The Local is not responsible for content posted by users.
9 Pages V   1 2 3 > »    Reply to this topic

Taxation! Why less is more.

Roy E
post 6.Mar.2006, 10:59 PM
Post #1
Joined: 23.Nov.2005

QUOTE
Lethal Taxes: Why Europe?s Economy Lags Behind America?s

If you really like apple pie, and you could have one-third of a 2 pound pie or half of a 1 pound pie, which would you choose? This grade school math problem is very similar to the problem politicians and economic policymakers face in deciding whether to distribute smaller pieces of a bigger pie, or vice versa. Their decisions tell us much about their real motives.

more: http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/885
Go to the top of the page
+
*Kodos*
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:10 PM
Post #2


QUOTE
If the American economy continues growing 2 percent faster yearly than the Europeans, and if the U.S. government continues spending 36 percent of gross national product, actual government expenditures would average about $31,000 per person (or double that of today).


Given that all assumptions remain completely fixed, that there are no additional terror attacks akin to 09.11...that may hold water.

That said...

Did the author of the article factor in the burden to public health (MediCare) and Social Security? 20 years ago, the baby boomers were working, feeding money into the system that supported "X" pensioners. Today...baby boomers are retiring. I'm no mathlete, but the "Y" is Generation X & Y with a much smaller volume to contribute to the Social Security pot. Not only that...but in the 1980s, most families were shifiting to the 2 income family. The latest trend is to shift back to a one income family, with one parent either staying home completely or working part-time. Any way you slice the pie, that's less people, contributing less money to stoke a larger fire.

I would be very interested to read the basis for the author's calculations and assumptions. I'm not saying that the economy could not improve by 2 points each year...I'm just wondering which model they are using for trending purposes.

FR & Aaron...what do your sexy, Econ minds think?
Go to the top of the page
+
Alice Is Back
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:20 PM
Post #3
Joined: 15.Jan.2006

Sweden has the highest tax rates in the EU... and one of the highest growth rates too
Go to the top of the page
+
*Kodos*
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:27 PM
Post #4


I love your sexy, math/econ mind.

What did you think of the article? Given no data to back it up, I felt like I wasn't really reading much of anything.
Go to the top of the page
+
FR
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:42 PM
Post #5
Joined: 22.Oct.2005

QUOTE (Kang)
QUOTE
If the American economy continues growing 2 percent faster yearly than the Europeans, and if the U.S. government continues spending 36 percent of gross national product, actual government expenditures would average about $31,000 per person (or double that of today).


Given that all assumptions remain completely fixed, that there are no additional terror attacks akin to 09.11...that may hold water.

That said...

Did the author of the article factor in the burden to public health (MediCare) and Social Security? 20 years ago, the baby boomers were working, feeding money into the system that supported "X" pensioners. Today...baby boomers are retiring. I'm no mathlete, but the "Y" is Generation X & Y with a much smaller volume to contribute to the Social Security pot. Not only that...but in the 1980s, most families were shifiting to the 2 income family. The latest trend is to shift back to a one income family, with one parent either staying home completely or working part-time. Any way you slice the pie, that's less people, contributing less money to stoke a larger fire.

I would be very interested to read the basis for the author's calculations and assumptions. I'm not saying that the economy could not improve by 2 points each year...I'm just wondering which model they are using for trending purposes.

FR & Aaron...what do your sexy, Econ minds think?


The terror attacks did not cause the last recession. The country was already in a recession.

We have a labor shortage already in younger age brackets and it's not getting any better. When Social Security started, the population was around 20% young to 15 % old. Now it's the opposite. Yes, a big problem, but luckily for the Social Security System, they are getting tons of money for their "suspense account" from illegal aliens, who contribute, but will never collect. Just do a google search to find out about the SS slush fund "suspense account".
Go to the top of the page
+
FR
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:43 PM
Post #6
Joined: 22.Oct.2005

QUOTE (Aaron_in_berlin)
Sweden has the highest tax rates in the EU... and one of the highest growth rates too


Growth in the US has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with the military industrial complex, don't cha think?
Go to the top of the page
+
Roy E
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:49 PM
Post #7
Joined: 23.Nov.2005

QUOTE (Aaron_in_berlin)
Sweden has the highest tax rates in the EU... and one of the highest growth rates too


If that's true, great. But there are other opinions out there. Some are questioning the sustainability of the model. I'm not posting these in an attempt to diminsh Sweden in any way, but for the purpose of drilling down to the truth.

These article contain a lot of reference links...

Celtic Tiger Devours Scandinavian Model
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/705

The Myth of the Scandinavian Model(2)
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/510

The Myth of the Scandinavian Model (3)
http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/626
Go to the top of the page
+
FR
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:52 PM
Post #8
Joined: 22.Oct.2005

If I hear that new catchword "sustainability" again...

I guess a new set of MBA's has graduated and they have a new guru. Sometimes things aren't meant to be sustained... we want them to change. A goal of sustainability is just wrong.
Go to the top of the page
+
Roy E
post 6.Mar.2006, 11:56 PM
Post #9
Joined: 23.Nov.2005

QUOTE (FR)
Growth in the US has nothing to do with taxes and everything to do with the military industrial complex, don't cha think?


Only insofar as US defense projects like the internet, satellite communcations technology, and GPS have created whole new civilian industries.
Go to the top of the page
+
*Kodos*
post 7.Mar.2006, 12:04 AM
Post #10


QUOTE (RoyE)
Only insofar as US defense projects like the internet, satellite communcations technology, and GPS have created whole new civilian industries.


Roy...

When you call Tech Support for any of these industries...with whom are you speaking? Americans? Indians?

And...when you purchase your shiny new GPS, where is it manufactured? America or Asia? Where does the raw for these products come from?

The Tech sector is notorious for outsourcing all support services. So you are correct in stating that there are new civilian industries. You are incorrect in assuming that these jobs are located in the United States.

If people don't work...they can't pay taxes. No taxes...phucked economy. Reagan has already proven Trickle Down Economics to be a farce. Corporate fat cats have already figured out a way to dodge the tax man. The burden falls on the middle-class. The soon to be outsourced middle-class.

I don't know squat about Economics and I know this.

/Marnie
Go to the top of the page
+
FR
post 7.Mar.2006, 12:10 AM
Post #11
Joined: 22.Oct.2005

Economics, on one level, is the behavior of consumers (microeconomis). As I'm quite sure you're a consumer (you know quite a bit about stores), I'm also quite sure you know quite a bit about economics. It's just a matter of putting together the connections.
Go to the top of the page
+
*Kodos*
post 7.Mar.2006, 12:14 AM
Post #12


Not only am I a consumer...I am a professional consumer, as opposed to an empty-headed consumer (procurement speak for non procurement types). laugh.gif

I'm more inclined to deal with the legalese, as opposed to the mathematics. I received some sort of cost of ownership estimate, along with an ROI matrix the other day for a piece of capital equipment I'm looking at. I put that down and went back to the contract portion. Much easier for my brain. :wink:
Go to the top of the page
+
*Littlefair*
post 7.Mar.2006, 12:16 AM
Post #13


Do you know what amazes me the most about you fr is that the other day you always do something that relates to a thread here. EXCEPT the sex thread. lol Why did u never post there??????? :twisted:
Go to the top of the page
+
FR
post 7.Mar.2006, 12:18 AM
Post #14
Joined: 22.Oct.2005

Because I get enough in real life so I don't need the virtual.
Go to the top of the page
+
FR
post 7.Mar.2006, 12:19 AM
Post #15
Joined: 22.Oct.2005

QUOTE (Kang)
Not only am I a consumer...I am a professional consumer, as opposed to an empty-headed consumer (procurement speak for non procurement types). laugh.gif

I'm more inclined to deal with the legalese, as opposed to the mathematics. I received some sort of cost of ownership estimate, along with an ROI matrix the other day for a piece of capital equipment I'm looking at. I put that down and went back to the contract portion. Much easier for my brain. :wink:


You even have a loverly certificate to prove it. :shock:
Go to the top of the page
+

9 Pages V   1 2 3 > » 
Reply to this topic
1 User(s) are reading this topic (1 Guests and 0 Anonymous Users)
0 Members: