[drunkle]

[quote=BobS]

Here are a few empirically verifiable observations that should contribute to our understanding:
1. There is a huge, largely unpublicized, correlation between family income and hours worked annually.
Sounds simple, and it is. The poor simply work less, for a variety of reasons.
[/quote]

while the correlation may apply to the middle classes, it obviously does not apply at the extremes; uneducated laborers and the wealthy born/well connected.

[quote]

2. The income tax rate structure is already extremely “progressive” if measured by the % paid by each quintile. The lowest two quintiles pay less than 5% of the revenues, the top quintile pays over half.

[/quote]

by “extremely progressive”, i assume you’re refering to the progression affecting the bottom 75%.

[quote]

3. Historically, increases in marginal tax rates NEVER bring in the predicted tax revenues. People can simply work less or arrange their affairs to legally (or illegally) pay less. Indeed, regarding the capital gains tax rate, there is a perfect record going back decades of lower rates bringing in more tax revenue, and higher rates less revenue.[/quote]

does “predicted tax revenues” mean less revenues than before a rate hike?

do higher tax revenues under lower cap gains rate = higher total revenues? or higher than “predicted”? and does individual behaviour such as tax reduction strategy have much to do with it? ie., not cashing out holdings during times of higher rates?

i think these observations are inconclusive regarding fairness or unfairness of our tax system.

[drunkle]

[quote=BobS]

Here are a few empirically verifiable observations that should contribute to our understanding:
1. There is a huge, largely unpublicized, correlation between family income and hours worked annually.
Sounds simple, and it is. The poor simply work less, for a variety of reasons.
[/quote]

while the correlation may apply to the middle classes, it obviously does not apply at the extremes; uneducated laborers and the wealthy born/well connected.

[quote]

2. The income tax rate structure is already extremely “progressive” if measured by the % paid by each quintile. The lowest two quintiles pay less than 5% of the revenues, the top quintile pays over half.

[/quote]

by “extremely progressive”, i assume you’re refering to the progression affecting the bottom 75%.

[quote]

3. Historically, increases in marginal tax rates NEVER bring in the predicted tax revenues. People can simply work less or arrange their affairs to legally (or illegally) pay less. Indeed, regarding the capital gains tax rate, there is a perfect record going back decades of lower rates bringing in more tax revenue, and higher rates less revenue.[/quote]

does “predicted tax revenues” mean less revenues than before a rate hike?

do higher tax revenues under lower cap gains rate = higher total revenues? or higher than “predicted”? and does individual behaviour such as tax reduction strategy have much to do with it? ie., not cashing out holdings during times of higher rates?

i think these observations are inconclusive regarding fairness or unfairness of our tax system.

[drunkle]

[quote=BobS]

Here are a few empirically verifiable observations that should contribute to our understanding:
1. There is a huge, largely unpublicized, correlation between family income and hours worked annually.
Sounds simple, and it is. The poor simply work less, for a variety of reasons.
[/quote]

while the correlation may apply to the middle classes, it obviously does not apply at the extremes; uneducated laborers and the wealthy born/well connected.

[quote]

2. The income tax rate structure is already extremely “progressive” if measured by the % paid by each quintile. The lowest two quintiles pay less than 5% of the revenues, the top quintile pays over half.

[/quote]

by “extremely progressive”, i assume you’re refering to the progression affecting the bottom 75%.

[quote]

3. Historically, increases in marginal tax rates NEVER bring in the predicted tax revenues. People can simply work less or arrange their affairs to legally (or illegally) pay less. Indeed, regarding the capital gains tax rate, there is a perfect record going back decades of lower rates bringing in more tax revenue, and higher rates less revenue.[/quote]

does “predicted tax revenues” mean less revenues than before a rate hike?

do higher tax revenues under lower cap gains rate = higher total revenues? or higher than “predicted”? and does individual behaviour such as tax reduction strategy have much to do with it? ie., not cashing out holdings during times of higher rates?

i think these observations are inconclusive regarding fairness or unfairness of our tax system.

[drunkle]

[quote=BobS]

Here are a few empirically verifiable observations that should contribute to our understanding:
1. There is a huge, largely unpublicized, correlation between family income and hours worked annually.
Sounds simple, and it is. The poor simply work less, for a variety of reasons.
[/quote]

while the correlation may apply to the middle classes, it obviously does not apply at the extremes; uneducated laborers and the wealthy born/well connected.

