The Republicans are playing a cynical political game with hugely high economic stakes
07-07-2011, 09:56 PM
#23
Flat tax would be an incentive for people to work harder, thereby increasing GDP.
An inverse tax would actually FORCE people to work harder.
You want the economy to do a complete 180 in 1 year? Here's how:
Change the tax rate to an inverse tax rate.
Completely eliminate federal minimum wage.
Completely eliminate entitlements for low/no wage earners.
If government forced you to earn your keep, you would too.
o Businesses would have an incentive to hire people because the price fix on labor would go away.
o "40 hour work week" would become complete bullshit, because the more you earn, the higher % you would get to keep
o If the first $100/week were taxed at 100%, the next $100 taxed at 50%, then 25%, 12.5%, and finally a final tax rate of 6.25% for everything above, consider the incentive of people to start and run a business even if they're only just breaking into the top tax bracket
$100/week = $0 take home
$200/week = $50
$300/week = $125
$400/week = $213.50
$500/week = $307.25
$600/week = $401.00
There are so many more hourly employees than there are millionaires in the US, taxing the first $5200/year that a person makes is absolutely genious.
The incentive to work harder to earn more in such an economy is huge - initially wage equilibriums will probably drop to around $5/hour, but the motivation for individuals to start businesses, go into the top tax bracket and far beyond it, and hire employees to help them make even more money will drastically raise the demand curve for labor, and have skilled individual employees easily breaking into the top tax bracket and beyond.
Individuals will have to either "get in" or "get out", and individuals will start voting for people who will cut government expenditures so they can eventually pay less in taxes. The highest income earners are still paying FAR MORE in income taxes than laborers too.
Remember when the United States was by far the fastest growing economy in the world? And then remember what happened when government decided to stop being pro-business, and instead started to be pro-worker?
Some people will die because they are economic leeches instead of being economic stimulants, but economically speaking, we don't need them anyways... Morally speaking, it will force the people that support these people to work more hours.
An inverse tax would actually FORCE people to work harder.
You want the economy to do a complete 180 in 1 year? Here's how:
Change the tax rate to an inverse tax rate.
Completely eliminate federal minimum wage.
Completely eliminate entitlements for low/no wage earners.
If government forced you to earn your keep, you would too.
o Businesses would have an incentive to hire people because the price fix on labor would go away.
o "40 hour work week" would become complete bullshit, because the more you earn, the higher % you would get to keep
o If the first $100/week were taxed at 100%, the next $100 taxed at 50%, then 25%, 12.5%, and finally a final tax rate of 6.25% for everything above, consider the incentive of people to start and run a business even if they're only just breaking into the top tax bracket
$100/week = $0 take home
$200/week = $50
$300/week = $125
$400/week = $213.50
$500/week = $307.25
$600/week = $401.00
There are so many more hourly employees than there are millionaires in the US, taxing the first $5200/year that a person makes is absolutely genious.
The incentive to work harder to earn more in such an economy is huge - initially wage equilibriums will probably drop to around $5/hour, but the motivation for individuals to start businesses, go into the top tax bracket and far beyond it, and hire employees to help them make even more money will drastically raise the demand curve for labor, and have skilled individual employees easily breaking into the top tax bracket and beyond.
Individuals will have to either "get in" or "get out", and individuals will start voting for people who will cut government expenditures so they can eventually pay less in taxes. The highest income earners are still paying FAR MORE in income taxes than laborers too.
Remember when the United States was by far the fastest growing economy in the world? And then remember what happened when government decided to stop being pro-business, and instead started to be pro-worker?
Some people will die because they are economic leeches instead of being economic stimulants, but economically speaking, we don't need them anyways... Morally speaking, it will force the people that support these people to work more hours.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 08:25 AM
#24
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
just because I like videos:
if anything, watch the 2nd in its entirety
notable quote: "assuming youre getting a 10% pay hike, and when your boss only gives you a 4% pay increase you start crying and complaining that your pay was cut by 6%."
if anything, watch the 2nd in its entirety
notable quote: "assuming youre getting a 10% pay hike, and when your boss only gives you a 4% pay increase you start crying and complaining that your pay was cut by 6%."
Last edited by Braineack; 07-08-2011 at 08:44 AM.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 01:22 PM
#27
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
And Marx also preached that the individual has no rights, that his life and work belong to the group and that the group may sacrifice him at its own whim to its own interests.
Reply
0
0
07-08-2011, 01:34 PM
#28
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
Noteworthy in Congressman Long’s reply was the following statement he made about voting against the amendment proposed by U.S. Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) that would have prohibited Pigford II funding:
“I voted against this amendment, along with several other Republicans, because stopping payments could increase the risk for additional litigation. I firmly believe I must take every step I can to curb costly litigation, which hurts businesses and job creation in this country. I also believe I must take every step to slow out-of-control government spending at every turn.“
Later in the reply, the auctioneer-turned-politician added this thought-provoking missive:
“The United States is facing an unprecedented budget shortfall which threatens the stability of our economy and the fiscal viability of future generations who will have to repay our debt. Families, businesses and especially the federal government all need to take caution to live within our means and prioritize how to best spend their money. We must look at all programs as we search for savings in tackling this extremely important challenge.”
