"Social programs... should be managed and created by society not the government."
Great idea; but who has the time. I know! We'll have each region of our society select a number of its members to represent their views; we'll have just those people hammer out the details of this stuff on our behaf, so the rest of us can bet back to what we're doing.
The flat tax component of the FairTax is significantly lower than the current top marginal tax rate, so in the limit, as the low-end "prebate" becomes less meaningful as a percentage of spending (and in practicality, above the 97th percentile or so) the actual tax burden on the rich is lower.
Report what you earn. Report what you consume (or alternately, what you save; income = consumption + savings) and tax it, on a progressive schedule, like we do now with income. It works out the same as the income tax, but the only deduction is for savings.
Income taxes have black markets too; ever hear of "under the table"?
Over 10 years (1999-2009), North Dakota paid $53.9 billion in taxes and received $102.6 billion, with a gross product of $31.6 billion in 2009; that's a tax SUBSIDY of **154%** of product.
Meanwhile, California paid $4,249.5 billion, received only $3,913.3 billion, in an economy of $1,847.0 billion; a net tax PAID of 18% of its product.
North Dakota is a free-loader; most "red" states are (exceptions include: Georgia, Texas.) California is paying their bills; most "blue" states are (exceptions include: Vermont, West Virginia.)
You break up the US into 50 (51? 52?) separate nations, and states like North Dakota become the equivalent of Greece to California's... I dunno, France? (New York is clearly the Germany here.)
No. We spend a lot on law enforcement, courts, and prisons, but not nearly so much as replace the single-largest source of government income. Nice "pipe" dream though.
You mock faux-neutrality, and then trot out the most right-wing talking point; that no taxes should ever be increased.
This isn't *an* economist. This is a very *diverse group* of economist and the things they can agree on. There are economist who very much think government spending being as high as it is is not inherently bad.
Also, look up "perfect market" and "externalities" vis-a-vis a carbon tax.
SS can pay 100% of its liabilities until 2037, and still pay 75% of its debts afterward. That shortfall after 2037 is a problem, but a very solvable one.
More or less agree, but I just wanted to point out that while the US headline corporate tax is high, the effective rate paid by US corporations is very low, because of all the tax deductions in our code. (You may already know this, just pointing it out for those following along.)
"The PIGS are in trouble because they spend more than they earn."
No.
In Greece, yes, but Greece is not all four nations. Spain and Ireland were in fact doing everything "right" before the crash. Their problem was a major housing bubble. (Like the US had. But since there's no Fannie/Freddie for the right-wing to pin the blame on, they just paint them with the same brush as Greece and hope no one will notice.)
Real interest rates are negative on 10 year US Bonds. So we should borrow more money.
And:
Interest rates are low and yet unemployment is high. So we should print more money.
Right now, these won't collapse the economy, they would help it. But this article is more about the long-term and is explicitly addressing the best way to get people to pay for the stuff they want.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
While you think of that, here's the Nation Bureau of Economic Research's paper on the link between the two: http://www.nber.org/bah/summer04/w10466.html
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
Great idea; but who has the time. I know! We'll have each region of our society select a number of its members to represent their views; we'll have just those people hammer out the details of this stuff on our behaf, so the rest of us can bet back to what we're doing.
Oh. Wait.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re:
I specified my time frame for a reason. N. Dakota has found some oil recently; good on them, but it doesn't appreciably change the long-term trend.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: regarding 2 of the proposals
Wikipedia has a chart:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax#Distribution_of_tax_burden
http://en.wikipedia.org/wik i/File:NRST-percentile.png
The poor (under $15k) and also the rich (over $200k) come out better off; those in between do not.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re:
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re:
Income taxes have black markets too; ever hear of "under the table"?
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re:
Meanwhile, California paid $4,249.5 billion, received only $3,913.3 billion, in an economy of $1,847.0 billion; a net tax PAID of 18% of its product.
North Dakota is a free-loader; most "red" states are (exceptions include: Georgia, Texas.) California is paying their bills; most "blue" states are (exceptions include: Vermont, West Virginia.)
You break up the US into 50 (51? 52?) separate nations, and states like North Dakota become the equivalent of Greece to California's... I dunno, France? (New York is clearly the Germany here.)
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
Asking why it's STILL 65 is silly. Would you like to ask why it was initially 65?
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Most of these ideas are bad
This isn't *an* economist. This is a very *diverse group* of economist and the things they can agree on. There are economist who very much think government spending being as high as it is is not inherently bad.
Also, look up "perfect market" and "externalities" vis-a-vis a carbon tax.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Ok - I'm confused.
So, tax havens and one oil monarchy.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Hmmm
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re:
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Ok - I'm confused.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Re: Re: Whoa...
No.
In Greece, yes, but Greece is not all four nations. Spain and Ireland were in fact doing everything "right" before the crash. Their problem was a major housing bubble. (Like the US had. But since there's no Fannie/Freddie for the right-wing to pin the blame on, they just paint them with the same brush as Greece and hope no one will notice.)
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: Re: Bad writing.
And are you implying that VA heart surgeons aren't good?
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re:
Unless you're suggesting an EU-style monetary union without fiscal union? Because that's working great...
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re:
Real interest rates are negative on 10 year US Bonds. So we should borrow more money.
And:
Interest rates are low and yet unemployment is high. So we should print more money.
Right now, these won't collapse the economy, they would help it. But this article is more about the long-term and is explicitly addressing the best way to get people to pay for the stuff they want.
On the post: When Every Practical Economic Idea Is Political Suicide, Something's Wrong With Politics
Re: How?
Next >>