however. And I never said debt in itself is a bad thing. Thank you so much for putting words in my mouth. . Here is a good place to discover how very different two places can be. If you think one system will work worldwide then you are a simpleton. Many things listed here are good ideas. Others are strange, people will think the Swedish system's laws very strange here so implementing them here would break America. Cva.stanford.edu/people/davidbbs/Swedish_facts.html We have no Poland from which to steal dirty power (lol) and we like to drive fast, regardless of the law. Whoops Sweden already doesn't work in America! That's what he's talking about.
|
On October 26 2011 01:29 Equity213 wrote:
This whole issue is always and only tackled from a pragmatic standpoint. If a 50% tax rate is the most efficient rate on the laffer curve, then thats what people advocate.
Does no one ever stop to ask if it is MORALLY right to take half of peoples income? Its not money your taking, its time and labour. I personally find it reprehensible that morality is not only disregarded, but it is never even considered.
Should we have a 20% flat tax? The 9-9-9? Keep the progressive tax?
These questions have their root in the root in the public perception that the government OWNS you and can arbitrarily take what ever they want. They are loaded questions. The only reason the tax rate isnt 100% is because they know no one would work.
I might sound like a Ron Paul type, but Ron Paul fails this litmus test too.
Of course to agree with any of this you have to reject utilitarianism, which seems to be the default moral position for most people.
hmmm, I think most people are not utilitarian unless you are only talking about TL or the internet specifically. Also I don't think you're truly rejecting utilitarianism, it's just that you've crossed in to the realm of the neurological impact of a policy and now you have to find some way to quantify the impact of "unfairness" or whatever.
|
On October 25 2011 13:04 HellRoxYa wrote:Show nested quote +On October 25 2011 12:50 WTFZerg wrote:On October 25 2011 12:47 HellRoxYa wrote:On October 25 2011 12:34 Muffinman53 wrote:On October 25 2011 12:03 jeremysaint wrote:
i swear americans live on another planet sometimes. the usa is going broke because of its ridiculously low taxes. 3rd lowest in western world. you dont need a tax cut, and unless you really hate people with low income you dont need a federal sales tax or any kind of flat tax.
sometimes complex problems and systems don't have a simple answer, and a tax code you pulled out of your ass on a whim will not help your finacial woes. if there are problems with the current system fix the problems, close the loopholes, force republicans to cooperate with the us govt and president for the good of the country, at least once. Yeah it's almost like no other country is in debt. Damn those Americans. Speaking for Sweden, we've been reducing our debt since the mid 90's, while still doing quite well in all major political areas (domestically and internationally). Sure, everyone has debt, but not everyone has a system that's heading for a trainwreck. The economy of Sweden and the economy of the United States are not even remotely comparable in any way. What works for one will not work for another. "Debt" is not a bad thing. Ridiculous, run away spending resulting in hilariously high debt is. On October 25 2011 12:47 aethereality wrote:Wikipedia:
Perry graduated in 1972 with a Bachelor of Science degree in animal science with a 2.5 GPA.
Hahahaha. A public state university, and he couldn't even try hard enough to get a GPA over 3.0? People actually want to elect a slacker? I mean, you'd have to be sitting around all day with your thumb up your ass to get a GPA that low. I truly do not trust people like this to run an entire nation. J.R. Bob Dobbs help us TT Edit: Also, animal science? Hmm.... A 2.5? How the hell... Why in the world would it not be comparable? You have a different system, that much is true. How that leads you to conclude that one could not adopt (let alone compare) the others system, not even in theory, is lost on me however. And I never said debt in itself is a bad thing. Thank you so much for putting words in my mouth. Another good point on this issue I think you may suffer from: http://welcometosweden.blogspot.com/2009/05/sweden-vs-america-battle-continues.html
Notice that Sweden is not commonly known to singlehandedly go into some third world country and dump billions in aid when there was no disaster there other than poverty. Sweden definitely helps out, but do they do near what America does?... The global community likes to focus on what's wrong with America and never gives much thanks for the good we do.
In 1862 AbeLincoln said:
"If you look for the bad in mankind expecting to find it, you surely will."
But of course you never really said America was bad- You're just trying to help, and I find that admirable. Indeed, I personally believe America needs to do what nobody will vote for: Raising tax and cutting spending. We are in too huge of debt to cut taxes yet. Once we're out we can keep the cuts and start to cut taxes along with spending. America is about Independence, that means we have some risk. Those who are afraid of risk, should go somewhere like Sweden!
|
On October 25 2011 13:40 Froadac wrote:
Good god. This makes me sad to even identify with the Republican Party.
Ron Paul may want to cut a toooonnnn of stuff, but at least if you look at the numbers, and that stuff gets cut, money is saved.
Especially the stuff abroad.
Basically this is like "massive random taxcut with ambiguous spending cuts"
If you cut your grass and find a Paul 88 sign, you might be a republican.