[apparently] it’s worth spending $1.25 billion to prevent spending more money to litigate the case once described on the Washington Times’ editorial page as “Race hustlers are shaking down taxpayers for payoffs, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is falling for the scam.”
“I voted against this amendment, along with several other Republicans, because stopping payments could increase the risk for additional litigation. I firmly believe I must take every step I can to curb costly litigation, which hurts businesses and job creation in this country. I also believe I must take every step to slow out-of-control government spending at every turn.“
Later in the reply, the auctioneer-turned-politician added this thought-provoking missive:
“The United States is facing an unprecedented budget shortfall which threatens the stability of our economy and the fiscal viability of future generations who will have to repay our debt. Families, businesses and especially the federal government all need to take caution to live within our means and prioritize how to best spend their money. We must look at all programs as we search for savings in tackling this extremely important challenge.”
[apparently] it’s worth spending $1.25 billion to prevent spending more money to litigate the case once described on the Washington Times’ editorial page as “Race hustlers are shaking down taxpayers for payoffs, and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) is falling for the scam.”
Reply
0
0
07-11-2011, 10:37 AM
#30
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
Don't like videos?! How about Factoids!
- Not one penny of U.S. debt has been repaid for 51 years: the last time US government funded debt actually decreased on a year-over-year basis was 1960;
- 97% of today’s funded debt has been accumulated since August 1971 – the end of the Bretton Woods agreements when President Nixon took America off the gold standard;
- President Obama for the budget through 2020 projected only a 2.5% interest rate on the federal debt, whereas the actual interest cost since 1980 has averaged 5.7%. If the 5.7% interest cost was used, the US deficit would increase by another $4.9 trillion by 2020;
- President Obama projects 4.2% growth rate of the economy for the next 3 years. If growth is only 2.5%, deficits would increase by another $4 trillion by 2020;
- The US government borrows 40-50 cents for every dollar it spends. A balanced budget without reducing the existing debt will require cutting government spending in half.
- The current agreement to cut $2 trillion of spending over ten years, in exchange for raising the debt ceiling $2.4 trillion debt ceiling will only fund the Treasury until before the next presidential election.
Reply
0
0
07-11-2011, 10:56 AM
#32
Boost Czar
iTrader: (62)
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Chantilly, VA
Posts: 79,493
Total Cats: 4,080
we borrow against ourselves and any country that wants to make money off our "spoiled blonde girl with a credit card" like spending.
The Demoncrat solution to the problem is like telling someone in horrendous debt, unable to make their bills each month and about to lose their home/car/etc, to get a better job (raise taxes/increase revenue) and a few more credit cards (increase debt limit and continue to shop at Barney's). All while suggesting and acknowledging that this is an unsubstainable approach.
The Federal government’s spendable tax revenue of approximately $170 billion per month; is roughly just enough to cover legally required Social Security / Medicare payments ($90 billion) and debt service (ranging from $10-40 billon per month) – and the most politically sensitive payments for military and unemployment ($40 billion).
The Treasury will need to borrow $20 trillion or ten times more than the proposed deficit reduction agreement over the next decade.
The American Social Welfarists promised that government bureaucrats could manage the economy so effectively we would avoid the pain of deleveraging the ludicrous amount of mortgage and credit card debt we ran up in the “good times”. Congress did put Welfare State on steroids, but much of the $5 trillion in deficit spending went to not-so-well-intentioned bailouts and subsidies for powerful cronies. With solvency of our nation now at risk and unemployment rising again, the Privateer suggests another path for our nation:
“Economic “miracles” (so-called) have happened before. The US emerged from a deep recession in 1920-21, because the government and the central bank did NOT interfere. Germany emerged from the actual physical rubble of WW II for exactly the same reason. So, to a lesser extent, did Japan. In all these cases, debts which could not be repaid were not held on life support by central banks, they were written off. In all these cases, creditors took very severe “haircuts” indeed while many debtors literally had to start again from scratch. In all these cases, the LACK of government impediments or government largesse meant that a recovery took place in a much shorter time frame than would otherwise have been the case.
Nothing demonstrates more clearly how the Social Welfare State is on life support than the fact America’s fastest growing cohort of the unemployed are federal, state and local government workers. Last month government cut a record 39,000 jobs; over the past eight months governments have cut a combined 238,000 positions. With federal, state and local governments all threatened with debt defaults and the public angry over failed spending; the American Social Welfare State is doomed.
The Treasury will need to borrow $20 trillion or ten times more than the proposed deficit reduction agreement over the next decade.
