Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Oil subsidies
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8  Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Oil subsidies (Read 513 times)
stevea
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 842
Location: Ohio
Joined: Jul 24th, 2011
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #50 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:39am
Print Post  
Don_G wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 6:40pm:
With raises government come taxes Jeff!
Wit unions dere is strengt! a labor monopoly, market failure and systemic inefficiency.

FTFY.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 2470
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #51 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 9:20am
Print Post  
stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
WTF - NO!  No one misses that.  That's obvious, and nothing I said suggests otherwise.
Sorry, like your posts a lot Kaz, but stop assuming others are stupid.  Despite my 4 STEM degree, I have a good undergrad level of understanding of economics. It's quite unlikely I haven't accounted for and dismissed your claim based on evidence & reason


I didn't assume anything, you said you didn't understand that.  Here you go:

stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:06am:
I think taxing income is a very very poor idea for a lot of reasons.
Taxing sales (Fair tax, a transaction tax) is better than a VAT I'm not convinced it's very good.

Taxes impact markets.  Ppl marginally choose activities to avoid taxes.
If you want less income/profits, then tax income/profits.
If you want less value add (less labor or processing of materials) then use a VAT tax.
If you want less sales or economic activity, then tax sales (Fair Tax).
These are all poor ideas.

On a practical basis it's naturally quite complex (and even hazy)  to determine what is income and it's quite invasive of government to try to measure it. FAIR is still problematic, tho' less so.

Why don't we tax sloth, pollution and crime instead ?


You listed taxes which are ALL baked into the prices of products we buy, then included taxing the price of products we buy with a list of other taxes which are baked into the prices of products we buy.

The reason to tax sales is because ALL TAXES ARE SALES TAXES.  Except one, and that is roughly 1/2 of one percent of Federal revenue.  Just so you know, that is the death tax, which is actually .6 of one percent of Federal revenue.  I  said about 1/2 a percent to prevent Google from answering the question.

If you remove all other taxes and only tax sales, then prices will go DOWN.

1)  In the short run because you immediately remove the cost of tax compliance and the inefficiencies of incenting activities which do not grow the economy as well as making the cash based economy taxpayers

2)  In the long run because we become a tax haven and will draw investment from across the world.  Companies will move here instead of leaving

So to your list, taxing "income/profit" and "VAT" are both sales taxes, Steve.  They are both baked into the price of the products we buy.  They are both sales taxes.

Other sales taxes include:

- CDs
- Bonds
- Corporate taxes
- Capital gains
- Dividend taxes
- Tariffs
- Property taxes
- Sin taxes

All are sales taxes.   Neither companies nor consumers are stupid.  We don't perform acts then just pay taxes.  The taxes are calculated in the purchase prices.

When you say sales taxes are bad, you leave only the death tax.  You have to tax economic activity.  The ideal solution is to tax is simply and tax it once rather than having six ways to Sunday to tax the same thing over and over and separate tax infrastructures to tax and collect them
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 2470
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #52 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 9:40am
Print Post  
stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
No - it certainly is not free of evasion techniques and does involve intrusive government tracking of transactions and loads of economic inefficiency.  It's not the sweet dream you imagine

I never said it was "free of evasion techniques."  I said it eliminates our having multiple tax infrastructures.  Having 40 ways to cheat is better than having one?

stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
Even today there is a lot of black-market transactions to evade small state&local sales taxes - those would increase dramatically


You have to esplain that one to me.  So prices go down, that will drive up fraud.  Say what?

stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
Lawful methods of FAIR tax evasion include the creation of LT leases - why buy a new house w/ a 21% tax, when you can lease it from the builder ?  Ford & Chevy& Toyota will only lease and rarely sell, but when they sell it will be a nominally 'used' product.  OR I can buy a car in Mexico or Canada and bring it to the US "used" and free of tax

It's actually pretty funny how you lectured me for saying you are stupid for not realizing you know that all those taxes are already built in to the price of products you buy, and you keep repeating you don't know that.