[quote]

2. The income tax rate structure is already extremely “progressive” if measured by the % paid by each quintile. The lowest two quintiles pay less than 5% of the revenues, the top quintile pays over half.

[/quote]

by “extremely progressive”, i assume you’re refering to the progression affecting the bottom 75%.

[quote]

3. Historically, increases in marginal tax rates NEVER bring in the predicted tax revenues. People can simply work less or arrange their affairs to legally (or illegally) pay less. Indeed, regarding the capital gains tax rate, there is a perfect record going back decades of lower rates bringing in more tax revenue, and higher rates less revenue.[/quote]

does “predicted tax revenues” mean less revenues than before a rate hike?

do higher tax revenues under lower cap gains rate = higher total revenues? or higher than “predicted”? and does individual behaviour such as tax reduction strategy have much to do with it? ie., not cashing out holdings during times of higher rates?

i think these observations are inconclusive regarding fairness or unfairness of our tax system.

[drunkle]

[quote=BobS]

Here are a few empirically verifiable observations that should contribute to our understanding:
1. There is a huge, largely unpublicized, correlation between family income and hours worked annually.
Sounds simple, and it is. The poor simply work less, for a variety of reasons.
[/quote]

while the correlation may apply to the middle classes, it obviously does not apply at the extremes; uneducated laborers and the wealthy born/well connected.

[quote]

2. The income tax rate structure is already extremely “progressive” if measured by the % paid by each quintile. The lowest two quintiles pay less than 5% of the revenues, the top quintile pays over half.

[/quote]

by “extremely progressive”, i assume you’re refering to the progression affecting the bottom 75%.

[quote]

3. Historically, increases in marginal tax rates NEVER bring in the predicted tax revenues. People can simply work less or arrange their affairs to legally (or illegally) pay less. Indeed, regarding the capital gains tax rate, there is a perfect record going back decades of lower rates bringing in more tax revenue, and higher rates less revenue.[/quote]

does “predicted tax revenues” mean less revenues than before a rate hike?

do higher tax revenues under lower cap gains rate = higher total revenues? or higher than “predicted”? and does individual behaviour such as tax reduction strategy have much to do with it? ie., not cashing out holdings during times of higher rates?

i think these observations are inconclusive regarding fairness or unfairness of our tax system.

[drunkle]

esmith:

the prius is a far cry from this specialized niche vehicle. btw, the honda ev had numbers close to this thing but was a more practical and conventional car.

people laughed at the prius? who? republicans? oilmen? who cares. the prius is an actual car, a consumer product appealing to the general public vs this engineering exercise.

cfd? had to look that one up. why not just say “modeling”? when i was in school, fluid dynamics involved theory which led to computation and resulted in experiment (ie., testing). funny how marketers and techno geeks just love to make up new acronyms for the same old things.

do you think their “cfd” took cross winds and lift into account? between the nice big tail fin and the lifting body shape, i’m sure that single rear wheel will have plenty of traction and control…

and gull wing doors?? heh, good luck getting out of the thing in tight parking.

[drunkle]

esmith:

the prius is a far cry from this specialized niche vehicle. btw, the honda ev had numbers close to this thing but was a more practical and conventional car.

people laughed at the prius? who? republicans? oilmen? who cares. the prius is an actual car, a consumer product appealing to the general public vs this engineering exercise.

cfd? had to look that one up. why not just say “modeling”? when i was in school, fluid dynamics involved theory which led to computation and resulted in experiment (ie., testing). funny how marketers and techno geeks just love to make up new acronyms for the same old things.

do you think their “cfd” took cross winds and lift into account? between the nice big tail fin and the lifting body shape, i’m sure that single rear wheel will have plenty of traction and control…

and gull wing doors?? heh, good luck getting out of the thing in tight parking.

