about Taxes

Discussion in 'Economy' started by neurosport, May 7, 2009.

  1. neurosport
    Offline

    neurosport BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    794
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +39
    if everybody had to take 90% of their income and burn that cash - there would be no real impact on the economy. the prices internally would simply reset dropping by a factor of 10 and everything would go back to normal.

    on the other hand if 90% of income was taxed and given to the government the economy would collapse. everybody would leave their jobs in the private sector and go to work for the bureaucracy where the money is. production would stop and people would starve to death.

    therefore it is not money being taken away from the people that is killing the economy - it is money given to the government. unfortunately the government can always give money to itself by printing it. it doesn't need taxes.

    moral of the story - taxes don't matter, government spending does.

    the tax rate that you are thinking of is FICTIONAL. its just a number on paper. the REAL tax rate is higher. the real tax rate includes the fictional tax rate plus inflation plus government debt. the real tax rate can very well exceed 100% ! ! ! of course this can only go on for so long before the house of cards collapses ...
     
    Last edited: May 7, 2009
  2. edthecynic
    Offline

    edthecynic Censored for Cynicism

    Joined:
    Oct 20, 2008
    Messages:
    26,672
    Thanks Received:
    3,087
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Ratings:
    +5,732
    That does not compute! Production won't stop!!!
    Business will produce what government SPENDS its taxed or printed money on.

    Spend wisely, grasshopper. :eusa_whistle:
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  3. neurosport
    Offline

    neurosport BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    794
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +39
    no. what the government spends will end up in the pockets of those who paid it off - unions, pharma etc. plus their own ( government ) employees. it won't go to independent businesses who produce everything of value.
     
  4. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    Independent businesses have no such role, given the unfortunate realities of market concentration. Just another form of inefficiency promoted under capitalism.
     
  5. neurosport
    Offline

    neurosport BANNED

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2009
    Messages:
    794
    Thanks Received:
    39
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Brooklyn, NY
    Ratings:
    +39
    Elaborate ?
     
  6. Amanda
    Offline

    Amanda Calm as a Hindu cow

    Joined:
    Nov 28, 2008
    Messages:
    4,426
    Thanks Received:
    1,005
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +1,006
    Oh now you've done it.... :eek:
     
  7. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    Economic efficiency is best brought about by the establishment of worker-owned and managed enterprises and labor cooperatives. However, the effective market concentration guaranteed by a capitalist economic structure generates negative externalities that have an adverse impact on any such democratic or worker-owned firms attempting to enter into the competitive market. Larger and less efficient firms are thus able to eliminate smaller and more efficient firms in a process that John Stuart Mill termed "the tyranny of capital" simply as a result of their access to a greater reserve of capital and productive resources rather than any greater skill in utilizing that reserve efficiently.

    Shush, you. :eusa_angel:
     
  8. hipeter924
    Offline

    hipeter924 Not a zombie yet

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    6,092
    Thanks Received:
    620
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    Nowhere you can follow
    Ratings:
    +1,433
    Capitalism is not inefficient...its the most efficient system we have...it promotes individualism while both socialism and communism desire to take that away.
     
  9. Agnapostate
    Offline

    Agnapostate BANNED

    Joined:
    Sep 19, 2008
    Messages:
    6,860
    Thanks Received:
    344
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    The Quake State
    Ratings:
    +344
    The precise nature of the inefficiency promoted under capitalism has just been described: a propensity toward market concentration that ultimately undercuts competitive enterprise, and affirms Jaroslav Vanek's remark that "[t]he capitalist economy is not a true market economy because in western capitalism, as in Soviet state capitalism, there is a tendency towards monopoly. Economic democracy tends toward a competitive market." This conflicts with the superior efficiency provided by a socialist economy consisting of small-scale enterprise by worker-owned and managed enterprises and labor cooperatives.

    Moreover, without further elaboration on your part, I'm willing to stake plenty that you describe previously and currently existing forms of state capitalism as "socialism" or "communism"; I don't believe I've yet encountered a single anti-socialist who's used the term accurately.
     
  10. hipeter924
    Offline

    hipeter924 Not a zombie yet

    Joined:
    May 5, 2009
    Messages:
    6,092
    Thanks Received:
    620
    Trophy Points:
    200
    Location:
    Nowhere you can follow
    Ratings:
    +1,433
    I said capitalism as a whole meaning every type of capitalism.

    By the way Soviet state capitalism, there was no such thing. I doubt you can find many people of note (on any side) to back up your theory. The Soviet Union was a Communist state. What idiot said otherwise?

    "propensity toward market concentration that ultimately undercuts competitive enterprise"

    What a load of rubbish. A free market economy is ultimate goal of capitalism, but just like its counterparts of communism and socialism the economy never ended up reaching its ultimate goal. But unlike Communism and Socialism it is thriving and can reach the ultimate goal of a free market economy.

    The Capitalist free market is happening...free trade deals aren't for nothing mate. Its the opening up of a new competitive environment...so your idea that free market capitalism stops competition sounds like its straight from a bit of soviet propaganda...its a nice story but not the true one.
     

Share This Page