This again is no change.  If you buy a house on the primary market you pay those taxes now.  If you buy it on the secondary market, you don't.  What you don't pay are all the redundant tax infrastructures and counter incentives.  The price of the house goes down

stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
Your FAIR tax should also tax stock purchases (maybe only new offerings and new stock issuance) so effectively you are putting the US ability to raise capital on par with Iraq.  Welcome to the 3rd world


Factually incorrect.  Stock purchases are not taxed in the Fair Tax.  You pay taxes on goods and services, not investments

stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
You really want FedGov snooping through all your purchases ? INVASIVE STATISM!


You've obviously never owned a business that you would say something so incredibly naive.  I have, I've owned five. 

Now:  Government combs over my corporate taxes, personal taxes, sales taxes, unemployment taxes, revenue (business license), corporate property taxes, property taxes.

You're like OMG, kaz, you replace that list with just sales taxes which is already on that list and eliminate the rest???  That's statism!  Yeah ...

stevea wrote on Aug 5th, 2017 at 10:39pm:
Neil Boortz spin is particularly nasty  His transition policy makes no allowance for the fact that MOST ppl have already-taxed assets in their savings. Tweedle-dum saved $100k in an IRA, his twin, Tweedle-dee had the same rate of saving but chose to save in AFTER-TAX vehicles, so he only saved $72k after 28% tax.   Then Kaiser Boortz takes over and declares that Tweedle-dee gets taxed $21k (the 21% FAIR rate that is realistic) and has $79k to spend in retirement, while his twin gets double-taxed an additional 21% and has only <$57k to spend.  MASSIVELY UNFAIR and it applies to everyone with after tax assets, like houses, cars, savings accounts, stocks, bonds and biz investment.   This fact alone would cause most retirees to move to offshore and not pay the 21% rip-off tax.  Total rip-off to be double-taxed like this.  Boortz ideas have other problems


He admits that actually.  So your standard is you don't want things to be better unless we achieve perfection.  Both benefit.  But that's not good enough, reject all but perfection no matter how much worse it is now!

It's people like you in the Republican party keeping Obamacare for us
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2411
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #53 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 12:43pm
Print Post  
stevea wrote on Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:39am:
FTFY.


It's contrary to the libertarian's agenda to not allow unions. You're the first fairly intelligent one that I've heard say otherwise.

You would need to amend that to say that unions should be allowed, but with limitations. But don't get into talking about the limitations because it soon would become apparent that those limitations would be designed to strip unions of all their power.

This is libertarian 101 for you Steve and you not understanding it tells me that you weren't the Steve that posted on Supplysideforum.com.

They were all very well informed supply siders and libertarians combined mostly.

You're not going to get away with any of your nonsense with me Steve.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 2470
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #54 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 12:48pm
Print Post  
Don_G wrote on Aug 6th, 2017 at 12:43pm:
It's contrary to the libertarian's agenda to not allow unions. You're the first fairly intelligent one that I've heard say otherwise.

You would need to amend that to say that unions should be allowed, but with limitations. But don't get into talking about the limitations because it soon would become apparent that those limitations would be designed to strip unions of all their power.

This is libertarian 101 for you Steve and you not understanding it tells me that you weren't the Steve that posted on Supplysideforum.com.

They were all very well informed supply siders and libertarians combined mostly.

You're not going to get away with any of your nonsense with me Steve.


Gawd you're a dolt.  Libertarians support VOLUNTARY unions that are based on market power.  We oppose GOVERNMENT mandated unions enforced with guns.  How is that beyond your comprehension?  Is it possible anyone is that stupid?  How stupid are you?
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2411
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #55 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:01pm
Print Post  
stevea wrote on Aug 6th, 2017 at 12:23am:
FINES are actually a tax on crime, so your opinion rejects well-established reality.


No, I didn't learn anything new. You've just stated a novel idea on fines and taxation. Weak Steve, but not worth my time to debate word meanings.

