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: THE WATSONYOUTH who wrote (623065)	8/6/2011 1:12:15 AM
From: TimF	1 Recommendation Respond to of 1578938

I didn't claim an 8% annual increase, only that spending was going up even as politicians claim massive cuts. If so the current total spending/GDP ratio will at best remain at the current 25 ratio. 25% of GDP is I think more than the federal government has ever spent outside of WWII. Its more than we can possible cover with tax revenue, well at least not without a rather massive VAT, and heavy taxes on everyone, not just the rich, or even just the middle class. Even to get back to the norm we would want to reduce that percentage. And I don't even think there is a good long term reason to be as high as the modern norm. ----- ...The higher the GDP a country achieves, the lower the tax/GDP ratio should be. Suppose you live a hypothetical country where GDP is $100 per person, and taxes are $30 per person, and things are generally ok – the military is big enough, there are enough roads, etc. Then you as a country develop very quickly, so that GDP doubles to $200 per person, would you also want to double the tax money sent to the government to $60 per person? Only if you are obsessively fond of the government. The government is there to keep us safe and secure, and to provide infrastructure. These needs clearly should not scale linearly with how rich we are. When we become a lot richer, we should strive to become a lot more entertained, not a lot safer and securer, unless we are, to begin with, very unsecure and unsafe. acouplequestions.com