Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Personally my first step would be to eliminate corporate and personal income tax (along with payroll taxes and other fun things) for a flat consumption tax. For the full details on that google the Fair Tax.

You still need to encourage domestic investment.

 dogma wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Personally my first step would be to eliminate corporate and personal income tax (along with payroll taxes and other fun things) for a flat consumption tax. For the full details on that google the Fair Tax.

You still need to encourage domestic investment.

Well... all else being equal... dropping the corporate tax rate will do that.

 whembly wrote:

Well... all else being equal... dropping the corporate tax rate will do that.

But all else isn't equal, that's the point. We can get corporations to base their operations here, but we'll never compete with developing nations for unskilled labor.

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:

Well... all else being equal... dropping the corporate tax rate will do that.

But all else isn't equal, that's the point. We can get corporations to base their operations here, but we'll never compete with developing nations for unskilled labor.

Right... More things needs to happen.

But one of the EASIEST thing is to lower that rate.

I know International Accountant/Tax Lawyers who is advocating this as "step one". US has the HIGHEST tax rate in the world.... and the thing is, its really cost applied to the consumers. The other thing is to change the corporate tax law to a "Territorial Base" taxation(we're practically the only Western Country to do this), rather than the current Global taxation... that's why money earned overseas don't usually come back to US.

It's just a start....


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Um... what?
http://www.ft.com/intl/cms/s/06ebfdaa-ed3f-11e1-83d1-00144feab49a,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F06ebfdaa-ed3f-11e1-83d1-00144feab49a.html&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ace.mu.nu%2F#axzz24PFYQ8wq
Here's a snippit:

Drafts of the party platform, which it will adopt at a convention in Tampa Bay, Florida, next week, call for an audit of Federal Reserve monetary policy and a commission to look at restoring the link between the dollar and gold.
The move shows how five years of easy monetary policy – and the efforts of congressman Ron Paul – have made the once-fringe idea of returning to gold-as-money a legitimate part of Republican debate.

Marsha Blackburn, a Republican congresswoman from Tennessee and co-chair of the platform committee, said the issues were not adopted merely to placate Mr Paul and the delegates that he picked up during his campaign for the party’s nomination.

I beg to differ... obvious appeals to the paulbots...

 whembly wrote:
US has the HIGHEST tax rate in the world....

Second highest, Japan is higher.

 whembly wrote:

...and the thing is, its really cost applied to the consumers.

Yep. Though relevance depends on where the product is sold.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

I beg to differ... obvious appeals to the paulbots...

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Personally my first step would be to eliminate corporate and personal income tax (along with payroll taxes and other fun things) for a flat consumption tax. For the full details on that google the Fair Tax.

Love it.

Better yet, offer easier to get citizenship for any and all illegals. They can pay taxes if they are being legally employed, and they no longer have to fear INS. Win-Win.

 dogma wrote:

 whembly wrote:
US has the HIGHEST tax rate in the world....

Second highest, Japan is higher.

I think we're now higher... Japan enacted some reforms earlier this year.

 whembly wrote:

...and the thing is, its really cost applied to the consumers.

Yep. Though relevance depends on where the product is sold.

absolutely.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

I beg to differ... obvious appeals to the paulbots...

 Horst wrote:

 KalashnikovMarine wrote:
Personally my first step would be to eliminate corporate and personal income tax (along with payroll taxes and other fun things) for a flat consumption tax. For the full details on that google the Fair Tax.

Love it.

Better yet, offer easier to get citizenship for any and all illegals. They can pay taxes if they are being legally employed, and they no longer have to fear INS. Win-Win.

Lose lose. Importing the globe's poor does not help your economy, and it certainly puts downward pressure on wages.

Eh, I didn't say actively import them, but we kinda have a lot of them already here. Make all the illegals currently in the country legal citizens, then they pay taxes like the rest of us. more people paying taxes = more money from taxes, less burden on citizens paying for services used by illegals.

What's with the fething obsession with the Gold standard?

 Amaya wrote:
What's with the fething obsession with the Gold standard?

Because, fiat money is Monopoly money.... at least, I think that's the arguement.

As if gold has any intrinsic value.