Quote:
Sloth would be new, but no more difficult.   Say you earn $100k for 46 weeks work annually.  The government imputes what you could have worked 52 weeks, therefore imputes a possible income of 113K and therefore wants you to pay a massive tax on the $13k you failed to earn, the $13k of value you failed to provide to society.  It would make vacationing and retirement pretty expensive.


What's your point? Can we move on to something more important than you attempting to invent mew meanings for words?

Quote:
That's your closed-minded  assumption - is it ?  The concept has real foundations in economics.


Your economics are slanted to your own personal poltics and your politics are extreme and not part of the mainstream. Being not part of the mainstream is fine but believing in the immpossible is not!

Quote:
FAIL - there are lots of decent alternative ideas.  What is USUALLY lacking in those ideas is a logical foundation that relates back to economic fundamentals.


My point is that the ideas are always lacking. That's what I'm asking for, but within the bounds of possible and feasible. Feasible, we'll determine through discussion.

Quote:
  We know and should expect that all taxes are distorting of the market wherein they apply.  Marginal changes in taxes create marginal reductions in the activity that generate the tax.


Disagree. You are beginning to espouse on the Laffer curve and reaganomics.

Quote:
  Therefore we should choose to tax activities that we want less of  (like sloth, crime and pollution) OR we should tax features that are not avoidable by action.  Like a per-capita tax.


This is where you are called upon to invent a way to tax sloth, crime, and (pollution)

con't


Pollution is RARELY taxed.  Instead we see all sorts of wrong-headed, arrogant/ignorant regulation, and other sorts of indirect taxes that miss the mark.  You should know well that I've already promoted Pigouvian taxes - direct taxes on the pollutant - as a partial solution.    Sadly Pigouvian taxes are rare, b/c top-down central planner types are chock filled w/ arrogance and dismissive of markets and prefer CAFE standards and emissions regulations.

Did you fail history ?  There are many historical alternatives and many more theoretical ones (like the FAIR tax) that aren't hard to grasp.  I don't like excises or tariffs as they cause economic inefficiency.


Shockingly immoral. Your Willie Horton "That's where the money is” (so let's take it) attitude is appalling & shallow.   "income tax" does not imply a flat rate or a progressive (meaning wrong-headed) rate of taxation.   Taking the first $10k of every income is also an income tax.   The current, common progressive income tax is hyper-unjust for reasons you are not intellectually prepared to accept.

In our market system, the way a person can lawfully acquire wealthy is to voluntarily exchange for things that others value even more. Bill Gates sells you a 10cent CD w/ software for $300 b/c you value the sw more than the $300, and Gates values the $300 more than the CD.  Gates only becomes wealthy b/c he's selling you and millions of others a valuable bargain.  [well actually MS was involved in monopolistic behavior, but that's not the norm].  Note that you can't arrive at this understanding by following the failed "labor theory of value" still supported by some of the Left.  Trade is a win-win, net increase in value.

So your progressive, or even flat tax has the negative impact of harming the most beneficial members of society.  It's dumb, like spanking the best students in class and rewarding those who got Fs. Eduardo Saverin (facebook billionaire) gave up his US citizenship b/c he didn't want to pay progressive income taxes.  I can't blame him, and it's a loss or the US.  It's market inefficiency.

"The ability to pay" is NOT a just criteria for taxing ppl.  When you got out of college I'm sure your folks had more ability to pay for your needs than you did.  Did you mooch off them ?

No - the best tax would fall on those who have opportunity but fail to produce.  That's hard to measure and runs into the "blood from a stone" problem.


The rubber left the tarmack long ago.  You had your fingers in your ears singing 'la-la-la.

You really can tax crime for some greater social income.
You really can tax pollution directly - for much greater social income.
We really could tax "luxuries" vacations, optional travel, early-retirement, a lot more.
Civil courts should at turn a profit (why are we spending many millions so Samsung and sue Apple ?).
A per-capita tax is probably among the best ideas around.  If you fall far enough into arrears - you aren't contributing to society so you can't vote.

