Taxes, the Economy, Healthcare, and Iraq [Archive]

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 03:06 PM

Hi, I've been lurking on ST for about two years now and am finally putting in my .02.

Taxes and it's effects on the economy

While I fall under Obama's definition of middle class and would receive the benefits of his proposed tax cuts for the middle class I have to agree with McCain on this one. Cutting business taxes is the only way to stimulate the economy and create new US based jobs.

I work as a tax advisor for a large international company based in central Texas and see the effects of (and make decisions on) business taxes as it relates to jobs and local economies everyday. The tax burden currently placed on US businesses is one of the highest in the world and directly affects a business' bottom line. We continually have meetings and discussions on how to minimize the company's taxes and unfortunately that normally means moving jobs outside of the country. Cutting business taxes not only creates the possibilities for more jobs at a large company, it creates numerous opportunities for small businesses that are direct vendors for the company and indirect vendors for the company's employees (i.e. - restaurants, dry cleaners, and other stores opening near the large business to cater to the employees). Examples of these economies can be seen in San Antonio; Toyota chose San Antonio because of the tax packages that were offered to it but the mere mention of a large company going to the south side revitalized business on that side of town which created more jobs.

Healthcare

More government intervention is not needed in order for everyone to be able to have access to affordable healthcare. Good old American capitalism is what is needed.

Currently, clinics make up for unpaid medical bills by overcharging the insurance companies (who normally pay out an amount much more than what the service costs) which in turn drives everyone's costs up. The solution is to make health care providers display the prices for their services up front and people in need of health care can choose who they go to and how much they are willing to pay. This competition would drive the costs of the services down to the point that the market is willing to bear. Much like choosing where you are going to get your oil changed you would be able to say "Why are you charging $500 to set a broken arm when the guy down the street only charges $300?"

Iraq

Right or wrong we went over there, and are still there but that does not mean you pull out before the job is done. History has shown that either a dictator type leader or another country that does not have good intentions will move in if we pull out before the Iraqis are ready to run the country themselves. An example of this happening is Afghanistan. The US basically left them to straighten themselves out after the Afghan/USSR war which left an opening for the Taliban to come in and take control.

clambake

09-05-2008, 04:18 PM

Hi, I've been lurking on ST for about two years now and am finally putting in my .02.

[quote]Taxes and it's effects on the economy

While I fall under Obama's definition of middle class and would receive the benefits of his proposed tax cuts for the middle class I have to agree with McCain on this one. Cutting business taxes is the only way to stimulate the economy and create new US based jobs.
we did that and check the #s.

I work as a tax advisor for a large international company based in central Texas
who's that?

Toyota chose San Antonio because of the tax packages that were offered to it but the mere mention of a large company going to the south side revitalized business on that side of town which created more jobs.
interesting choice for your example.....toyota......their benefits are a tad obvious, don't you think?

Healthcare

More government intervention is not needed in order for everyone to be able to have access to affordable healthcare. Good old American capitalism is what is needed.
you like the way it's working now?

Currently, clinics make up for unpaid medical bills by overcharging the insurance companies (who normally pay out an amount much more than what the service costs) which in turn drives everyone's costs up. The solution is to make health care providers display the prices for their services up front and people in need of health care can choose who they go to and how much they are willing to pay. This competition would drive the costs of the services down to the point that the market is willing to bear. Much like choosing where you are going to get your oil changed you would be able to say "Why are you charging $500 to set a broken arm when the guy down the street only charges $300?"
are you suggesting the creation of a federal hmo police squad with teeth?

Iraq

Right or wrong we went over there,
need you say more?

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 04:50 PM

we did that and check the #s.

We didn't cut enough...there are countries that offer 0% corporate income taxes for 50 years for companies in order to stimulate job growth.

who's that?

A large international company based in central texas...the admins can check my email and verify but I'm not disclosing where i work.

interesting choice for your example.....toyota......their benefits are a tad obvious, don't you think?

Was just making it simple...these effects can be seen where any large company is located (inside or outside the US).

you like the way it's working now?

Personally...it doesn't matter to me since i have a good healthcare plan and am in good general health. But this is the only way to lower the actual costs of healthcare. THe actual costs (including a decent profit percentage) are nowhere near the prices that the insurance companies are willing to pay out. Doctors that I know agree with this also. The cost of doing a simple blood test is less than $10 but the insurance providers pay over $100 for these services.

are you suggesting the creation of a federal hmo police squad with teeth?

