A consumption tax I can unreservedly support

#1
utgibbs

utgibbs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 30, 2009
Messages
7,394
Likes
0
#1
I've got a consumption tax I can unreservedly support: taxes on financial transactions.

This should be a no-brainer. It would be an incredible revenue raiser on unproductive parts of the economy, even after sales volumes decrease with the implementation of the tax. It would also decrease speculation and mindless currency trades, etc. In this time of "deficit crisis" and given our last boom was predicated upon an illusory stock market bubble, shouldn't this be the first priority of any deficit reduction effort?

Of course, this is a direct tax on elite economic power. It makes absolute and total sense. But, it will never be implemented.

I've heard a lot about the "fairness" of consumption taxes (on the bottom three quintiles), but I've heard nothing about this no-brainer - raising huge revenues by taxing the unproductive parts of the economy.
 
#3
#3
MG1968 said:
since when are financial transactions "unproductive"?
Click to expand...

Do I really have to answer that question? Really?

Even the thoroughly Capital-soaked Washington Consensus considers dividends unearned income!
 
#4
#4
MG1968 said:
since when are financial transactions "unproductive"?
Click to expand...

Apparently, it's when you aren't the one who is good / smart / strategic enough to be on either side of said transaction. So you just take it, instead.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#5
#5
I think we should tax welfare benefits, especially Sect. 8 housing and SSI payments. Those are unearned income as well.
 
#6
#6
MG1968 said:
I think we should tax welfare benefits, especially Sect. 8 housing and SSI payments. Those are unearned income as well.
Click to expand...

Great idea - what are some other "unproductive" areas that could be "solved" via taxation:

Tooth fairy, allowance and lemonade stand revenue - break'em in early, I say.

For every dollar the kid makes, make them flush $.40 of it down the toilet.

How about a wishing well / fountain tax? Station a government worker (unionized, of course) at each one, and ask them to demand an additional dime for every quarter you throw in. If they question the tax, remind them that it costs money to have someone stand there all day and collect their money - and if the government doesn't do it, who will? If they refuse, threaten to withhold their wish as penalty, and if they still refuse, take their house and throw them in jail. We can't just have people running around wishing all willy-nilly. Maybe pro-rate the tax to be commensurate to the value of what they wish for.

Make beggers use a special governmental begging cup - and put a lock on it that can only be opened at the IRS office at the end of each day. That way, we're sure to get our cut of the now untaxed and all-important begging funds circulating the country.

Endless possibilities abound.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#7
#7
utgibbs said:
I've got a consumption tax I can unreservedly support: taxes on financial transactions.

This should be a no-brainer. It would be an incredible revenue raiser on unproductive parts of the economy, even after sales volumes decrease with the implementation of the tax. It would also decrease speculation and mindless currency trades, etc. In this time of "deficit crisis" and given our last boom was predicated upon an illusory stock market bubble, shouldn't this be the first priority of any deficit reduction effort?

Of course, this is a direct tax on elite economic power. It makes absolute and total sense. But, it will never be implemented.

I've heard a lot about the "fairness" of consumption taxes (on the bottom three quintiles), but I've heard nothing about this no-brainer - raising huge revenues by taxing the unproductive parts of the economy.
Click to expand...

MG1968 said:
I think we should tax welfare benefits, especially Sect. 8 housing and SSI payments. Those are unearned income as well.
Click to expand...

Tenacious D said:
Great idea - what are some other "unproductive" areas that could be "solved" via taxation:

Tooth fairy, allowance and lemonade stand revenue - break'em in early, I say.

For every dollar the kid makes, make them flush $.40 of it down the toilet.

How about a wishing well / fountain tax? Station a government worker (unionized, of course) at each one, and ask them to demand an additional dime for every quarter you throw in. If they question the tax, remind them that it costs money to have someone stand there all day and collect their money - and if the government doesn't do it, who will? If they refuse, threaten to withhold their wish as penalty, and if they still refuse, take their house and throw them in jail. We can't just have people running around wishing all willy-nilly. Maybe pro-rate the tax to be commensurate to the value of what they wish for.

Make beggers use a special governmental begging cup - and put a lock on it that can only be opened at the IRS office at the end of each day. That way, we're sure to get our cut of the now untaxed and all-important begging funds circulating the country.

Endless possibilities abound.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

I think my money being taxed now should be wisely spent and the waste cut out(earmarks,fed funded news(NPR),paying to liberate Iraq and then also paying to rebuild it without ANYTHING in return, etc... before they ask me for another dime. If then, and only then, more money is needed i will be glad to do my part.
 
#8
#8
Selling lemonade is not unproductive.

Do y'all know what these words mean? Do you realize how much revenue would be raised at 1% per transaction - even factoring in a reduced volume of trading? Do you know how much your taxes would go down in a simple, transparent and progressive system?
 
#9
#9
utgibbs said:
Selling lemonade is not unproductive.

Do y'all know what these words mean? Do you realize how much revenue would be raised at 1% per transaction - even factoring in a reduced volume of trading? Do you know how much your taxes would go down in a simple, transparent and progressive system?
Click to expand...

simple, transparent and progressive have nothing to do with what you generally argue. Your basic premise has never shifted away from income distribution, which is a far cry from your typical gibberish about capital.
 
#13
#13
utgibbs said:
Selling lemonade is not unproductive.

Do y'all know what these words mean? Do you realize how much revenue would be raised at 1% per transaction - even factoring in a reduced volume of trading? Do you know how much your taxes would go down in a simple, transparent and progressive system?
Click to expand...

do you know how much the stock market would crash? Do you realize that would crush people on the cusp of retirement? I think the baby boomers have taken enough of a beating
 
#14
#14
BigPapaVol said:
simple, transparent and progressive have nothing to do with what you generally argue. Your basic premise has never shifted away from income distribution, which is a far cry from your typical gibberish about capital.
Click to expand...

Yes. Income redistribution is a big positive, IF it is going to help the less fortunate in society.

Right now, we have reverse Robin Hood; income is being redistributed (as it ALWAYS is) but it is being taken from the bottom quintiles and transferred to the top quintiles. And this is happening all over the world.

It's just as VolDad says - the rich pay 40% of the taxes. But they possess over 80% of the wealth. Thus proving our regressive tax structure in one bold stroke.
 
#15
#15
VolsNSkinsFan said:
do you know how much the stock market would crash? Do you realize that would crush people on the cusp of retirement? I think the baby boomers have taken enough of a beating
Click to expand...

Do you know that is pure hogwash?

Even if you are right, the proceeds could be redirected to offset this problems easily.
 
#18
#18
droski said:
guess gibbs is ok with joe public having their 401k performance drop by 2% a year.
Click to expand...

Again, even if this were the case (and that's absolutely dubious), the proceeds could be redirected to EASILY make up the difference and then some.
 
#19
#19
The Federal Income Tax should be a flat rate based on that taxpayer's BMI. That would solve a multitude of problems.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#23
#23
utgibbs said:
It should be progressive as Adam Smith declared.
Click to expand...

He did not declare it. It is implicit, at best. He did state that the rich should pay in a greater proportion to their revenue, however, he did so in advocating property taxes and consumption taxes (since they buy more expensive "trifles", they would be taxed more on the same tax rate).
 
#24
#24
utgibbs said:
Again, even if this were the case (and that's absolutely dubious), the proceeds could be redirected to EASILY make up the difference and then some.
Click to expand...

how is that dubious? transaction costs of 1%, average turnover of a 401k plan is at least well over 100%. do the math. and how are the proceeds going to be redirected exactly? redirected in what manner? who made you king to decide who deserves money and who doesn't?
 
#25
#25
utvolpj said:
just ignore the other stuff he said though
Click to expand...

Who ever said that? AS would be the first to jump on this tax, recognizing it is generating revenue in unproductive parts of the economy.

In fact, let's read the first sentence of Theory of Moral Sentiments.

The disposition to admire, and almost to worship, the rich and the powerful, and to despise, or, at least, to neglect persons of poor and mean condition, though necessary both to establish and to maintain the distinctions of ranks and the order of society, is, at the same time, the great and most universal cause of the corruption of our moral sentiments.
Click to expand...
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top