TheHammer wrote:
And your point is, Testify? That because some ivory tower economic indicators say so people who live in poverty don't exist, or something? What are you even getting at?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

TheHammer wrote:
act is that we have been cutting government for the last 4 years and it's not getting us out of debt at all, all it's doing is hurting the middle class and hurting economic growth and making the problem worse.

Ummm... care the back that up?

And it's not just Obamacare... both (R) and (D) are spending money that we don't have!

Easy.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/06/federal-reserve-economic-data-chart-real-government-spending-obama-recovery.php

Not just that, but the level at which spending has increased in the Federal Government has also been remarkably slow under President Obama.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

Not just that, but if we hadn't been cutting so many government jobs the unemployment rate would be quite a bit lower!
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/05/08/unemployment-rate-without-government-cuts-7-1/

And, hey, maybe the reason for such an anemic recovery has to do with the drastic level of government cuts we have done!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/public-sector-austerity-in-one-graph/2012/06/11/gJQAv89NVV_blog.html

And, hey, Obamacare actually saves the government money and helps lower the deficit!
http://articles.philly.com/2012-07-25/news/32849332_1_cbo-analysts-medicaid-expansion-health-care-law

 Amaya wrote:
What's with the fething obsession with the Gold standard?

"If currency is backed by precious metals, then currency has a concrete value."

That's wrong, of course, but optimism is infectious.

 Amaya wrote:
As if gold has any intrinsic value.

Well... its a commodity, so of course it has value.

 whembly wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
As if gold has any intrinsic value.

Well... its a commodity, so of course it has value.

Is gold necessary for the continuation of human existence?

 Amaya wrote:

 whembly wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
As if gold has any intrinsic value.

Well... its a commodity, so of course it has value.

Is gold necessary for the continuation of human existence?

No...

I'm not arguing to be put back on gold standard.

I'm just saying that the Republican platform folks are BLATANTLY pandering to the Paulbots... but, hey.. that's what politicians do... eh?

off topic,
Did you know that a survey has revealed 95% of people will believe survey results because there is a "%" in it?

Yes, but you said it has value. It does not have intrinsic value. Food, oxygen, water and the like do. Gold is only valued by those who choose to value it. I can't think of a use for it that some other metal can't do better.

 Amaya wrote:
Yes, but you said it has value. It does not have intrinsic value. Food, oxygen, water and the like do. Gold is only valued by those who choose to value it. I can't think of a use for it that some other metal can't do better.

Well... it has value:

10 REASONS WHY GOLD IS SO VALUABLE:
1. Gold is not only the most malleable, but the most ductile metal that we have discovered.
2. Chemically, gold also happens to be the least reactive, aside from noble gases.
3. Gold has been seen as extremely valuable since ancient, unrecorded times. We have proof of this in the jewelry, coinage and additional arts and decoratives that have been found in archaeological digs.
4. Gold tends to withstand, likely because it is resistant to individuals acid attacks.
5. Gold is used in many industries. It is commonly used in electronics, jewelry, dentistry, the production of colored glass and even to detail fine china.
6. Due to it being a naturally occurring metal, it is considered to be fairly rare. In fact, it is most frequently found during abundant mining of other metals like copper.
7. Gold is able to easily create alloys with countless other metals.
8. Aside from gold being a wonderful conductor of electricity and heat, it will also strongly reflect infrared radiation.
9. Unlike many other metals, gold will not be affected by moisture, air or the majority of corrosive agents. This is why it is commonly used in jewelry, as a coating for metals that are more reactive and for coinage.
10. Gold has been used worldwide monetarily – and still is – whether by coinage, standards or convertible shares.

 whembly wrote:

 Amaya wrote:
Yes, but you said it has value. It does not have intrinsic value. Food, oxygen, water and the like do. Gold is only valued by those who choose to value it. I can't think of a use for it that some other metal can't do better.

