Total Posts:32|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Why Do We Do this to Ourselves?

jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
These are all terrible policies that our government imposes upon us (oftentimes with support from the majority):

1.) The Drug War

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It

3.) Affirmative Action that is the Enemy of Meritocracy

4.) Foreign Wars that are Both Expensive and Counterproductive

5.) Regulatory Agencies that are Easily Manipulated by Corporations
President of DDO
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a democracy is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 9:51:42 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Go away. Please.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Agent_Orange
Posts: 2,254
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 9:54:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a democracy is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.

Good thing we live in a republic then.
#BlackLivesMatter
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 9:56:46 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:54:41 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a democracy is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.

Good thing we live in a republic then.

Good thing democracy is essentially morally incoherent because it attempts a leap from subjective to objective morality.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
thett3
Posts: 14,382
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 10:05:27 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:54:41 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a republic is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.

Good thing we live in a republic then.

I mean, its not as if the argument doesnt still apply to a Republic (which is what I was talking about anyway, a republic is just a type of democracy)
DDO Vice President

#StandwithBossy

#UnbanTheMadman

#BetOnThett

"Don't quote me, ever." -Max

"My name is max. I'm not a big fan of slacks"- Max rapping

"Walmart should have the opportunity to bribe a politician to it's agenda" -Max

"Thett, you're really good at convincing people you're a decent person"-tulle

"You fit the character of Regina George quite nicely"- Sam

: At 11/12/2016 11:49:40 PM, Raisor wrote:
: thett was right
bossyburrito
Posts: 14,075
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 10:27:36 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:51:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Go away. Please.

This thread is serious...

I agree with Thett.
#UnbanTheMadman

"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
Or lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps
And start to dream of somewhere
To relax their restless flight
Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights..."

~ Rush
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 11:03:44 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 10:08:27 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:51:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Go away. Please.

What is your problem?

You.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
lewis20
Posts: 5,093
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 11:04:49 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:54:41 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a democracy is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.

Good thing we live in a republic then.

Its not really a republic anymore, politicians do what they want regardless of the constitution
"If you are a racist I will attack you with the north"- Abraham Lincoln

"Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material" - Leviticus 19 19

"War is a racket" - Smedley Butler
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/13/2013 11:16:23 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
These are all terrible policies that our government imposes upon us (oftentimes with support from the majority):

1.) The Drug War

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It

3.) Affirmative Action that is the Enemy of Meritocracy

4.) Foreign Wars that are Both Expensive and Counterproductive

5.) Regulatory Agencies that are Easily Manipulated by Corporations

How is it a double tax? Tax from income through long-term capital gains is less then taxes on work income.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 1:33:05 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 11:16:23 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
These are all terrible policies that our government imposes upon us (oftentimes with support from the majority):

1.) The Drug War

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It

3.) Affirmative Action that is the Enemy of Meritocracy

4.) Foreign Wars that are Both Expensive and Counterproductive

5.) Regulatory Agencies that are Easily Manipulated by Corporations

How is it a double tax? Tax from income through long-term capital gains is less then taxes on work income.

For the record, dividends and interest are taxed as normal income and he did say "savings and investment".

I am assuming his point is, regardless of the rate of taxation, these assets were purchased with after tax money. It is a stupid argument; however, dividends are actually double taxed, as they are taxed as corporate profits, then as regular income. Dividends are the only thing I know of that are double taxed, and by that I mean they are taxed twice.
My work here is, finally, done.
Contra
Posts: 3,941
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 7:41:46 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
These are all terrible policies that our government imposes upon us (oftentimes with support from the majority):

1.) The Drug War

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It

3.) Affirmative Action that is the Enemy of Meritocracy

4.) Foreign Wars that are Both Expensive and Counterproductive

5.) Regulatory Agencies that are Easily Manipulated by Corporations

I fully agree. Just add the fact that many continue believe in big government policies which perpetuate the problems they were trying to solve. UGH DAMNIT!