No, just a system where the patients know how much a clinic charges for services before they decide to purchase that clinics services. If you had $1500 in a medical spending account and had the freedom to choose which provider to go to based on cost/quality of service you would go with the one that meets your needs the best since you know it is coming out of your spending account. Currently, most people don't care how much the doctor charges, they just care about their own copay amount. So if a doctor overcharges on their services it doesn't affect the patient because their insurance pays the difference (or most of it). This system drives the prices of the services up since doctors/clinics know that they can charge more than the actual value of a service and still get paid for it.

2centsworth

09-05-2008, 05:02 PM

Anti.Hero

09-05-2008, 05:06 PM

2centsworth

09-05-2008, 05:12 PM

Common sense doesn't work in this country. The masses are licking their chops to attack "BIG EVIL BUSINESS" and are too stupid to comprehend most of your well done post.

It'll take a collapse before the masses wise up. Then again, it only took $4 gas for people to say "fuck the birds". :lol

They should just split the country in two and let people choose who they want their leaders to be. We'll see which side can sustain itself for 5 years.

it's bad enough only having a two party system. No way I want a one party system.

Anti.Hero

09-05-2008, 05:14 PM

it's bad enough only having a two party system. No way I want a one party system.

Yes but the dems are going far-left, the reps are turning into moderate dems/"neo-cons" :lol

Just divide them in two and you will have a narrower spectrum for each party.

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 05:31 PM

I'm with you on taxes, but against you on healthcare. The following article talks a little bit about why capitalism will not solve our healthcare crises.
http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18802 (http://www.nybooks.com/articles/18802)

Interesting...many things that i agree with. But not so sure I trust an analysis that doesn't mention the costs of malpractice suits. Doctors are so scared of getting sued nowadays that if you go into the hospital for heartburn they check you for everything that begins with "H".

clambake

09-05-2008, 05:35 PM

We didn't cut enough...there are countries that offer 0% corporate income taxes for 50 years for companies in order to stimulate job growth.
which is why a candidate has proposed large tax cuts and incentives to companies(big and small)to keep the US as their sole base of physical operations.

Personally...it doesn't matter to me since i have a good healthcare plan and am in good general health. But this is the only way to lower the actual costs of healthcare. THe actual costs (including a decent profit percentage) are nowhere near the prices that the insurance companies are willing to pay out. Doctors that I know agree with this also. The cost of doing a simple blood test is less than $10 but the insurance providers pay over $100 for these services.
i agree completely with your fleecing analogy, but this would require stomping on some very big toes.

No, just a system where the patients know how much a clinic charges for services before they decide to purchase that clinics services. If you had $1500 in a medical spending account and had the freedom to choose which provider to go to based on cost/quality of service you would go with the one that meets your needs the best since you know it is coming out of your spending account. Currently, most people don't care how much the doctor charges, they just care about their own copay amount. So if a doctor overcharges on their services it doesn't affect the patient because their insurance pays the difference (or most of it). This system drives the prices of the services up since doctors/clinics know that they can charge more than the actual value of a service and still get paid for it.
that would require a complete re-education of the american public. in other words.....that would piss off the red states.

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 05:47 PM

Common sense doesn't work in this country. The masses are licking their chops to attack "BIG EVIL BUSINESS" and are too stupid to comprehend most of your well done post.

It'll take a collapse before the masses wise up. Then again, it only took $4 gas for people to say "fuck the birds". :lol

Thanks!!! This is the one flaw with democracy...once the masses realize that they can get something for free (i.e. - welfare, universal health care, whatever) they start voting for whatever benefits THEM and not the health and stability of the country.

They should just split the country in two and let people choose who they want their leaders to be. We'll see which side can sustain itself for 5 years.

I like it:toast. How did N. Korea and S. Korea do??

clambake

09-05-2008, 05:56 PM

Just divide them in two and you will have a narrower spectrum for each party.

one side would be burdened by tree huggers.

the other would be devoured by the "bubba" plight.

