SI
SI
discoversearch

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 : American Presidential Politics and foreign affairs
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  
To: Peter Dierks who wrote (31577)1/19/2009 9:46:35 AM
From: DuckTapeSunroof1 Recommendation  Read Replies (1) of 71588
 
Both major Parties' main goal in life has long seemed to be working to secure special tax preferences and loopholes in the code to feather the nests of their own particular set of backers. They have succeeded only in turning the tax code into an abomination.

All such loopholes, exceptions, and special preferences corrupt the Free Market, reduce the growth potential of the entire economy, and bleed the citizens and consumers.

I say support any serious efforts made to eliminate loopholes and preferences from the US tax code.... Going back to some of the ideas talked about by Forbes during his presidential campaign run would be a good start on the debate.

If we could eliminate all the special loopholes that collectively are known as 'corporate welfare', I say we should also simultaneously LOWER the corporate tax rate by the exact amount saved by directly eliminating preferences and loopholes.

That way, with all changes a net revenue neutral, we could more clearly make the case that simplifying the code (and thus reducing the massive compliance costs and eliminating the false, non-free-market derived incentives) is a clear GOOD in itself.

... The present system works best for the corrupt, not the incorruptible. Or else, how can you explain the end result of one such preference: US consumers having to pay twice the world price for sugar so a dozen or so corporate multi-millionaire 'sugar-daddies' can laugh all the way to the bank? Is it the strategic importance of sugar that justifies taking the taxpayer's money to keep prices high?

(And, oh yes, American candy manufacturers are relocating overseas because they can't compete with other candy makers who buy free market sugar.... Those lost American jobs are another 'benefit' brought to you by special preferences.)

I'm sure the justifications for the mohair wool subsidy and paying McDonald's to run advertising overseas are just as worthy....
Report TOU ViolationShare This Post
 Public ReplyPrvt ReplyMark as Last ReadFilePrevious 10Next 10PreviousNext  

HomeMailHotSubjectMarksPeopleMarksKeepersSettings
Terms Of UseContact UsCopyright/IP PolicyPrivacy PolicyAbout UsFAQAdvertise on SI
© 2025 Knight Sac Media.  Data provided by Twelve Data, Alpha Vantage, and CityFALCON News