Section 8 makes the public housing projects into crime ridden slums. Makes the inhabitants dependent, if you earn over $1000 a month, you're evicted! Bad policy.

Medicaid has a similar effect, and health insurance in general and all gov't programs that promulgate health insurance raise the cost of health care and hurt the very people they were meant to help.

Public highways draw their funds from the pockets of the poor mainly (gas tax), and the pressure against higher taxes makes it unlikely that roads are maintained adequately.

Et cetera.
"The solution [for Republicans] is to admit that Bush was a bad president, stop this racist homophobic stuff, stop trying to give most of the tax cuts to the rich, propose a real alternative to Obamacare that actually works, and propose smart free market solutions to our economic problems." - Distraff

"Americans are better off in a dynamic, free-enterprise-based economy that fosters economic growth, opportunity and upward mobility." - Paul Ryan
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 7:58:51 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 11:16:23 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM, jimtimmy wrote:

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It


How is it a double tax? Tax from income through long-term capital gains is less then taxes on work income.

I think he's implying that the money is first taxed when it is earned as income, and then taxed again when it is applied to capital and a gain is realized.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
malcolmxy
Posts: 2,855
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 8:03:41 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 11:04:49 PM, lewis20 wrote:

Its not really a republic anymore, politicians do what they want regardless of the constitution

Um...yeah...that's pretty much what happens in a Republic...like every time one's ever existed.

On the one hand, the founding fathers were right that people are too stupid to be making important decisions of state all the time.

On the other hand, they used that excuse to set up a government that was bound to fail exactly as it is doing so, currently (devouring itself from within).

What can ya do? We're living in a world constructed by dudes who wore powdered wigs. It was pretty well doomed from the get-go.
War is over, if you want it.

Meet Dr. Stupid and his assistants - http://www.debate.org...
MouthWash
Posts: 2,607
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 4:19:32 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 9:56:46 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:54:41 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a democracy is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.

Good thing we live in a republic then.

Good thing democracy is essentially morally incoherent because it attempts a leap from subjective to objective morality.

Subjective morality is f*cking incoherent.

No one claims that democracy is "right." It's a pragmatic solution.
"Well, that gives whole new meaning to my assassination. If I was going to die anyway, perhaps I should leave the Bolsheviks' descendants some Christmas cookies instead of breaking their dishes and vodka bottles in their sleep." -Tsar Nicholas II (YYW)
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 4:59:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 4:19:32 PM, MouthWash wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:56:46 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:54:41 PM, Agent_Orange wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:38:45 PM, thett3 wrote:
Because people are stupid, it's as simple as that. Leadership in a democracy is based around making promises to the mob to satisfy their whims, nothing to do with actual ability.

Good thing we live in a republic then.

Good thing democracy is essentially morally incoherent because it attempts a leap from subjective to objective morality.

Subjective morality is f*cking incoherent.

Lol k... I'll entertain you. How?

No one claims that democracy is "right." It's a pragmatic solution.

My statement states that it's moral incoherent. That's it.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 9:28:41 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/13/2013 11:03:44 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
At 1/13/2013 10:08:27 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:51:42 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Go away. Please.

What is your problem?

You.

No, LK. You are being the problem here. Jim is actually trying to make productive discourse. You don't have to look at his threads or posts. So take the pineapple out of your ass and go do better things.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 9:37:58 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 1:33:05 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 1/13/2013 11:16:23 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
These are all terrible policies that our government imposes upon us (oftentimes with support from the majority):

1.) The Drug War

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It

3.) Affirmative Action that is the Enemy of Meritocracy

4.) Foreign Wars that are Both Expensive and Counterproductive

5.) Regulatory Agencies that are Easily Manipulated by Corporations

How is it a double tax? Tax from income through long-term capital gains is less then taxes on work income.

For the record, dividends and interest are taxed as normal income and he did say "savings and investment".

I am assuming his point is, regardless of the rate of taxation, these assets were purchased with after tax money. It is a stupid argument; however, dividends are actually double taxed, as they are taxed as corporate profits, then as regular income. Dividends are the only thing I know of that are double taxed, and by that I mean they are taxed twice.