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 06:36 PM

I work as a tax advisor for a large international company based in central Texas and see the effects of (and make decisions on) business taxes as it relates to jobs and local economies everyday. The tax burden currently placed on US businesses is one of the highest in the world and directly affects a business' bottom line. We continually have meetings and discussions on how to minimize the company's taxes and unfortunately that normally means moving jobs outside of the country. Cutting business taxes not only creates the possibilities for more jobs at a large company, it creates numerous opportunities for small businesses that are direct vendors for the company and indirect vendors for the company's employees (i.e. - restaurants, dry cleaners, and other stores opening near the large business to cater to the employees). Examples of these economies can be seen in San Antonio; Toyota chose San Antonio because of the tax packages that were offered to it but the mere mention of a large company going to the south side revitalized business on that side of town which created more jobs.

Blah....unless your primary consumers are in other countries then you pay a sort of tax anyway to get your good back here to the U.S. to market...what we need is to raise import taxes on businesses that choose to locate to place like Mexico that have much lower wage demands...I mean, lets face facts, you can make all the cheap shit in Mexico and China that you want, but unless you have a market to sell it in those goods aren't gonna make shit for you....meanwhile, Manufacturing in the U.S. is at all time lows - those are jobs that pay wages and carry benefits that support families - instead we are stuck with a steady stream of Bushco service economy jobs that offer no job security, no benefits and no protection for families...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 06:39 PM

I work as a tax advisor for a large international company based in central Texas and see the effects of (and make decisions on) business taxes as it relates to jobs and local economies everyday.

Let's face facts, if American businesses cared more for Americans and American jobs than they did for their own bottom lines they wouldn't pay tax advisors like you millions of dollars to skirt U.S. tax laws...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 06:43 PM

Examples of these economies can be seen in San Antonio; Toyota chose San Antonio because of the tax packages that were offered to it but the mere mention of a large company going to the south side revitalized business on that side of town which created more jobs.

The only reason Toyota located to SA was because Texas is a non-Union state and San Antonio had excess power capacity thanks to our 'socialized' but very successful power company...same for microsoft and all the other businesses in Westover Hills...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 06:46 PM

Currently, clinics make up for unpaid medical bills by overcharging the insurance companies (who normally pay out an amount much more than what the service costs) which in turn drives everyone's costs up. The solution is to make health care providers display the prices for their services up front and people in need of health care can choose who they go to and how much they are willing to pay. This competition would drive the costs of the services down to the point that the market is willing to bear. Much like choosing where you are going to get your oil changed you would be able to say "Why are you charging $500 to set a broken arm when the guy down the street only charges $300?"

The problem isn't people who can pay, or clinics ripping insurance companies, the problem is people who can't pay......people who can't pay tend to let health care problems perpetuate until they get much, much worse.....then taxpayers get stuck paying for expensive emergency care instead of much less expensive preventative care...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 06:50 PM

Right or wrong we went over there, and are still there but that does not mean you pull out before the job is done. History has shown that either a dictator type leader or another country that does not have good intentions will move in if we pull out before the Iraqis are ready to run the country themselves. An example of this happening is Afghanistan. The US basically left them to straighten themselves out after the Afghan/USSR war which left an opening for the Taliban to come in and take control.

If history has shown anything it is that the Middle East is a cluster-fuck of corrupt governments and foreign self-interest.....that almost always drives 'occupying forces' into complete and utter bankruptcy...

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 07:04 PM

Blah....unless your primary consumers are in other countries then you pay a sort of tax anyway to get your good back here to the U.S. to market...

The goal is to minimize taxes not eliminate them. Of course there are some taxes that go to the US, but moving jobs overseas reduces those taxes substantially.

what we need is to raise import taxes on businesses that choose to locate to place like Mexico that have much lower wage demands...

So you want to pay $10 for something at walmart that normally costs $2? Talk about the poor getting poorer...

The amount of the tax needed would have to be astronomical for it to force companies to move their manufacturing back to the US.

Manufacturing in the U.S. is at all time lows - those are jobs that pay wages and carry benefits that support families - instead we are stuck with a steady stream of Bushco service economy jobs that offer no job security, no benefits and no protection for families...

Exactly my point...people need to realize that we are in a GLOBAL economy now. The country's that offer the best tax packages in order to lure in businesses are the ones that succeed in this day and age. The US didn't see it coming and kept on taxing business.

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 07:07 PM

Let's face facts, if American businesses cared more for Americans and American jobs than they did for their own bottom lines they wouldn't pay tax advisors like you millions of dollars to skirt U.S. tax laws...

They do care about americans...americans demand low priced products and refuse to pay for higher priced items that are manufactured domestically.

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 07:13 PM

The only reason Toyota located to SA was because Texas is a non-Union state and San Antonio had excess power capacity thanks to our 'socialized' but very successful power company...same for microsoft and all the other businesses in Westover Hills...

They all received lucrative multi year sales and property tax incentives, which in TX is the norm.

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 07:56 PM

Let's face facts, if American businesses cared more for Americans and American jobs than they did for their own bottom lines they wouldn't pay tax advisors like you millions of dollars to skirt U.S. tax laws...

:lol:lol:lol Liberals...not only do they expect the government to take care of them but now they also expect businesses to do the same!!! The world isn't one big UNICEF.:lmao

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 08:08 PM

So you want to pay $10 for something at walmart that normally costs $2? Talk about the poor getting poorer...

The amount of the tax needed would have to be astronomical for it to force companies to move their manufacturing back to the US.

I would rather not have 8-10-11 children working in 3rd country sweatshops just so I can buy a disposable razor for a few cents less than it would cost to produce in the U.S. as I'm sure many people would - plus, those jobs (and dollars) stay in the U.S. generating more business and more jobs instead of in some multinational companies Canary Island fund...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 08:10 PM

Exactly my point...people need to realize that we are in a GLOBAL economy now. The country's that offer the best tax packages in order to lure in businesses are the ones that succeed in this day and age. The US didn't see it coming and kept on taxing business.

We're not in a global economy, the multinational companies that bribe our politicians to fuck us all over are in a 'global economy'.....the U.S. runs multi-billion dollar deficits year in and year out which translates to money that would otherwise stay here and generate more jobs fleeing to third world shitholes..

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 08:12 PM

They do care about americans...americans demand low priced products and refuse to pay for higher priced items that are manufactured domestically.

they don't give a shit about you, me or any other flag-waving American...the quicker you and other globalists realize that, the quicker we can start turning our economy around...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 08:13 PM

They all received lucrative multi year sales and property tax incentives, which in TX is the norm.

See post #22...

Nbadan

09-05-2008, 08:16 PM

Liberals...not only do they expect the government to take care of them but now they also expect businesses to do the same!!! The world isn't one big UNICEF

....and globalists think that they are saving the world by employing Asian women and children in sub-human sweetshops for less than a dollar a day and abetting greedy politicians to put the will of multinational companies over the will of the people of this country...

KenMcCoy

09-05-2008, 10:22 PM

....and globalists think that they are saving the world by employing Asian women and children in sub-human sweetshops for less than a dollar a day and abetting greedy politicians to put the will of multinational companies over the will of the people of this country...

Find 10 things in your house that were made entirely in the US...don't rush, i'll wait...

Businesses are in business for one thing, and that is to make money. I believe that most of the American born companies that choose to outsource jobs overseas would love to bring most of them back to the US; but that isn't going to happen until taxes are lowered making it feasible fiscally.

clambake

09-06-2008, 12:23 AM

Find 10 things in your house that were made entirely in the US...don't rush, i'll wait...
nostalgia of the american dream was suffocated some time ago.

Businesses are in business for one thing, and that is to make money.
mostly american business. I spent some time as a hammer for bechtol, so you want to make it global. why do you avoid the easy pickings?

I believe that most of the American born companies that choose to outsource jobs overseas would love to bring most of them back to the US; but that isn't going to happen until taxes are lowered making it feasible fiscally.
horseshit. you're not a very good tax consultant poster if you're not willing to divulge your clients aspirations.

2centsworth

09-06-2008, 09:31 AM

Ken,

You're arguing with communist.

boutons_

09-06-2008, 10:20 AM

"I believe that most of the American born companies that choose to outsource jobs overseas would love to bring most of them back to the US;"

"There they go again", with their evidence-free, faith-based "believe" bullshit.

The only reason a corp would re-patriot a job is to reducie costs, to increase profits, not for some altruistic, philanthropic policy of hiring Americans just because they're Americans. Jobs are input to production which are subject to continuous pressure to be eliminated, and under-paid, and over-worked.

