| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
The Hammer
Joined: 18 Jan 2003
Location: Ullungdo 37.5 N, 130.9 E, altitude : 223 m
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 6:39 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Mosley wrote: |
Joo: We don't often disagree but...I gotta ask ya: Have you ever been to Canada? Do you realize what a burden the VAT(provincial AND federal) imposes on the average working schmuck? Someone with a modest income(say, 30K a yr.) is basically reduced to poverty what with income taxes, sales taxes, property taxes(assuming he even qualifies for a mortgage w/house prices these days), and a myriad of other involuntary payments to government.
If I were PM, I'd abolish the GST tomorrow. If I were a provincial premier, I'd abolish the PST tomorrow(if I were the Alberta premier there would be no need: no sales tax there). |
I have never been to Canada . I would hope that Business tax cuts would create lots of jobs , increase investment , fire up the economy and get people higher salaries . However I believe in pay as you go something would have to make up for the loss of tax revenue from businesses. |
Basing any strategy on hope is not recommended. |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 7:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
This will discourage consumption , increase investment , increase tax revenue and improve productivity. |
What good is investment if people aren't consuming? What good is increased productivity if people aren't consuming? |
It will be a logical thing for people to do with their money. It will also help out US business because they won't have the burden of taxes any more. It Will also cut the US trade deficit due to less consumption.
Oh by the way less business taxes = more business investment= better products = US products are more competitive = more overseas sales.
Captial gains tax cuts will also boost the US stock market which will also lead to more government revenue. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
newteacher
Joined: 31 May 2007
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 7:51 am Post subject: |
|
|
| mindmetoo wrote: |
| newteacher wrote: |
| I think the real problem with American corporations is the distribution of their profits, not the amount of taxes they're paying. When you consider that the CEO's of most of the large corporations make more money in one day then the average employee makes in a year you have a problem. They're destroying the American middle class by slowly shifting most operations overseas, paying as little as they possibly can to the workers in the States, and keeping the majority of the profits for themselves. I've had enough of the CEO's making hundreds of millions of dollars a year when the average worker is making around 40-70k. It's disgusting. |
That's when workers need to get some gumption and learn how to bargain collectively. The UAW figured it out. "We want a share of that wealth. If you don't give it to us, find yourself 20,000 new employees." |
You're right, but as it stands unions in the States have basically been striped of their power. Even the UAW doesn't have nearly as much power as it did 25 years ago. We need a middle management union in the States. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Juregen
Joined: 30 May 2006
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
This will discourage consumption , increase investment , increase tax revenue and improve productivity. |
What good is investment if people aren't consuming? What good is increased productivity if people aren't consuming? |
You don't think consumption is over the top in Amerika? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:32 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
This will discourage consumption , increase investment , increase tax revenue and improve productivity. |
What good is investment if people aren't consuming? What good is increased productivity if people aren't consuming? |
It will be a logical thing for people to do with their money. It will also help out US business because they won't have the burden of taxes any more. It Will also cut the US trade deficit due to less consumption. |
less consumption = less business income = less business profit = lower wages or layoffs = recession
| Quote: |
Oh by the way less business taxes = more business investment= better products = US products are more competitive = more overseas sales.
Captial gains tax cuts will also boost the US stock market which will also lead to more government revenue. |
How will stock market gains lead to more government revenue? Especially when we stop taxing the profits from those gains?
Is there an actual economist whose theories you are basing this on? Or is it your own construction? It doesn't sound very fundamentally sound. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Juregen wrote: |
| huffdaddy wrote: |
What good is investment if people aren't consuming? What good is increased productivity if people aren't consuming? |
You don't think consumption is over the top in Amerika? |
From a personal philosophical point of view, yes. From a realistic economic point of view, no. Consumption is what drives the economy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Gopher
Joined: 04 Jun 2005
|
| Posted: Mon Jul 02, 2007 3:41 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
This will discourage consumption, increase investment, increase tax revenue, and improve productivity...
...less consumption = less business income = less business profit = lower wages or layoffs = recession
...less business taxes = more business investment = better products = US products are more competitive = more overseas sales. |
| Quote: |
Chung Mee: Opium is my business. The bridge mean more traffic. More traffic mean more money. More money mean more power.
Lawrence Bourne III: Yeah, well, before I commit any of that to memory, would there be anything in this for me?