I'm more than a lil perplexed how an American politician can not realize the growth alone of goverment spending is absolutely no go. Even John Maynard Keynes would say hold up.
If interest on the debt, gobbles 100% of the tax reciepts, then what? No, we are not there yet, but it's hardly a stretch to say we are on the path there. We're not taxing enough? Spending is spiraling so far from reality. Obama has spend over 4 Trill, in one term, and they want to tax it out of you, then fail to budget, then tax it some more. How about some accountability. No lets raise the debt ceiling 2 trillion. Guess what, we might spend that all before the election. Then what? raise again? This is insane. Take it on the chin and fix it, or ride the train off the cliff. Calling conservatives careless or heartless works with balanced budgets and butter to go with the guns. We're so far from that, the position fails dead on it's face.
Dems and Republicans both love the Fed. Social Programs financed and tanks built.
It's hard for me to take a liberal perspective on in tax plans discussions because it's always about filling the coffers, not about how damn big the coffer has gotten lately.
Rick Perry fails on this gimmick in my horribly interested perspective
Look at the federal grants the Dept of Energy gave out, Solyndra, 500 mill loss, 13 other got money, and they all failed/failing/ were failing, money was supposed to save them. You cannot find a list of any of the other companies either(ala Federal Reserve/half audit) A mirror of the bailout cronyism for banks. Not going to Pick on Rick any further than to say he's not serious, not informed, or just not willing to take on the reality. CDC wants to recommend gardasil to all boys nationwide now, so i guess he will probably stop retreating, and maybe go a lil offensive if anyone brings HPV up again
|
On October 26 2011 01:29 Equity213 wrote:
This whole issue is always and only tackled from a pragmatic standpoint. If a 50% tax rate is the most efficient rate on the laffer curve, then thats what people advocate.
Does no one ever stop to ask if it is MORALLY right to take half of peoples income? Its not money your taking, its time and labour. I personally find it reprehensible that morality is not only disregarded, but it is never even considered.
Should we have a 20% flat tax? The 9-9-9? Keep the progressive tax?
These questions have their root in the root in the public perception that the government OWNS you and can arbitrarily take what ever they want. They are loaded questions. The only reason the tax rate isnt 100% is because they know no one would work.
I might sound like a Ron Paul type, but Ron Paul fails this litmus test too.
Of course to agree with any of this you have to reject utilitarianism, which seems to be the default moral position for most people.
The problem with the Laffer Curve is a lot of people believe it's something like this
![[image loading]](http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/36/Laffer-Curve.svg/745px-Laffer-Curve.svg.png)
When in reality it's more like this
![[image loading]](http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_ksI5H-K89vw/R6cj4j0szvI/AAAAAAAAB-Q/fthndTZLuhU/s400/laffuer-curve.png)
There are just too many variables, ripple effects and events in modern life to accurately predict revenues based on the taxation rate. The theory has been put to the test, and found lacking, numerous times. Like most things related to the economy, the validity of a theory depends more on faith, conviction and dumb luck, than science.
|
Won't this only benefit those making large sums of money? Most people's taxable income rate isn't above 20%. Does anyone know the threshold for the amount of money when you'd start to benefit switching plans, not taking into account any exemptions/deductions, etc? And what marginal rate are you at when it would be good to switch?
|
+ Show Spoiler +On October 26 2011 02:30 Bibdy wrote:Show nested quote +On October 26 2011 01:29 Equity213 wrote:
This whole issue is always and only tackled from a pragmatic standpoint. If a 50% tax rate is the most efficient rate on the laffer curve, then thats what people advocate.
Does no one ever stop to ask if it is MORALLY right to take half of peoples income? Its not money your taking, its time and labour. I personally find it reprehensible that morality is not only disregarded, but it is never even considered.
Should we have a 20% flat tax? The 9-9-9? Keep the progressive tax?
These questions have their root in the root in the public perception that the government OWNS you and can arbitrarily take what ever they want. They are loaded questions. The only reason the tax rate isnt 100% is because they know no one would work.
I might sound like a Ron Paul type, but Ron Paul fails this litmus test too.
Of course to agree with any of this you have to reject utilitarianism, which seems to be the default moral position for most people. The problem with the Laffer Curve is a lot of people believe it's something like this When in reality it's more like this There are just too many variables, ripple effects and events in modern life to accurately predict revenues based on the taxation rate. The theory has been put to the test, and found lacking, numerous times. Like most things related to the economy, the validity of a theory depends more on faith, conviction and dumb luck, than science.
Don't have the energy to take a stand in this debate, however I agree with this post and was just about to write something simular. The subject is simply to complex to be easily calculated or predicted.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://www.snapdrive.net/files/522046/Monopoly/Income%20Tax%20Pay%2010%25%20or%20$200.Gif)