If the US govt wanted to increase domestic jobs, it could start by taxing fuel for ships which is now on corporate welfare with tax-free fuel. High fuel+tax costs would make importing more expensive, facilitating the "make it here" above "buy it over there" decision.

clambake

09-06-2008, 10:27 AM

Ken,

You're arguing with communist.

i drive a car built in 1999

i don't have a flat screen tv

i'm heavily invested in amer. stock

gee......i do resemble today's communist! :lol

KenMcCoy

09-06-2008, 10:45 AM

Ken,

You're arguing with communist.

Yeah...I'm done there's no use. The only reason I posted was to give a first hand account that corporate tax cuts DO have a direct impact on jobs in the US. If people want to believe otherise, that's fine. They can fingerpoint and blame big business all they want...but at least show me one economic theory that raising corporate taxes creates new jobs.

spurster

09-06-2008, 11:01 AM

All the promises from both parties to cut my taxes and your taxes doesn't make sense to me. We're already running huge deficits (while fighting two wars). The last time I checked, paying off a debt costs more than paying off the bill right away. To my mind then, these tax cuts are really tax increases in the long run. As for stimulating the economy, if the huge deficits we currently have (and have had for most of BushCo) aren't stimulating the economy that much, how does a bigger deficit change that?

KenMcCoy

09-06-2008, 11:07 AM

I agree. If the main goal is to reduce the deficit, the best thing to do would be to raise everyone's taxes but no one would vote for someone proposing that.

Yonivore

09-06-2008, 11:53 AM

I agree. If the main goal is to reduce the deficit, the best thing to do would be to raise everyone's taxes but no one would vote for someone proposing that.
If you want to reduce the deficit, reduce spending. President Bush has already proven that CUTTING taxes increases federal revenues...not raising them.

Raising taxes <> increased revenues.

KenMcCoy

09-06-2008, 12:13 PM

Yeah that goes straight to my point that cutting taxes increases jobs thus increasing revenues.

Nbadan

09-07-2008, 02:25 AM

Find 10 things in your house that were made entirely in the US...don't rush, i'll wait...

Businesses are in business for one thing, and that is to make money. I believe that most of the American born companies that choose to outsource jobs overseas would love to bring most of them back to the US; but that isn't going to happen until taxes are lowered making it feasible fiscally.

I think you overestimate the the ethics of business...why pay an American $15/hour plus benefits, plus social security, plus having to deal with American regulations when they can make the goods in China, Mexico or some other third world shit-hole for a fraction of the costs? It's not about taxes, countries in Europe have much higher tax rates than the U.S. but they also have tighter import restrictions to protect native businesses...

Nbadan

09-07-2008, 02:29 AM

If you want to reduce the deficit, reduce spending. President Bush has already proven that CUTTING taxes increases federal revenues...not raising them.

Raising taxes <> increased revenues.

Cutting taxes without concurrent cuts in spending only increases the size of the national deficit...you want business to expand in the U.S., trim spending on military endeavors that don't benefit anyone but a few powerful businessmen with political connections and quit printing money like it's toilet paper...during economic expansions the government is supposed to pay down the debt not increase it...Clinton was on the right track...

Nbadan

09-07-2008, 02:35 AM

Yeah that goes straight to my point that cutting taxes increases jobs thus increasing revenues.

Cutting taxes does stimulate the economy, but only when taxes are very high which hasn't been the case for many years....businesses get to make a lot of deductions that you and I don't get, plus they hide many of their profits in offshore accounts...every few years a Republican President will give them amnesty to bring the cash back into the U.S. system without risk of forfeiture....

KenMcCoy

09-07-2008, 11:57 AM

...Clinton was on the right track...

Sure...Clinton was on the right track:rolleyes...Bush has to bail out the mortgage industry problems that Bill Clinton created.

Billionaire Sanford I. Weill, who according to Louis Uchitelle (http://select.nytimes.com/search/restricted/article?res=F00C13F6345A0C768DDDAE0894DF404482) made "Citigroup into the most powerful financial institution since the House of Morgan a century ago," has what I call the Wall of Me leading to his office, which he has decorated with tributes to him, including a dozen framed magazine covers. A major trophy is the pen Bill Clinton used to sign the repeal of the Glass-Steagall Act, a move which allowed Weill to create Citigroup.

http://www.progressivehistorians.com/2007/11/bill-clintons-role-in-mortgage-crisis.html

Look at the sub-prime mortgage numbers before and after Clinton repealed the Glass-Steagall Act.

http://mises.org/images4/2555Fig01.jpg

KenMcCoy

09-07-2008, 12:06 PM

Do you understand how long it takes to turn around an economy??? Clinton gets credit for the benefits of the economic policy of Reagan and HW Bush. Now...W is stuck with cleaning up Clinton's mess AND having to deal with the aftermath of 9/11 which might not have happened if Clinton had had any balls after the USS Cole attack.

