Total Posts:74|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

What type of taxation do you support?

slo1
Posts: 4,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 4:51:44 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

What is 50* sales tax?

I support taxing profits like how businesses are taxed.
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:00:56 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 4:51:44 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

What is 50* sales tax?

I support taxing profits like how businesses are taxed.

If you pay a 50% sales tax, you pay 50% of the sales price in taxes.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:08:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
I should have said "spending." Income and spending are, obviously, two completely different things -- and there would be two completely different thresholds.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:16:28 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.

A flat sales tax is inherently regressive, though...you would significantly discourage consumption amongst the least-off, and if broadly applied, could induce a significant amount of cost-push inflation, which would cause cause the Fed to tighten policy. Japan is the best example in recent memory of the potential perils of a poorly-managed sales tax.

I'd much prefer even a wage tax to a flat-rate sales tax.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:19:24 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:16:28 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.

A flat sales tax is inherently regressive, though...you would significantly discourage consumption amongst the least-off, and if broadly applied, could induce a significant amount of cost-push inflation, which would cause cause the Fed to tighten policy. Japan is the best example in recent memory of the potential perils of a poorly-managed sales tax.

I'd much prefer even a wage tax to a flat-rate sales tax.

You are wrong. A flat sales tax is fair and balanced. If you buy an apple for 1 dollar, you pay 50 cents in taxes.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:23:55 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:19:24 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:16:28 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.

A flat sales tax is inherently regressive, though...you would significantly discourage consumption amongst the least-off, and if broadly applied, could induce a significant amount of cost-push inflation, which would cause cause the Fed to tighten policy. Japan is the best example in recent memory of the potential perils of a poorly-managed sales tax.

I'd much prefer even a wage tax to a flat-rate sales tax.

You are wrong. A flat sales tax is fair and balanced. If you buy an apple for 1 dollar, you pay 50 cents in taxes.

It depends on how you define fair and balanced. I'm not wrong in pointing out that the tax is regressive, which deals with tax incidence relative to your income.

If I pay 50 cents in taxes, per your example, that's a large percentage of my income if I earn only $10 a year than if I earn, say, $20. Thus, there's a far greater burden for me to consume that apple, so I'm likely to withhold expenditures. That could have negative ramifications for employment, and send non-tax-adjusted prices falling, which would screw with bottom lines -- and, by extension, employment.

But yeah, I highly advise you to look into Japan: http://www.bloomberg.com...

There is a way to properly levy ales tax, but your proposal simply isn't it.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:30:49 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:23:55 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:19:24 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:16:28 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.

A flat sales tax is inherently regressive, though...you would significantly discourage consumption amongst the least-off, and if broadly applied, could induce a significant amount of cost-push inflation, which would cause cause the Fed to tighten policy. Japan is the best example in recent memory of the potential perils of a poorly-managed sales tax.

I'd much prefer even a wage tax to a flat-rate sales tax.

You are wrong. A flat sales tax is fair and balanced. If you buy an apple for 1 dollar, you pay 50 cents in taxes.

It depends on how you define fair and balanced. I'm not wrong in pointing out that the tax is regressive, which deals with tax incidence relative to your income.

If I pay 50 cents in taxes, per your example, that's a large percentage of my income if I earn only $10 a year than if I earn, say, $20. Thus, there's a far greater burden for me to consume that apple, so I'm likely to withhold expenditures. That could have negative ramifications for employment, and send non-tax-adjusted prices falling, which would screw with bottom lines -- and, by extension, employment.

But yeah, I highly advise you to look into Japan: http://www.bloomberg.com...

There is a way to properly levy ales tax, but your proposal simply isn't it.

The only fasir tax is a sales tax. Anything else is theft.
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:31:47 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
50% is a massive overtaxation. Other countries would sit back with their cheese and wine and laugh at our stupidity.

GDP is not produced by the government, and the workers they contract are inefficient.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:32:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:30:49 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:23:55 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:19:24 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:16:28 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.

A flat sales tax is inherently regressive, though...you would significantly discourage consumption amongst the least-off, and if broadly applied, could induce a significant amount of cost-push inflation, which would cause cause the Fed to tighten policy. Japan is the best example in recent memory of the potential perils of a poorly-managed sales tax.

I'd much prefer even a wage tax to a flat-rate sales tax.

You are wrong. A flat sales tax is fair and balanced. If you buy an apple for 1 dollar, you pay 50 cents in taxes.

It depends on how you define fair and balanced. I'm not wrong in pointing out that the tax is regressive, which deals with tax incidence relative to your income.

If I pay 50 cents in taxes, per your example, that's a large percentage of my income if I earn only $10 a year than if I earn, say, $20. Thus, there's a far greater burden for me to consume that apple, so I'm likely to withhold expenditures. That could have negative ramifications for employment, and send non-tax-adjusted prices falling, which would screw with bottom lines -- and, by extension, employment.

But yeah, I highly advise you to look into Japan: http://www.bloomberg.com...

There is a way to properly levy ales tax, but your proposal simply isn't it.

The only fasir tax is a sales tax. Anything else is theft.

Way to completely ignore every point that I made and inject your subjective opinion on what is or isn't theft -- and I hardly see why a 50 percent sales tax isn't theft, but my proposal is. What's the dividing line, or the moving part, that qualifies one but not the other as theft?

I was under the impression that, in making this thread, you wanted to discuss economics -- not sophistry -- though whether you're even interested in any kind of debate at this point is suspect.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:38:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:31:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
50% is a massive overtaxation.

I don't think there's any categorical basis for this judgment. 50% could very well be an appropriate rate on consumption in excess of some exorbitant amount -- and would be appropriate in ensuring intertemporal optimization.

Other countries would sit back with their cheese and wine and laugh at our stupidity.

Other countries have VAT's, which they balance out with increased expenditure on social welfare programs. Not to mention, government largesse in Europe, better or for worse, far outweighs that of the US.

GDP is not produced by the government, and the workers they contract are inefficient.

This is just utter bullsh1t. Quite literally, the formula for NGDP is, via even basic quantity theory of money, is:

NGDP = MV = PY

Where does that M come from? Oh, right, government!

Take your dogma elsewhere, please.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:40:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:32:31 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:30:49 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:23:55 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:19:24 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:16:28 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:13:55 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

Fair enough. I only support a flat sales tax.

A flat sales tax is inherently regressive, though...you would significantly discourage consumption amongst the least-off, and if broadly applied, could induce a significant amount of cost-push inflation, which would cause cause the Fed to tighten policy. Japan is the best example in recent memory of the potential perils of a poorly-managed sales tax.

I'd much prefer even a wage tax to a flat-rate sales tax.

You are wrong. A flat sales tax is fair and balanced. If you buy an apple for 1 dollar, you pay 50 cents in taxes.

It depends on how you define fair and balanced. I'm not wrong in pointing out that the tax is regressive, which deals with tax incidence relative to your income.

If I pay 50 cents in taxes, per your example, that's a large percentage of my income if I earn only $10 a year than if I earn, say, $20. Thus, there's a far greater burden for me to consume that apple, so I'm likely to withhold expenditures. That could have negative ramifications for employment, and send non-tax-adjusted prices falling, which would screw with bottom lines -- and, by extension, employment.

But yeah, I highly advise you to look into Japan: http://www.bloomberg.com...

There is a way to properly levy ales tax, but your proposal simply isn't it.

The only fasir tax is a sales tax. Anything else is theft.

Way to completely ignore every point that I made and inject your subjective opinion on what is or isn't theft -- and I hardly see why a 50 percent sales tax isn't theft, but my proposal is. What's the dividing line, or the moving part, that qualifies one but not the other as theft?

I was under the impression that, in making this thread, you wanted to discuss economics -- not sophistry -- though whether you're even interested in any kind of debate at this point is suspect.

You need to debate the facts. I am not ignoring anything. You are the one who argued againbst a flat sales tax.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:41:05 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:40:08 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
You need to debate the facts. I am not ignoring anything. You are the one who argued againbst a flat sales tax.

I am debating the facts -- but you refuse to engage anything that I've said thus far, whereas I have engaged your arguments. Do you really think that any objective observer would accuse *me* of not debating the facts?
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:43:11 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:41:05 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:40:08 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
You need to debate the facts. I am not ignoring anything. You are the one who argued againbst a flat sales tax.

I am debating the facts -- but you refuse to engage anything that I've said thus far, whereas I have engaged your arguments. Do you really think that any objective observer would accuse *me* of not debating the facts?

You are the one who argued for a property tax. That is theft.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:49:12 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:43:11 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:41:05 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:40:08 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
You need to debate the facts. I am not ignoring anything. You are the one who argued againbst a flat sales tax.

I am debating the facts -- but you refuse to engage anything that I've said thus far, whereas I have engaged your arguments. Do you really think that any objective observer would accuse *me* of not debating the facts?

You are the one who argued for a property tax. That is theft.

What kind of bogus strawman is that? When did I argue for a property tax?

Actually read what I'm saying before you respond. It makes you look like much less of a fool.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 5:58:00 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:49:12 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:43:11 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:41:05 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:40:08 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
You need to debate the facts. I am not ignoring anything. You are the one who argued againbst a flat sales tax.

I am debating the facts -- but you refuse to engage anything that I've said thus far, whereas I have engaged your arguments. Do you really think that any objective observer would accuse *me* of not debating the facts?

You are the one who argued for a property tax. That is theft.

What kind of bogus strawman is that? When did I argue for a property tax?

Actually read what I'm saying before you respond. It makes you look like much less of a fool.

Fallacy fallacy. Disagreement does not equal a fallacy. You or someone with a similar profile picture argued for a property tax.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 6:04:23 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:58:00 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
Fallacy fallacy.

It was a strawman -- you accused me of supporting a property tax, when I never advocated for anything of the kind. You're misrepresenting a progressive consumption tax as a property tax. That is, by definition, a strawman.

Disagreement does not equal a fallacy.

Another strawman -- I never said anything of the sort. Actually read and comprehend what I'm saying.

Not to mention, it's hardly a disagreement when you refuse to engage my arguments.

You or someone with a similar profile picture argued for a property tax.

Okay, but I never did. Focus on what *I'm* arguing, please.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 6:07:42 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 6:04:23 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:58:00 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
Fallacy fallacy.

It was a strawman -- you accused me of supporting a property tax, when I never advocated for anything of the kind. You're misrepresenting a progressive consumption tax as a property tax. That is, by definition, a strawman.

Disagreement does not equal a fallacy.

Another strawman -- I never said anything of the sort. Actually read and comprehend what I'm saying.

Not to mention, it's hardly a disagreement when you refuse to engage my arguments.
someone on this post argued for a property tax.
You or someone with a similar profile picture argued for a property tax.

Okay, but I never did. Focus on what *I'm* arguing, please.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 6:11:07 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 6:07:42 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 6:04:23 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:58:00 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
Fallacy fallacy.

It was a strawman -- you accused me of supporting a property tax, when I never advocated for anything of the kind. You're misrepresenting a progressive consumption tax as a property tax. That is, by definition, a strawman.

Disagreement does not equal a fallacy.

Another strawman -- I never said anything of the sort. Actually read and comprehend what I'm saying.

Not to mention, it's hardly a disagreement when you refuse to engage my arguments.
someone on this post argued for a property tax.
You or someone with a similar profile picture argued for a property tax.

Okay, but I never did. Focus on what *I'm* arguing, please.

Were you intending to respond to anything I wrote?
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
Greyparrot
Posts: 14,268
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:24:17 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:38:11 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:31:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
50% is a massive overtaxation.

I don't think there's any categorical basis for this judgment. 50% could very well be an appropriate rate on consumption in excess of some exorbitant amount -- and would be appropriate in ensuring intertemporal optimization.

Other countries would sit back with their cheese and wine and laugh at our stupidity.

Other countries have VAT's, which they balance out with increased expenditure on social welfare programs. Not to mention, government largesse in Europe, better or for worse, far outweighs that of the US.

GDP is not produced by the government, and the workers they contract are inefficient.

This is just utter bullsh1t. Quite literally, the formula for NGDP is, via even basic quantity theory of money, is:

NGDP = MV = PY

Where does that M come from? Oh, right, government!

Take your dogma elsewhere, please.

By all means, continue to dogmatically praise the benefits of a state controlled economy funded by a 50% sales tax.
slo1
Posts: 4,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:24:31 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:00:56 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
At 4/19/2015 4:51:44 PM, slo1 wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

What is 50* sales tax?

I support taxing profits like how businesses are taxed.

If you pay a 50% sales tax, you pay 50% of the sales price in taxes.

Well, one has to be careful. Demand decreases when price rises. What you are proposing would devastate the economy. Our entire standard of living is based upon spending.

Businesses are taxed on profits. People should be as well.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:27:51 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 7:24:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:38:11 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:31:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
50% is a massive overtaxation.

I don't think there's any categorical basis for this judgment. 50% could very well be an appropriate rate on consumption in excess of some exorbitant amount -- and would be appropriate in ensuring intertemporal optimization.

Other countries would sit back with their cheese and wine and laugh at our stupidity.

Other countries have VAT's, which they balance out with increased expenditure on social welfare programs. Not to mention, government largesse in Europe, better or for worse, far outweighs that of the US.

GDP is not produced by the government, and the workers they contract are inefficient.

This is just utter bullsh1t. Quite literally, the formula for NGDP is, via even basic quantity theory of money, is:

NGDP = MV = PY

Where does that M come from? Oh, right, government!

Take your dogma elsewhere, please.

By all means, continue to dogmatically praise the benefits of a state controlled economy funded by a 50% sales tax.

You need to learn how to read, and respond thoughtfully *without* making ludicrous assumptions. Never once did I praise a 50% sales tax, nor do I extol the virtues of a "state-controlled" economy.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:30:34 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 7:27:51 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 7:24:17 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:38:11 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:31:47 PM, Greyparrot wrote:
50% is a massive overtaxation.

I don't think there's any categorical basis for this judgment. 50% could very well be an appropriate rate on consumption in excess of some exorbitant amount -- and would be appropriate in ensuring intertemporal optimization.

Other countries would sit back with their cheese and wine and laugh at our stupidity.

Other countries have VAT's, which they balance out with increased expenditure on social welfare programs. Not to mention, government largesse in Europe, better or for worse, far outweighs that of the US.

GDP is not produced by the government, and the workers they contract are inefficient.

This is just utter bullsh1t. Quite literally, the formula for NGDP is, via even basic quantity theory of money, is:

NGDP = MV = PY

Where does that M come from? Oh, right, government!

Take your dogma elsewhere, please.

By all means, continue to dogmatically praise the benefits of a state controlled economy funded by a 50% sales tax.

You need to learn how to read, and respond thoughtfully *without* making ludicrous assumptions. Never once did I praise a 50% sales tax, nor do I extol the virtues of a "state-controlled" economy.
You need to get over it. I mistook your picture for that of someone else.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:32:19 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

This would be optimal.

But a flat tax -- but I kinda like the Rubio plan, too -- would also work. Politically (16 amendment) a sales tax wouldn't work. The Rubio plan was predicted to actually create a large amount of growth. Let me see if I can find the report for you
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:33:54 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 7:30:34 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
You need to get over it. I mistook your picture for that of someone else.

You're insinuating, wrongly, that I took offense to your error; in reality, the only person making a big deal of it is you. I made a multiplicity of points in this thread that you blindly ignored without the slightest bit of argumentation. That is my issue.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Posts: 12,398
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:35:08 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 7:32:19 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

This would be optimal.

But a flat tax -- but I kinda like the Rubio plan, too -- would also work. Politically (16 amendment) a sales tax wouldn't work. The Rubio plan was predicted to actually create a large amount of growth. Let me see if I can find the report for you

Okay, I'm open to looking into it.
~ResponsiblyIrresponsible

DDO's Economics Messiah
LiberalProlifer
Posts: 803
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:37:20 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 7:33:54 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 7:30:34 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
You need to get over it. I mistook your picture for that of someone else.

You're insinuating, wrongly, that I took offense to your error; in reality, the only person making a big deal of it is you. I made a multiplicity of points in this thread that you blindly ignored without the slightest bit of argumentation. That is my issue.

Yes or no: are you going to answer my question? Stop harping over a simp;le mistake and get over it. If you are truely apathetic, you will get over it.
16kadams
Posts: 10,497
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
4/19/2015 7:38:36 PM
Posted: 1 year ago
At 4/19/2015 7:35:08 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/19/2015 7:32:19 PM, 16kadams wrote:
At 4/19/2015 5:07:04 PM, ResponsiblyIrresponsible wrote:
At 4/18/2015 9:16:27 PM, LiberalProlifer wrote:
I support a 50* sales tax and nothing else.

I support a progressive consumption tax, but not a 50-percent flat rate. I would want a graduated rate that adjusts for the diminishing marginal utility of income.

This would be optimal.

But a flat tax -- but I kinda like the Rubio plan, too -- would also work. Politically (16 amendment) a sales tax wouldn't work. The Rubio plan was predicted to actually create a large amount of growth. Let me see if I can find the report for you

Okay, I'm open to looking into it.

I found two. I've only read the first.

http://taxfoundation.org...
http://www.heritage.org...

Not saying change opinion, only that this plan is the best alternative because of the 16th amendment XD
https://www.youtube.com...
https://rekonomics.wordpress.com...
"A trend is a trend, but the question is, will it bend? Will it alter its course through some unforeseen force and come to a premature end?" -- Alec Cairncross