Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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.

Strategies & Market Trends : ahhaha's ahs -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Mark Adams who wrote (3145)	10/17/2001 8:02:37 PM
From: Ahda	Respond to of 24758

I seem to support taxes, but find the current implementation disconcerting. The cost of collection, administrative overhead hurt efficency and competitiveness. I figure that along with the right to ownership of property, society has an responsibility to provide people born into poverty with a chance to succeed. I propose that by providing a good education and a safe environment to operate in, the American dream can live. BRAVO!

To: Mark Adams who wrote (3145)	10/17/2001 10:17:49 PM
From: frankw1900	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

Mark, I figure that along with the right to ownership of property, society has an responsibility to provide people born into poverty with a chance to succeed. I propose that by providing a good education and a safe environment to operate in, the American dream can live. The second sentence doesn't follow from the first, if you are making an economic argument. Education, streets, sewers, police, even defense, are improvements leading to a higher general price level and greater economic activity and prosperity, thus increasing the material well being of everyone. Sensible people support these things through taxation because it's in their interest to do so. This is not an ethical argument although I expect most ethical people would agree with it. (I'd go further and say, profligate spending, particularly in the area of post secondary education, will lead to even greater general well being. Have to be sensible though, can't pave the whole country, can't have prisons as a growth industry and for sure, can't have everyone a client to some social worker. Can't use up the whole GDP in taxes.... Can't have govt taking up so much space the new Carnegie can't/won't spend his money on libraries.) I seem to support taxes, but find the current implementation disconcerting. The cost of collection, administrative overhead hurt efficency and competitiveness. It's not the cost of collecting taxes that is really significant. It's what they tax: when they tax capital or the cost of operations (I include corporate tax here), they retard the rate of improvement/investment and ultimately lessen the amount of tax that could be collected from net income which most years would be increasing. I personally think that taxes are not nearly as important an influence on our well being as inflation. In the past year I think the US money supply has increased by about 10% while the economy has stood still. I've not a clue how this might work out but I don't have a good feeling about it.

To: Mark Adams who wrote (3145)	10/17/2001 10:36:53 PM
From: ahhaha	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 24758

Here is your moral imperative that I mentioned earlier is your secret reason behind rationalizing the corporate tax: I figure that along with the right to ownership of property, society has an responsibility to provide people born into poverty with a chance to succeed. I propose that by providing a good education and a safe environment to operate in, the American dream can live. The problem is that your means achieves the exact opposite of its intent. Your claim that "society has a responsibility to provide people born into poverty with a chance to succeed" requires that someone knows who is in poverty. If I put on a show of poverty, should you be taxed to give me money?. Forget that. If you can identify who is in poverty will your steps to prevent them from staying in poverty succeed? Have we in the US learned nothing from the last 40 years of trying to do that with the outcome that the same percentage are still in poverty.