The American Social Welfarists promised that government bureaucrats could manage the economy so effectively we would avoid the pain of deleveraging the ludicrous amount of mortgage and credit card debt we ran up in the “good times”. Congress did put Welfare State on steroids, but much of the $5 trillion in deficit spending went to not-so-well-intentioned bailouts and subsidies for powerful cronies. With solvency of our nation now at risk and unemployment rising again, the Privateer suggests another path for our nation:
“Economic “miracles” (so-called) have happened before. The US emerged from a deep recession in 1920-21, because the government and the central bank did NOT interfere. Germany emerged from the actual physical rubble of WW II for exactly the same reason. So, to a lesser extent, did Japan. In all these cases, debts which could not be repaid were not held on life support by central banks, they were written off. In all these cases, creditors took very severe “haircuts” indeed while many debtors literally had to start again from scratch. In all these cases, the LACK of government impediments or government largesse meant that a recovery took place in a much shorter time frame than would otherwise have been the case.
Nothing demonstrates more clearly how the Social Welfare State is on life support than the fact America’s fastest growing cohort of the unemployed are federal, state and local government workers. Last month government cut a record 39,000 jobs; over the past eight months governments have cut a combined 238,000 positions. With federal, state and local governments all threatened with debt defaults and the public angry over failed spending; the American Social Welfare State is doomed.
The Demoncrat solution to the problem is like telling someone in horrendous debt, unable to make their bills each month and about to lose their home/car/etc, to get a better job (raise taxes/increase revenue) and a few more credit cards (increase debt limit and continue to shop at Barney's). All while suggesting and acknowledging that this is an unsubstainable approach.
Last edited by Braineack; 07-11-2011 at 11:09 AM.
Reply
0
0
07-11-2011, 11:44 AM
#33
The Demoncrat solution to the problem is like telling someone in horrendous debt, unable to make their bills each month and about to lose their home/car/etc, to get a better job (raise taxes/increase revenue) and a few more credit cards (increase debt limit and continue to shop at Barney's). All while suggesting and acknowledging that this is an unsubstainable approach.
"PAIN AND SUFFERING" is the ONLY way out of debt. I don't care if you're an individual, a corporation, or the most powerful country in the world, it is not possible to get out of debt without pain and suffering.
Reply
0
0
07-11-2011, 12:03 PM
#35
**** EO "Equal Outcome"
It's time to adopt a different form of EO - "Equal Opportunity"
It's time we started discriminating based on economic productivity - it starts with eliminating compulsory minimum wage.
"You don't want to earn enough to survive? Then **** you, go die"
"You want to have 18 children and not be able to afford them? Then **** you, go die - your children can die too, no need to keep your genes in the gene pool."
"You want to be born handicapped, and you need $18,000/month worth of medical care to survive? Then go make $18,000/month doing something productive to pay for your life. Can't afford to live? Then **** you, go die."
Paid into Social security all of your life, and now you're retired? Social security was designed to be indexed with average life expectancy, you might not be done earning your keep. Once you do surpass average life expectancy, you might end up taking a pay-cut if this country can't afford you - we'll try to pay for you though, because you did actually contribute your fair share toward your retirement - if you weren't on food stamps for the last 73 years.
Not near retirement now? Don't expect to get a social security check when you surpass average life expectancy. It's your own responsibility to make sure you can rest when you age - social security is not a retirement plan.
Adopt my plan, and you'll see that in just 6 months not only will our nations deficit become an almost overnight surplus, but our unemployment would drop to globally record lows, and our economic growth will shoot straight into the double digits.
Go ahead, someone tell me I'm wrong. **** you.
If government decided to do this, I would be happy to go find me a $5/hr job to help the turn around.
It's time to adopt a different form of EO - "Equal Opportunity"
It's time we started discriminating based on economic productivity - it starts with eliminating compulsory minimum wage.
"You don't want to earn enough to survive? Then **** you, go die"
"You want to have 18 children and not be able to afford them? Then **** you, go die - your children can die too, no need to keep your genes in the gene pool."
"You want to be born handicapped, and you need $18,000/month worth of medical care to survive? Then go make $18,000/month doing something productive to pay for your life. Can't afford to live? Then **** you, go die."
Paid into Social security all of your life, and now you're retired? Social security was designed to be indexed with average life expectancy, you might not be done earning your keep. Once you do surpass average life expectancy, you might end up taking a pay-cut if this country can't afford you - we'll try to pay for you though, because you did actually contribute your fair share toward your retirement - if you weren't on food stamps for the last 73 years.
Not near retirement now? Don't expect to get a social security check when you surpass average life expectancy. It's your own responsibility to make sure you can rest when you age - social security is not a retirement plan.
Adopt my plan, and you'll see that in just 6 months not only will our nations deficit become an almost overnight surplus, but our unemployment would drop to globally record lows, and our economic growth will shoot straight into the double digits.
Go ahead, someone tell me I'm wrong. **** you.
If government decided to do this, I would be happy to go find me a $5/hr job to help the turn around.
Reply
0
0