Well... it has value:

10 REASONS WHY GOLD IS SO VALUABLE:
1. Gold is not only the most malleable, but the most ductile metal that we have discovered.
2. Chemically, gold also happens to be the least reactive, aside from noble gases.
3. Gold has been seen as extremely valuable since ancient, unrecorded times. We have proof of this in the jewelry, coinage and additional arts and decoratives that have been found in archaeological digs.
4. Gold tends to withstand, likely because it is resistant to individuals acid attacks.
5. Gold is used in many industries. It is commonly used in electronics, jewelry, dentistry, the production of colored glass and even to detail fine china.
6. Due to it being a naturally occurring metal, it is considered to be fairly rare. In fact, it is most frequently found during abundant mining of other metals like copper.
7. Gold is able to easily create alloys with countless other metals.
8. Aside from gold being a wonderful conductor of electricity and heat, it will also strongly reflect infrared radiation.
9. Unlike many other metals, gold will not be affected by moisture, air or the majority of corrosive agents. This is why it is commonly used in jewelry, as a coating for metals that are more reactive and for coinage.
10. Gold has been used worldwide monetarily – and still is – whether by coinage, standards or convertible shares.

All of the bolded ones are meaningless unless you choose to consider them valuable.

@Amaya: What are we arguing about?

Nothing pertinent to the OP.

<cracks knuckels>
Charts and graphs here...

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/runaway-spending-tax-revenue#

n 2010, median family income was $51,360. If a typical family followed the federal government's lead, it would spend $73,319 and put 30 cents of every dollar spent on a credit card. This family would have racked up $325,781 in credit card debt—like a mortgage, only without the house. What credit card company would continue lending money to this family?

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/runaway-spending-tax-revenue#

The main driver behind long-term deficits is government spending, not low revenue. While revenue will surpass its historical average of 18.1 percent of GDP by 2018, spending remains above its historical average of 20.2 percent, reaching 22.1 percent by 2022, even after $2.1 trillion in spending cuts in the Budget Control Act.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/obamacare-tax-hikes

Obamacare imposes numerous tax hikes which total more than $500 billion over 10 years. Obamacare's higher tax rates on income and investment will slow economic growth, leaving hardworking American families and businesses worse off. A particularly harmful new payroll tax on investment income goes into effect in January 2013.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/growth-federal-spending-revenue

Since 1965, spending has risen constantly. While federal revenues are recovering from the recent recession, spending is growing sharply, resulting in four consecutive years of deficits exceeding $1 trillion.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/budget-control-act

The Budget Control Act's $1.2 trillion automatic sequestration cuts, out of $46.3 trillion in total spending, would impose draconian cuts on defense (on top of an estimated $407 billion in cuts from its spending caps). This would slash the defense budget and jeopardize the U.S. military's ability to defend the nation. Entitlement spending—the biggest part of the budget— would scarcely be touched by comparison.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/budget-entitlement-programs

Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security—along with other entitlements such as food stamps, unemployment, and housing assistance— make up 62 percent of all federal spending. In contrast, spending on foreign aid represents about 1 percent.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/defense-spending-entitlement-spending-problem

Unsustainable entitlement spending is the key driver of future deficits. Rather than tackle them directly, some would cut defense. But even if spending on this crucial national priority was eliminated completely, entitlements would continue to drive deficits to unmanageable levels.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/national-debt-skyrocket

Runaway spending on Medicare, Medicaid, and Social Security will drive federal debt to unsustainable levels over the next few decades. Total national debt consists of publicly held debt and intergovernmental debt. Intergovernmental debt is the amount that the government owes to specific programs or agencies, such as the Social Security Trust Fund. Publicly held debt is more

relevant to credit markets.

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/income-tax-receipts

Tax cuts can create incentives for individuals to work, save, and invest, which can generate more revenue. The most dramatic decline in the top individual income tax rate, from 70 percent to 28 percent, occurred during the Reagan Administration, during which tax receipts remained relatively constant as a share of the economy.

 whembly wrote:

TheHammer wrote:
And your point is, Testify? That because some ivory tower economic indicators say so people who live in poverty don't exist, or something? What are you even getting at?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:

TheHammer wrote:
act is that we have been cutting government for the last 4 years and it's not getting us out of debt at all, all it's doing is hurting the middle class and hurting economic growth and making the problem worse.

Ummm... care the back that up?

And it's not just Obamacare... both (R) and (D) are spending money that we don't have!

Easy.
http://tpmdc.talkingpointsmemo.com/2012/06/federal-reserve-economic-data-chart-real-government-spending-obama-recovery.php

Not just that, but the level at which spending has increased in the Federal Government has also been remarkably slow under President Obama.
http://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2012/05/24/who-is-the-smallest-government-spender-since-eisenhower-would-you-believe-its-barack-obama/

Not just that, but if we hadn't been cutting so many government jobs the unemployment rate would be quite a bit lower!
http://blogs.wsj.com/economics/2012/05/08/unemployment-rate-without-government-cuts-7-1/

And, hey, maybe the reason for such an anemic recovery has to do with the drastic level of government cuts we have done!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/ezra-klein/post/public-sector-austerity-in-one-graph/2012/06/11/gJQAv89NVV_blog.html

And, hey, Obamacare actually saves the government money and helps lower the deficit!
http://articles.philly.com/2012-07-25/news/32849332_1_cbo-analysts-medicaid-expansion-health-care-law

I read those links.... read this one:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/peterferrara/2012/06/14/president-obama-the-biggest-government-spender-in-world-history/
Now to be fair... I castigated the republicans for spending like drunken soldiers during the Bush years.

 Amaya wrote:
What's with the fething obsession with the Gold standard?

A lack of economic knowledge?


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 whembly wrote:
<cracks knuckels>
Charts and graphs here...

http://www.heritage.org/federalbudget/runaway-spending-tax-revenue#

n 2010, median family income was $51,360. If a typical family followed the federal government's lead, it would spend $73,319 and put 30 cents of every dollar spent on a credit card. This family would have racked up $325,781 in credit card debt—like a mortgage, only without the house. What credit card company would continue lending money to this family?

You can't compare the bond markets to a credit card.
You think if a credit card company was lending money below the rate of inflation, there wouldn't be a single household that didn't max it out?

All this fretting about debt is incredibly short-sighted. Normal rates of inflation will eliminate it in good time.

Hell in the UK we're borrowing money at 1.5%, while inflation is running at 5%. If we weren't spending out of our arses because of the recession, it'd be an economic miracle

There's really no good answer. Debt in and of itself is one sign of a healthy economy; however, what we have in the US is too much debt.

The conservative strawman is a supposedly huge national government. The problem with this concept of "bloated" government is that Americans demand services, they demand protection from the government, they expect and demand so many things....

You want to see a balanced budget? Get rid of social security, medicaid and medicare. Poof, all your debt is gone. All this quibbling that is being done and this wrong perception of "bloat" is over a tiny amount of the overall US budget. The total budget for 2012 was 3.79 trillion. Defense, Social Security and Medicaid/Medicare add up to 2.38 trillion! What are you going to cut? There's hardly anything left unless you just want to tell all the people that have been paying their whole lives "sorry, no medical or income assistance when you retire".

It's these mandatory services that are bleeding us dry and if we are going to continue to provide them, they need to be reworked; heck, they're 80+ year old programs...but no, when people talk about changing them, everybody else gets all bent out of shape and then nothing happens. So, you have a choice, raise taxes or keep running up the debt since as a nation we're too chicken to take a look at the real problem.

 Horst wrote:
Eh, I didn't say actively import them, but we kinda have a lot of them already here. Make all the illegals currently in the country legal citizens, then they pay taxes like the rest of us. more people paying taxes = more money from taxes, less burden on citizens paying for services used by illegals.

If we switch to a consumption tax it won't matter if they're legal or not. They'll pay the same taxes you and I do every single time they buy ANYTHING.

I love how people claim that Social Security is an "Entitlement". Fact is, in most cases, it is not. Working people have been paying into SS since their first real paycheck. Claiming that it is an entitlement is like saying a Christmas Club account is one.
You pay into the system and can reasonably expect to get that money back. That is NOT "Entitlement".
The problem is that people in government have been looking at this "federal savings account" as a menas of paying for things they otherwise cannot afford and have been leaching money from it to pay for same.

 helgrenze wrote:

You pay into the system and can reasonably expect to get that money back. That is NOT "Entitlement".

Yes, it is. That's pretty much what the word means.