Reply With Quote
Addressing minimum wage standards is a good starting point.
Thx for the explanation. I see you point regarding the regressive nature of a VAT system. I guess I put too much emphasis on the prebate portion of the plan. It seemed, to me, to address the immediate concerns of an unequal burden.
As for encouraging savings...Ive always thought that was a positive outcome unless its just rampant.
Addressing minimum wage standards is a good starting point.
How about eliminating a minimum wage standard?
God bless. Enough with the libertarian bull . There is a reason it has never been tried in the real world. I'm going to start calling you Don Quixote.
Foxconn? I'll pass.
yoni wouldn't. He'd prefer to continue to puppeteer Adam Smith's visibly dead invisible hand of the market.
You can't get Americans to work for the law-enforced minimum wage, now. What makes you think there'll be a Foxconn if you abolish the minimum wage?
I don't buy it. Most starting wages are now above minimum wage because that's what the market demands. I don't see that changing if you remove a floor on which hardly anyone is standing.
Why bother having a minimum wage when you liberals love illegal aliens taking our jobs anyway?God bless. Enough with the libertarian bull . There is a reason it has never been tried in the real world. I'm going to start calling you Don Quixote.
Great thread. Although I haven't read through it yet. I don't know if it got railroaded.
A big idea of taxes IMO for me is that if you take from someone in the name of taxes, it should go to benefiting every citizen, or tax payer.
I disagree with the idea of taking from everyone and giving to a specific group or subgroup
If no one is being paid the minimum wage, then why get rid of it? You're suggesting the market already dictated the law ineffectual. Old laws sit on the books all the time. Why do you want to waste government time and resources on abolishing laws the free market has already effective abolished?
The fair tax plan is hardly a libertarian ideal... replacing income taxes with consumption taxes doesn't solve anything, it just gives the government a different method of confiscating the money you rightfully earned, tbh....
My solution is FAR more libertarian: no income tax, abolish the IRS, repeal the 16th Amendment.... taxes should not be used as a way to punish hard work, and it's not the federal government's place to do that anyway....
Well thats even more quixotic and untenable. Never going to happen. Join us all in 2012. The majority of Americans have evolved past the Madisonian model of Government. We're not going backwards.
And the federal government operates on...?
Excise taxes, highway tolls, tariffs, user fees, etc.... taxes that exist for a purpose other than simply confiscating what you earned, tbh....
Also, again, if we got rid of the income tax today and replaced it with nothing, the federal budget would only revert back to the mid-1990s..... not too unreasonable, really.....
Except that our current model of government is a devolution - a bloated, arrogant, corrupt mess that warmongers in foreign countries, steals our wealth and civil liberties, and has no respect for our Cons ution..... some people might complain at first that the government isn't doing everything for them anymore, but I think most people would end up loving liberty, tbh.....
That must be why Ron Paul did so well in the Republican primaries tbh. We have evolved.
Still eligible for nomination in Tampa... Ron bless
http://prospect.org/article/progress...-never-heard-0There is a remedy that fixes profit shifting, adopts a territorial tax, and solidifies tax revenue, by adapting a variation of the corporate tax system already used at the state level.
This approach is called “sales factor apportionment” (SFA). Here’s how it works. SFA would apportion U.S. corporate tax on worldwide company income based upon the ratio of U.S. sales to worldwide sales. Despite the complex name, the principle is very simple. SFA disregards all internal corporate transfer pricing between subsidiaries, so a “sale” to a true customer outside the company is all that matters. In other words, the internal profit shifting in our RGC example becomes not only useless but stupid, as it lacks a business rationale. SFA also achieves the Republicans’ territoriality goal in a way that is good for the country while achieving the Democrats’ goal of eliminating tax avoidance and maintaining tax revenue. In fact, the U.S. states adopted this system long ago, to avoid artificial income shifting from high-tax to low-tax states. So it is hardly an alien concept, because U.S. companies already comply with it.
The U.S. corporate tax rate is indeed high among developed economies, but is so ineffective that it collects less revenue as a percent of GDP than foreign countries with lower tax rates. SFA ends the charade.
Sales factor apportionment is the only reliable way to eliminate fiction layered upon fiction—because it only considers income from real sales to real third parties from any part of the consolidated company.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions