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 : Formerly About Advanced Micro Devices -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: TimF who wrote (464527)3/17/2009 11:39:42 PM
From: i-node  Read Replies (3) | Respond to of 1576329
 
The fundamental fallacy in the thought process is one that CJ has presented here of late, that is, that "pooling" of money amongst the wealthy is what "causes" bad economies.

This was a belief in the 20s and 30s. For example, Henry Ford believed it and voluntarily doubled, then further increased, his employee's wages on the belief that spreading wealth around would trigger economic growth. The so-called "high wage" doctrine. It didn't work.

There is just no evidence that wealth redistribution results in anyone being better off in the long run.

What we DO know is that Hoover's tax increases -- including massive increases in the death tax and gift taxes -- were an unmitigated disaster, as was the protectionism. Some economists believe that his insane "check tax" contributed substantially to the economic problems. It is astounding that Obama is pursuing the same type of policy, particularly, with respect to fees and excise taxes which are so hidden from view at this point but will impact low-earners significantly.

As an example, the apparent decision to charge injured war veterans for health care is tantamount to a tax increase for the affected individuals. Not only is it shocking that any president would take such offensive action just on the basis of being an American, it is amazing that the man would take away the income of some of the most underpaid individuals in our society.



To: TimF who wrote (464527)3/18/2009 5:19:49 PM
From: tejek  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 1576329
 
Study the question, then, from its two aspects. In noting what the state is going to do with the millions of francs voted, do not neglect to note also what the taxpayers would have done—and can no longer do—with these same millions.

That's right. We don't know how the taxpayer will spend his money if he spends it at all. But we do know that the gov't will spend it and in the process create jobs.