Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: combjelly who wrote (310206)	11/10/2006 3:51:22 PM
From: TimF	Read Replies (3) of 1574005

Very simple. Current government funding of roads = X New tax for roads bring in revenue of Y. Government removes X (or at least part of X) from road funding an adds Y. X is spent on other programs. Net effect, a tax for roads only increases non-road spending. Saying "100% of the revenue from this tax will go to roads" (or education or whatever) isn't very meaningful. Well it might mean something. If the tax income is noticeably larger than the current spending for the activity the tax is dedicated to, then instituting the new tax would have the effect of increasing spending in that area, but often not by the entire amount of the new tax. Going back the hypothetical above. Imagine Y is greater than X. That doesn't mean that government funding of roads becomes X+Y. Only that it is at least Y.

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next