Chung Mee: Speed is important in business. Time is money.
Lawrence Bourne III: You said opium was money.
Chung Mee: Money is Money.
Lawrence Bourne III: Well then, what is time again? |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 6:43 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Hmmm, what's with the Volunteers quote? I'd expect something a little more highbrow from the Gopher. Where's the Marx? Where's the Smith? Heck, at least give us some Heller. There's gotta be something from Heller that'd fit here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:28 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
less consumption = less business income = less business profit = lower wages or layoffs = recession |
maybe US will make up for it with more business investment and higher stock prices. Also since US business would have more money to spend they would be able to turn out better products which would be more competitive abroad.
But we are getting ahead of the conversation here. So you are saying a value added tax and a tax on imported oil is going to cause a recession? Especially when there would be business tax cuts at the same time?
You are a libertarian aren't you?
| Quote: |
| How will stock market gains lead to more government revenue? Especially when we stop taxing the profits from those gains? |
people will have more money to spend. and the US will attract lots fo
| Quote: |
| Is there an actual economist whose theories you are basing this on? Or is it your own construction? It doesn't sound very fundamentally sound |
It is my own idea.
Less busiess taxes mean US business have more money to spend on infrastructure , and R&D and to hire workers - oh and pay benefits.
You are welcome to compare what I propose to what you think is good anyday.
What I say would cut the US trade deficit and give US business a big subsidy at the same time. More than a few says that Americans over consume and buy to many foreign products and they say that the US trade deficit is harmful to the US in the long run. I don't like protectionism and I am against trade barriers. Cutting consumtion while giving US companies more money to invest in R&D and infrastructure is one way to cut the current account deficit. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
mack4289
Joined: 06 Dec 2006
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 7:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
I feel like I've written this a lot lately but I guess it still needs to be said. If the US has more unions, it becomes a less attractive place to invest in. Companies that can't attract investment stagnate and then those union contracts lose more and more value. Look at any heavily unionized company in America. They're having a harder time competing every year.
Unions' demands are also corrosive to an economy. They inevitably demand iron-clad job security and that pay be tied to experience, not performance. So you almost can't fire them and the longer you keep them, the more you have to pay them. A sound business model, eh? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
huffdaddy
Joined: 25 Nov 2005
|
| Posted: Tue Jul 03, 2007 3:54 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee wrote: |
| Quote: |
less consumption = less business income = less business profit = lower wages or layoffs = recession |
maybe US will make up for it with more business investment and higher stock prices. Also since US business would have more money to spend they would be able to turn out better products which would be more competitive abroad. |
You just don't create higher stock prices. There has to be a reason for them. Like higher revenue and higher profit. Without this, why would the stock prices go up? Where would the businesses get the money to invest?
Aren't businesses already able to write off investment expenses?
| Quote: |
| But we are getting ahead of the conversation here. So you are saying a value added tax and a tax on imported oil is going to cause a recession? Especially when there would be business tax cuts at the same time? |
I don't believe in a VAT because it's regressive. A tax on oil could cause a recession, if it was high enough. There aren't enough substitutes in America for people to shift to.
| Quote: |
| You are a libertarian aren't you? |
No.
| Quote: |
| Quote: |
| Is there an actual economist whose theories you are basing this on? Or is it your own construction? It doesn't sound very fundamentally sound |
It is my own idea. |
Yeah, that's what I figured. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee
Joined: 25 May 2003
|
| Posted: Wed Jul 04, 2007 6:24 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| You just don't create higher stock prices. There has to be a reason for them. Like higher revenue and higher profit. Without this, why would the stock prices go up? Where would the businesses get the money to invest? |
Less taxes more money for business to make better products
| Quote: |
| Aren't businesses already able to write off investment expenses? |
not enough
| Quote: |
| I don't believe in a VAT because it's regressive. A tax on oil could cause a recession, if it was high enough. There aren't enough substitutes in America for people to shift to. |
There is something like a tax on oil already only it is supporting the enemies of the US in the mideast.
w/o oil Al Qaeda would have to sell drugs to survive. w/o oil Iran would make North Korea seem like a rich country.
| Quote: |
| You are a libertarian aren't you? |
| Quote: |
| Yeah, that's what I figured. |
well what do you have in mind? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
