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.

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

To: J_F_Shepard who wrote (606964)	4/7/2011 2:38:59 PM
From: TimF	2 Recommendations Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 1580140

I don't think any rate would be fair. "Fair" is a fuzzy concept. Also some of its definitions (and the choice of which definition to apply) are subjective. Taxing people a penny is in a sense "unfair" in that your forcibly taking their money from them. Taxing people all the same dollar amount is in a sense fair, everyone pays the same. Or "fair" could be taxing them all the same percentage, or it could be taxing them all by their ability to pay (which would mean those with very high incomes pay a much higher percentage than those with lower incomes, and potentially a much higher percentage than they pay now). Being fair in one way is unfair in another, so I don't use "fair" to much in this context (or in many others). Rather then "fair", I look at what promotes freedom, economic growth, economic efficiency, and the general interest of society. That's four criteria, with the last in particular being uncertain and changing. So I can't give any specific rate. But I think having tax rates, both average and marginal rates (as well as "effective marginal rates" a concept that goes beyond taxation, to include the cut off of benefits, and examines how much of the next dollar a person gets to keep), as low as possible is a good thing. I also think having taxes be as simple as possible with very few credits deductions or other forms of tax breaks is a good thing, partially because it allows for lower marginal rates with the same amount of revenue, and partially because it reduces the distortion and dead weight loss involved in taxes, both from making them easier to calculate, and from causing the tax code to distort markets and people's behavior to a smaller degree. Simpler taxes would probably also lower enforcement costs (both the direct costs for the government to enforce taxes, and the indirect cost of the intrusion and annoyance caused by the enforcement activities). Bill doesn't believe this and wants some names....help him out... I'm not sure what your getting at here, and I don't have a list of names but -- "About 47 percent will pay no federal income taxes at all for 2009. Either their incomes were too low, or they qualified for enough credits, deductions and exemptions to eliminate their liability." finance.yahoo.com That's higher than in previous years, partially because in general the figure has been climbing and partially because of the recession. A few years back it was closer to a third than half, but even a third is a large number of people not paying federal income taxes. If it was because federal spending was so tiny that not much in the way of taxes was needed, then I'd be fine having it be a larger number, say a small simple tax on the very rich and no tax on everyone else. But their are problems with that in the real world. 1 - Taxes don't tend to stay that way. The federal income tax was like that at first, not its big and complex and has higher rates, that effect a larger portion of most people's income. 2 - We don't have a tiny federal government, we have a huge expensive federal government. Many who vote for expansion of it don't pay the cost, many others only pay a tiny portion of their share of the cost. They can largely force the direct costs on to other people. They can't really avoid the costs, since high taxes on some often wind up being effectively paid by others (for example corporate tax might impact on wages or consumer prices more than corporate profits or stockholder's returns), and even more indirectly the non-rich take the hit in the slowing of growth rates caused by high taxes; but since the direct and obvious costs are pushed on to others, people might not recognize that they are still paying a price.