Another idea worthy of intellectual consideration is one from the georgists/Geoists; Taxing land.   I don't have a lot of love for property taxes, but it has the positive economic feature of not impacting supply/demand.   I fear it might roil markets more than most taxes, but it should be explored.

But let's not ignore the other side of the coin.  A LIMITED government would have taxes perhaps 5x less.[/quote
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 2470
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #56 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:08pm
Print Post  
stevea wrote on Aug 6th, 2017 at 12:23am:
A LIMITED government would have taxes perhaps 5x less.


As a math major (U of Maryland), I've never understood what that means.  What does 5x less mean?  Five times less mathematically would mean they pay 4 times the taxes you paid before back to you. 

I ask because you hear that used constantly now, and I still don't know what it means

Edit:

https://www.quora.com/What-exactly-does-three-times-less-of-something-equate-to-...

Note it says "The phrase 'three times less' is a language entity rather than a mathematical one," hence my confusion as a math major.

And I'm not saying I didn't guess 5x less meant one fifth, I did, but I didn't grasp how it got there.  Basically it's English majors and journalists doing math.  No wonder they can't get jobs ...
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Don_G
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2411
Location: British Columbia
Joined: May 8th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #57 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:11pm
Print Post  
Steve, I was going to continue but I've decided not to for now. You're too longwinded and you've ignored my request to break up your replies so there is room for replies by others. And in reality, you're inventing disagreement when in some cases none exists! Why? I'll figure out that part of you in time.

I'm not ingoring your issues and will respond to any you care to revisit specifically. In a few days because I have to leave the forum today.

I will say though, that you have erred grievously when you condemned unions. That alone lowered my personal estimation of your libertarian ideals being sincere. No libertarian can be allowed to get away with that!

Your politics are too extreme right Steve. The reason for that will be revealed through more conversation.

Sorry to have to follow you into the personal attacks. Maybe we can both rise above that when we discuss these issues again?
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
kaz
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Minarchist

Posts: 2470
Location: Kazmania
Joined: Jun 6th, 2017
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #58 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:15pm
Print Post  
Don_G wrote on Aug 6th, 2017 at 1:11pm:
Steve, I was going to continue but I've decided not to for now. You're too longwinded and you've ignored my request to break up your replies so there is room for replies by others.

I'm not ingoring your issues and will respond to any you care to revisit specifically. In a few days because I have to leave the forum today.

I will say though, that you have erred grievously when you condemned unions. That alone lowered my personal estimation of your libertarian ideals being sincere. No libertarian can be allowed to get away with that!

Your politics are too extreme right Steve. The reason for that will be revealed through more conversation.

Sorry to have to follow you into the personal attacks. Maybe we can both rise above that when we discuss these issues again?


Steve's totally correct about government enforced unions, which is the realty of what unions are today.  Government never misses a chance to expand it's power and people who want more pay for less work and don't mind using guns to get it are too great an opportunity for them to pass up.

OMG, where's Burt?  I can't see him!  Where did he go!



I do throw you a bone once in a while ...
  

Greg Gutfeld - I became a conservative by being around liberals and I became a libertarian by being around conservatives

Matt Stone - I hate conservatives, but I really f'ing hate liberals
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 18955
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Oil subsidies
Reply #59 - Aug 6th, 2017 at 5:13pm
Print Post  
kaz wrote on Aug 6th, 2017 at 12:48pm:
Gawd you're a dolt.  Libertarians support VOLUNTARY unions that are based on market power.  We oppose GOVERNMENT mandated unions enforced with guns.  How is that beyond your comprehension?  Is it possible anyone is that stupid?  How stupid are you?
Thanks kaz, it's rare to hear anyone articulate this. Even more rare to hear it articulated so well.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 ... 4 5 [6] 7 8 
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Oil subsidies
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy