TAX TAX TAX and more TAX – Page 32 – Piggington's Econo-Almanac

This topic has 765 replies, 27 voices, and was last updated 14 years, 2 months ago by briansd1.

Viewing 15 posts - 466 through 480 (of 766 total)

← 1 2 3 … 31 32 33 … 50 51 52 →

Author

Posts
April 22, 2010 at 2:29 PM #543286

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=surveyor][quote=sdduuuude]
You and the other guy are trying to make it sound like “progressive tax” means “tax I like” and “regressive tax” as “tax I don’t like” which is unacceptable.

Know what a term means and use it properly or don’t bring it up.[/quote]

Not the first time this has been said to BriBri.

LOL.[/quote]

brian significantly reduces the value of this site for me, filling up interesting threads with the same stupid shit over and over again with no basis of thought behind it. Hoping he goes the way of powayseller soon.

April 22, 2010 at 2:34 PM #542319

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=gandalf]You’re technically correct, sdduuuuuuuude…

Determination of progressive/regressive isn’t constrained to levying of taxes, and includes how such dollars are spent.
[/quote]

The thread is about taxes. The term “progressive tax” is constrained to the levying of taxes.

[quote=gandalf]
Overall, I would like to see less ‘policy’ implemented through tax law — percentages, deductions, incentives, etc. The original policy objectives are often subverted, unintended consequences.
[/quote]
With you 100% there.

[quote=gandalf]
As for NO tax….

How would you pay for government then? Are there things the government does that are worthwhile?

National defense?
Roads and highways?
Clean water?
Public school system?
Police and fire?[/quote]

You are assuming all those require the government. They don’t. I’ll give you Defense and Police. The others should be funded by those who use them the most.

Just because SOME taxes are needed doesn’t mean that the expression “There’s no tax like no tax” isn’t valid 🙂

April 22, 2010 at 2:34 PM #542434

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=gandalf]You’re technically correct, sdduuuuuuuude…

Determination of progressive/regressive isn’t constrained to levying of taxes, and includes how such dollars are spent.
[/quote]

The thread is about taxes. The term “progressive tax” is constrained to the levying of taxes.

[quote=gandalf]
Overall, I would like to see less ‘policy’ implemented through tax law — percentages, deductions, incentives, etc. The original policy objectives are often subverted, unintended consequences.
[/quote]
With you 100% there.

[quote=gandalf]
As for NO tax….

How would you pay for government then? Are there things the government does that are worthwhile?

National defense?
Roads and highways?
Clean water?
Public school system?
Police and fire?[/quote]

You are assuming all those require the government. They don’t. I’ll give you Defense and Police. The others should be funded by those who use them the most.

Just because SOME taxes are needed doesn’t mean that the expression “There’s no tax like no tax” isn’t valid 🙂

April 22, 2010 at 2:34 PM #542911

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=gandalf]You’re technically correct, sdduuuuuuuude…

Determination of progressive/regressive isn’t constrained to levying of taxes, and includes how such dollars are spent.
[/quote]

The thread is about taxes. The term “progressive tax” is constrained to the levying of taxes.

[quote=gandalf]
Overall, I would like to see less ‘policy’ implemented through tax law — percentages, deductions, incentives, etc. The original policy objectives are often subverted, unintended consequences.
[/quote]
With you 100% there.

[quote=gandalf]
As for NO tax….

How would you pay for government then? Are there things the government does that are worthwhile?

National defense?
Roads and highways?
Clean water?
Public school system?
Police and fire?[/quote]

You are assuming all those require the government. They don’t. I’ll give you Defense and Police. The others should be funded by those who use them the most.

Just because SOME taxes are needed doesn’t mean that the expression “There’s no tax like no tax” isn’t valid 🙂

April 22, 2010 at 2:34 PM #543005

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=gandalf]You’re technically correct, sdduuuuuuuude…

Determination of progressive/regressive isn’t constrained to levying of taxes, and includes how such dollars are spent.
[/quote]

The thread is about taxes. The term “progressive tax” is constrained to the levying of taxes.

[quote=gandalf]
Overall, I would like to see less ‘policy’ implemented through tax law — percentages, deductions, incentives, etc. The original policy objectives are often subverted, unintended consequences.
[/quote]
With you 100% there.

[quote=gandalf]
As for NO tax….

How would you pay for government then? Are there things the government does that are worthwhile?

National defense?
Roads and highways?
Clean water?
Public school system?
Police and fire?[/quote]

You are assuming all those require the government. They don’t. I’ll give you Defense and Police. The others should be funded by those who use them the most.

Just because SOME taxes are needed doesn’t mean that the expression “There’s no tax like no tax” isn’t valid 🙂

April 22, 2010 at 2:34 PM #543281

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=gandalf]You’re technically correct, sdduuuuuuuude…

Determination of progressive/regressive isn’t constrained to levying of taxes, and includes how such dollars are spent.
[/quote]

The thread is about taxes. The term “progressive tax” is constrained to the levying of taxes.

[quote=gandalf]
Overall, I would like to see less ‘policy’ implemented through tax law — percentages, deductions, incentives, etc. The original policy objectives are often subverted, unintended consequences.
[/quote]
With you 100% there.

[quote=gandalf]
As for NO tax….

How would you pay for government then? Are there things the government does that are worthwhile?

National defense?
Roads and highways?
Clean water?
Public school system?
Police and fire?[/quote]

You are assuming all those require the government. They don’t. I’ll give you Defense and Police. The others should be funded by those who use them the most.

Just because SOME taxes are needed doesn’t mean that the expression “There’s no tax like no tax” isn’t valid 🙂

April 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM #542344

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=afx114]Nate Silver … [/quote]

Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.

[img_assist|nid=13190|title=Govt Spending vs GDP|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=390|height=250]

FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_history_1902_2010.png

April 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM #542459

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=afx114]Nate Silver … [/quote]

Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.

[img_assist|nid=13190|title=Govt Spending vs GDP|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=390|height=250]

FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_history_1902_2010.png

April 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM #542936

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=afx114]Nate Silver … [/quote]

Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.

[img_assist|nid=13190|title=Govt Spending vs GDP|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=390|height=250]

FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_history_1902_2010.png

April 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM #543030

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=afx114]Nate Silver … [/quote]

Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.

[img_assist|nid=13190|title=Govt Spending vs GDP|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=390|height=250]

FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_history_1902_2010.png

April 22, 2010 at 2:52 PM #543306

sdduuuude
Participant

[quote=afx114]Nate Silver … [/quote]

Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.

[img_assist|nid=13190|title=Govt Spending vs GDP|desc=|link=node|align=left|width=390|height=250]

FROM:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Us_gov_spending_history_1902_2010.png

April 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM #542349

briansd1
Guest

[quote=sdduuuude]
Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.
[/quote]

Borrowing.

April 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM #542464

briansd1
Guest

[quote=sdduuuude]
Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.
[/quote]

Borrowing.

April 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM #542941

briansd1
Guest

[quote=sdduuuude]
Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.
[/quote]

Borrowing.

April 22, 2010 at 2:53 PM #543035

briansd1
Guest

[quote=sdduuuude]
Something not right about those numbers.
How can taxes stay level while spending as a pct of
GDP soars ? The gov must have some revenue stream other than taxes.
[/quote]

Borrowing.
Author

Posts

Viewing 15 posts - 466 through 480 (of 766 total)

← 1 2 3 … 31 32 33 … 50 51 52 →

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.