[drunkle]

esmith:

the prius is a far cry from this specialized niche vehicle. btw, the honda ev had numbers close to this thing but was a more practical and conventional car.

people laughed at the prius? who? republicans? oilmen? who cares. the prius is an actual car, a consumer product appealing to the general public vs this engineering exercise.

cfd? had to look that one up. why not just say “modeling”? when i was in school, fluid dynamics involved theory which led to computation and resulted in experiment (ie., testing). funny how marketers and techno geeks just love to make up new acronyms for the same old things.

do you think their “cfd” took cross winds and lift into account? between the nice big tail fin and the lifting body shape, i’m sure that single rear wheel will have plenty of traction and control…

and gull wing doors?? heh, good luck getting out of the thing in tight parking.

[drunkle]

esmith:

the prius is a far cry from this specialized niche vehicle. btw, the honda ev had numbers close to this thing but was a more practical and conventional car.

people laughed at the prius? who? republicans? oilmen? who cares. the prius is an actual car, a consumer product appealing to the general public vs this engineering exercise.

cfd? had to look that one up. why not just say “modeling”? when i was in school, fluid dynamics involved theory which led to computation and resulted in experiment (ie., testing). funny how marketers and techno geeks just love to make up new acronyms for the same old things.

do you think their “cfd” took cross winds and lift into account? between the nice big tail fin and the lifting body shape, i’m sure that single rear wheel will have plenty of traction and control…

and gull wing doors?? heh, good luck getting out of the thing in tight parking.

[drunkle]

esmith:

the prius is a far cry from this specialized niche vehicle. btw, the honda ev had numbers close to this thing but was a more practical and conventional car.

people laughed at the prius? who? republicans? oilmen? who cares. the prius is an actual car, a consumer product appealing to the general public vs this engineering exercise.

cfd? had to look that one up. why not just say “modeling”? when i was in school, fluid dynamics involved theory which led to computation and resulted in experiment (ie., testing). funny how marketers and techno geeks just love to make up new acronyms for the same old things.

do you think their “cfd” took cross winds and lift into account? between the nice big tail fin and the lifting body shape, i’m sure that single rear wheel will have plenty of traction and control…

and gull wing doors?? heh, good luck getting out of the thing in tight parking.

[drunkle]

good grief. the obsession of some nerds with sci fi and robotech…

is it really that difficult to simply produce *normal* vehicles that are electric/hybrid powered? as simple as a motorized bicycle to a battery powered vw? where are the PRACTICAL engineers shoehorning electric systems into existing platforms? do we really needs vehicles that look like insects, have no trunk space or rearward visibility?

are three wheel systems really necessary? or is drifting a battery powered go cart the main goal here?

[drunkle]

good grief. the obsession of some nerds with sci fi and robotech…

is it really that difficult to simply produce *normal* vehicles that are electric/hybrid powered? as simple as a motorized bicycle to a battery powered vw? where are the PRACTICAL engineers shoehorning electric systems into existing platforms? do we really needs vehicles that look like insects, have no trunk space or rearward visibility?

are three wheel systems really necessary? or is drifting a battery powered go cart the main goal here?

[drunkle]

good grief. the obsession of some nerds with sci fi and robotech…

is it really that difficult to simply produce *normal* vehicles that are electric/hybrid powered? as simple as a motorized bicycle to a battery powered vw? where are the PRACTICAL engineers shoehorning electric systems into existing platforms? do we really needs vehicles that look like insects, have no trunk space or rearward visibility?

are three wheel systems really necessary? or is drifting a battery powered go cart the main goal here?

[drunkle]

good grief. the obsession of some nerds with sci fi and robotech…

is it really that difficult to simply produce *normal* vehicles that are electric/hybrid powered? as simple as a motorized bicycle to a battery powered vw? where are the PRACTICAL engineers shoehorning electric systems into existing platforms? do we really needs vehicles that look like insects, have no trunk space or rearward visibility?

are three wheel systems really necessary? or is drifting a battery powered go cart the main goal here?

[drunkle]

good grief. the obsession of some nerds with sci fi and robotech…

is it really that difficult to simply produce *normal* vehicles that are electric/hybrid powered? as simple as a motorized bicycle to a battery powered vw? where are the PRACTICAL engineers shoehorning electric systems into existing platforms? do we really needs vehicles that look like insects, have no trunk space or rearward visibility?

are three wheel systems really necessary? or is drifting a battery powered go cart the main goal here?

[Author]

Posts