Well dividends and profits aren't the same thing. And regardless, income taxes are double taxed as well. Once for payroll, and the other as income taxes.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)
President of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:53:38 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.

That's one way to look at taxation. Another theory holds that people should only be taxed when they first earn income.

Besides, the most powerful argument against high investment taxes is that they are a very innefficient form of taxation that harms the economy.
President of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/14/2013 11:58:47 PM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 11:53:38 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.

That's one way to look at taxation. Another theory holds that people should only be taxed when they first earn income.

Besides, the most powerful argument against high investment taxes is that they are a very innefficient form of taxation that harms the economy.

All forms of taxes lead to dead-weight loss. Taxing labor can cause people to work less thus harming the economy.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2013 12:11:29 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 11:58:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:53:38 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.

That's one way to look at taxation. Another theory holds that people should only be taxed when they first earn income.

Besides, the most powerful argument against high investment taxes is that they are a very innefficient form of taxation that harms the economy.

All forms of taxes lead to dead-weight loss. Taxing labor can cause people to work less thus harming the economy.

True. Although, some lead to less per dollar of revenue raised than others.

Capital taxation is about the least efficient per dollar raised... Consumption taxes, Pigovian taxes, and taxes on immovable property are the most efficient per dollar raised (not that any of these are good)

One problem when it comes to public policy is that the most efficient forms of taxation tend to also be the most regressive... Which is why building welfare states is so hard. Progressive taxes just do too much harm to the economy and don't bring a stable revenue stream

European welfare states utilize regressive consumptiont taxes.
President of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2013 12:17:04 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/15/2013 12:11:29 AM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:58:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:53:38 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.

That's one way to look at taxation. Another theory holds that people should only be taxed when they first earn income.

Besides, the most powerful argument against high investment taxes is that they are a very innefficient form of taxation that harms the economy.

All forms of taxes lead to dead-weight loss. Taxing labor can cause people to work less thus harming the economy.

True. Although, some lead to less per dollar of revenue raised than others.

Capital taxation is about the least efficient per dollar raised... Consumption taxes, Pigovian taxes, and taxes on immovable property are the most efficient per dollar raised (not that any of these are good)

Source or deduction for this?

One problem when it comes to public policy is that the most efficient forms of taxation tend to also be the most regressive... Which is why building welfare states is so hard. Progressive taxes just do too much harm to the economy and don't bring a stable revenue stream

Whether a tax can raise revenue for a government or not doesn't mean there isn't a bunch of deadweight loss from it.

European welfare states utilize regressive consumptiont taxes.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
jimtimmy
Posts: 3,953
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2013 12:21:58 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/15/2013 12:17:04 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/15/2013 12:11:29 AM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:58:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:53:38 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.

That's one way to look at taxation. Another theory holds that people should only be taxed when they first earn income.

Besides, the most powerful argument against high investment taxes is that they are a very innefficient form of taxation that harms the economy.

All forms of taxes lead to dead-weight loss. Taxing labor can cause people to work less thus harming the economy.

True. Although, some lead to less per dollar of revenue raised than others.

Capital taxation is about the least efficient per dollar raised... Consumption taxes, Pigovian taxes, and taxes on immovable property are the most efficient per dollar raised (not that any of these are good)

Source or deduction for this?

One problem when it comes to public policy is that the most efficient forms of taxation tend to also be the most regressive... Which is why building welfare states is so hard. Progressive taxes just do too much harm to the economy and don't bring a stable revenue stream

Whether a tax can raise revenue for a government or not doesn't mean there isn't a bunch of deadweight loss from it.

European welfare states utilize regressive consumptiont taxes.

http://search.oecd.org...(2008)51
President of DDO
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2013 12:43:37 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/15/2013 12:21:58 AM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/15/2013 12:17:04 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/15/2013 12:11:29 AM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:58:47 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:53:38 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:39:09 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.

(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)

They're taxed on their savings, buts savings increases the net wealth of individuals, while consumption does not. The market still rewards them for savings. Taxing people from income earned from savings doesn't seem too different from taxing people from income earned from work. They're both forms of increasing one's wealth.

That's one way to look at taxation. Another theory holds that people should only be taxed when they first earn income.

Besides, the most powerful argument against high investment taxes is that they are a very innefficient form of taxation that harms the economy.

All forms of taxes lead to dead-weight loss. Taxing labor can cause people to work less thus harming the economy.

True. Although, some lead to less per dollar of revenue raised than others.

Capital taxation is about the least efficient per dollar raised... Consumption taxes, Pigovian taxes, and taxes on immovable property are the most efficient per dollar raised (not that any of these are good)

Source or deduction for this?

One problem when it comes to public policy is that the most efficient forms of taxation tend to also be the most regressive... Which is why building welfare states is so hard. Progressive taxes just do too much harm to the economy and don't bring a stable revenue stream

Whether a tax can raise revenue for a government or not doesn't mean there isn't a bunch of deadweight loss from it.

European welfare states utilize regressive consumptiont taxes.


http://search.oecd.org...(2008)51

broken link
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2013 4:44:15 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 9:37:58 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/14/2013 1:33:05 AM, Khaos_Mage wrote:
At 1/13/2013 11:16:23 PM, darkkermit wrote:
At 1/13/2013 9:36:47 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
These are all terrible policies that our government imposes upon us (oftentimes with support from the majority):

1.) The Drug War

2.) Taxation that Discriminates Against Savings and Investment by Double Taxing It

3.) Affirmative Action that is the Enemy of Meritocracy

4.) Foreign Wars that are Both Expensive and Counterproductive

5.) Regulatory Agencies that are Easily Manipulated by Corporations

How is it a double tax? Tax from income through long-term capital gains is less then taxes on work income.

For the record, dividends and interest are taxed as normal income and he did say "savings and investment".

I am assuming his point is, regardless of the rate of taxation, these assets were purchased with after tax money. It is a stupid argument; however, dividends are actually double taxed, as they are taxed as corporate profits, then as regular income. Dividends are the only thing I know of that are double taxed, and by that I mean they are taxed twice.

Well dividends and profits aren't the same thing. And regardless, income taxes are double taxed as well. Once for payroll, and the other as income taxes.

I didn't say they were the same thing. But dividends are not a deductable expense, so dividends are paid out with post-tax dollars, which are then taxed at the individual level, if applicable. Thus, the dividend dollar is literally taxed twice, which isn't a distinction the OP was making, as he was including savings.

Thank you for the payroll tax idea. I don't think I would call FICA taxes necessarily double taxed, but Medicare taxes to be sure. FICA is akin to a Roth IRA, both use post-tax dollars which grow tax free and I am 99% the qualified distribution are also tax-free; however, SS is not necessarily tax-free, but for the poor/lower middle class, it most likely is.
My work here is, finally, done.
Khaos_Mage
Posts: 23,214
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
1/15/2013 4:48:30 AM
Posted: 3 years ago
At 1/14/2013 11:07:15 PM, jimtimmy wrote:
Darkkermit,

I am not in any way an expert on the subject. But, here is the way I see it:

When someone makes income (however they do it), they have two basic choices: They can immediately consume or delay consumption.

If they immediatly consume, they pay whatever consumption taxes may apply.

If they delay consumption and invest or save (which earns interest or increases net wealth, they are taxed on their savings (which has already been taxed on the income level) and they still must pay consumption taxes when they consume.

In other words, they are taxed one more time if they save of invest than if they spend immeediatley... punishing virtue in my opinion.
If I use my money from my job to open a business, should this new income, and by extension my employees' wages, be subject to taxation? Why should investment or savings be any different? Are my post-tax dollars used in consumption also not being double taxed as income/wages for someone else?


(ALso, I didn't bring ut up, but our tax system has some biases against family formation)
Most definately.
My work here is, finally, done.