Wild Cobra

09-07-2008, 08:29 PM

I think you overestimate the the ethics of business...why pay an American $15/hour plus benefits, plus social security, plus having to deal with American regulations when they can make the goods in China, Mexico or some other third world shit-hole for a fraction of the costs? It's not about taxes, countries in Europe have much higher tax rates than the U.S. but they also have tighter import restrictions to protect native businesses...

But it's taxes that make the difference. The difference in wages alone are about the same difference as shipping costs. Most other countries use a consumer based consumption tax for good. That means they leave their country untaxed. Since we use a production based tax, we don't tax the product coming in. Imports under these conditions effectively have no taxes applied, except for the business profits here. Now our products get taxed as they are produced as well. Now it's even worse for the products we export. We tax them when produced, adding costs, then the overseas retailer taxes them again, making USA products too expensive to buy elsewhere.

The overvalued dollar of the past also didn't help. Now that the dollar has been dropping, the USA is becoming more competitive. If we were to change our income (productive) tax to something like the Fair Tax (consumption tax), then we would truly be competitive with the rest of the world.

Cutting taxes does stimulate the economy, but only when taxes are very high which hasn't been the case for many years....businesses get to make a lot of deductions that you and I don't get, plus they hide many of their profits in offshore accounts...every few years a Republican President will give them amnesty to bring the cash back into the U.S. system without risk of forfeiture....

Almost right. Cutting any tax level does stimulate the economy. Maximum economic growth would be at 0% tax. The democrats seem to think that more revenue is generated with higher taxes. However, if you take 100% of the wages, people will simply not work. Again, a 0% revenue. There is then no revenue for the government to operate with. As tax rates increase, economic growth diminishes and government revenues increase. At least until the drop in the economy becomes greater than the increase in revenue from a smaller economy. Raising taxes looks like on the surface to increase revenue. What happens is it also decreases the incentive to be productive.

What is the best tax rate? I can only guess. I would say 10% is too low. 15% is about right, give or take a little, but that the 25% and higher tax rates are too high. Now that's for the federal tax rate to provide the best revenue and economy. Combined with all taxes, probably about 20%-25% for optimum revenue and economy balance. It doesn't help to redistribute wealth like we have been doing with "tax credits" and "earned income credit." These programs need to be eliminated.

KenMcCoy

09-07-2008, 08:41 PM

But it's taxes that make the difference. The difference in wages alone are about the same difference as shipping costs. Most other countries use a consumer based consumption tax for good. That means they leave their country untaxed. Since we use a production based tax, we don't tax the product coming in. Imports under these conditions effectively have no taxes applied, except for the business profits here. Now our products get taxed as they are produced as well. Now it's even worse for the products we export. We tax them when produced, adding costs, then the overseas retailer taxes them again, making USA products too expensive to buy elsewhere.

The overvalued dollar of the past also didn't help. Now that the dollar has been dropping, the USA is becoming more competitive. If we were to change our income (productive) tax to something like the Fair Tax (consumption tax), then we would truly be competitive with the rest of the world.

Almost right. Cutting any tax level does stimulate the economy. Maximum economic growth would be at 0% tax. The democrats seem to think that more revenue is generated with higher taxes. However, if you take 100% of the wages, people will simply not work. Again, a 0% revenue. There is then no revenue for the government to operate with. As tax rates increase, economic growth diminishes and government revenues increase. At least until the drop in the economy becomes greater than the increase in revenue from a smaller economy. Raising taxes looks like on the surface to increase revenue. What happens is it also decreases the incentive to be productive.

What is the best tax rate? I can only guess. I would say 10% is too low. 15% is about right, give or take a little, but that the 25% and higher tax rates are too high. Now that's for the federal tax rate to provide the best revenue and economy. Combined with all taxes, probably about 20%-25% for optimum revenue and economy balance. It doesn't help to redistribute wealth like we have been doing with "tax credits" and "earned income credit." These programs need to be eliminated.

:toast well put...

KenMcCoy

09-07-2008, 08:51 PM