21-01-2003 00:42									#31
	Inflate your Upload Space

quote: Originally posted by chegitz guevara Things change, my friend, things change.

Sorry, but as Trotsky would say, communism has been consigned to the dustbin of history.

Ozz: Cromwell's revolution did lead to those things. A bloodbath occured in Ireland and a fundamentalist regime was imposed on England.

	21-01-2003 00:43									#32
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by Ozz Get rid half of the Government waste and corruption and taxes would drop so much that you wouldn't care about some minimum wager abusing an extra $50 to buy a pair of shoes.

Silly silly person. Several things-- The minimum wager is WORKING and often gets less money/ benefits that the person who does not work. I would support a system that would reward this person but often what happens is going to work disqualifies people from so many benefits that they end up losing out and then quitting work in frustration

UI abuse is epidemic in some places. There are whole towns were people get laid off upon attaining minimum qualification periods so others can qualify. An employer was suprised to get zero applications for full time work in a town that had an unemployment rate of around 50%. On our street, the only kid that had a mini bike was the kid on social assistance. His parents worked a number of jobs but it was ALL unreported.

Don't take me wrong-- there a large number of people who legitimately need what they get-- In nmany cases I wish there was more that could be done. But there are also far too many crooks and abusers in the system.

Finally, whenever anyone talks about paying less taxes, someone will always retort with comments about not wanting to help the needy, or healthcare or education. Well guess what, the Canadian government has been runnning surpluses despite much waste so more funds were already there for those needs-- Take the money the libs wasted on cancelled helicopters, government porkbarreling and the latest gun registry and there was even more money available. So don't tell me my tax dollars went to feed the needy.

	21-01-2003 00:48									#33
	Suffering from ads?

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia 3. India 4. Taiwan

3. 47 million dead
4 Taiwan? When did they have a revoution?

	21-01-2003 00:58									#34
	Put an end to popups!

quote: Originally posted by Flubber An employer was suprised to get zero applications for full time work in a town that had an unemployment rate of around 50%. So don't tell me my tax dollars went to feed the needy.

Silly Cranklyhead

You said it, the employer pays SO low he can't complete with welfare. I don't feel sorry for him at all, bastard.

No, your tax dollars went to feed the greedy.

Welfare/UIC fraud is a minor economic problem compared with the Federal government's corruption and
mismangement.

	21-01-2003 01:00									#35
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Back to the original topic...

a wealth tax would penlize investment, which also drives the economy. It would be a lot better of a deal to by an annuity or get a pension (which would be untaxed, as they're income) than to own stocks (wealth). It also brings in big problems: you'd be persuading the enitre population to go deeply into debt, since that would presumably count against networth, thus making the economy ridiculously unstable in case of a market collapse (housing or equity).

Or worse, if you taxes assets but ignored liabilities, then suddenly nobody couls own a house - you'd be paying tax on the whole value of the house while still paying interest on the part of it that you don't own.

	21-01-2003 01:01									#36
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

You can't have a fair tax system. That's one big reason that capitalism sucks.

A wealth tax would encourage the wealthy to invest their capital were it would be the most productive. I forget the economist name who was big in this area, George Somebody (not Bush of course). He was big in the 19th century. I'll get back with the name and more details.

I tend to agree with what idea that the US would not be so strong with this wealth tax because people would take their wealth elsewhere. Its just a hypothetical thing (assuming that the level of wealth remained constant). Another reason that capitalism sucks is that the wealthy can take their capital all over the world until they find a government who will cater to their wishes.

	21-01-2003 01:02									#37
	Put an end to popups!

DP

	21-01-2003 01:06									#38
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Goingonit Back to the original topic... a wealth tax would penlize investment, which also drives the economy. It would be a lot better of a deal to by an annuity or get a pension (which would be untaxed, as they're income) than to own stocks (wealth). It also brings in big problems: you'd be persuading the enitre population to go deeply into debt, since that would presumably count against networth, thus making the economy ridiculously unstable in case of a market collapse (housing or equity). Or worse, if you taxes assets but ignored liabilities, then suddenly nobody couls own a house - you'd be paying tax on the whole value of the house while still paying interest on the part of it that you don't own.

Wealth doesn't drive the economy. Income drives the economy. Are you familiar with the Paradox of Thrift by John Maynard Keynes. When people save their money it causes economic downfall.

	21-01-2003 01:09									#39
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

Ozz - source?

	21-01-2003 01:12									#40
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

"Wealth doesn't drive the economy. Income drives the economy. Are you familiar with the Paradox of Thrift by John Maynard Keynes. When people save their money it causes economic downfall."

Which, of course, explains the "Japanese Miracle" of the 50s-80s.

Keynes was right and wrong, btw. It just depends upon what Economy A needs at the moment - sometimes saving is more beneficial, sometimes spending is. Keynes should've realized that.

	21-01-2003 01:15									#41
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Shi Huangdi Ozz: Cromwell's revolution did lead to those things. A bloodbath occured in Ireland and a fundamentalist regime was imposed on England.

Ah, Regardless of who was running England Ireland
would have been put down, again and again until
1930. This was nothing to do with Cromwell.

Yes, fundamentalist regime was imposed on England. But an intolerent regime existed prior to Cromwell, against the Purtians, Quakers etc. The Purtians did
not impose a terror like the French or Russians. It
was the Non-Puritians turn to emigrate.

The Republic didn't last and wasn't passed to Chrisopher Cromwell. The King returned to a very differient England.

All revolutions impose regimes that force their fellow
countrymen to flee. Ask any United Empire Loyalist
in Canada about the Successful American Revolution.

	21-01-2003 01:21									#42
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Lawrence of Arabia Ozz - source?

Have to wait, I'm at work

I just remember the number from Churchill's History of the Second World War when India and Pakistan split.
He blamed Gandi's impatience for the bloodbath.

I source from written texts rather than web pages.

	21-01-2003 01:28									#43
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

no problem

	21-01-2003 01:42									#44
	Lose 30 kilos (of popups)

quote: Originally posted by JohnT "Wealth doesn't drive the economy. Income drives the economy. Are you familiar with the Paradox of Thrift by John Maynard Keynes. When people save their money it causes economic downfall." Which, of course, explains the "Japanese Miracle" of the 50s-80s. Keynes was right and wrong, btw. It just depends upon what Economy A needs at the moment - sometimes saving is more beneficial, sometimes spending is. Keynes should've realized that.

Investment doesn't even come from wealth. Investment is part of income and spending. Saving is a drain on the economy. No economist disagrees with this.

	21-01-2003 01:44									#45
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: You can't have a fair tax system. That's one big reason that capitalism sucks

quote: Another reason that capitalism sucks is that the wealthy can take their capital all over the world until they find a government who will cater to their wishes.

What bold statements.

One could establish a "fair tax" system within a capitalist society. All one has to do is to establish what is "fair".

I agree that the tax rates for those who make less should not have to pay higher rates (so I am pretty much against a flat tax). I also agree that those that make more should also have to return more. Yet, 40%?

I think that the way taxes are set-up now were more or less considered fair at the time they were established. Since, they have mutated into something that is unfair.

It would not be a fair world if everything one worked hard for would vanish the minute they obtained it. Raising taxes on the rich (high income) and wealthy (high net worth) would only make it harder for the little man to get ahead, or to become rich or wealthy. Think about who pays your salary, or were your precious income comes from.

As for that second statement. If one is American they must pay on everything they make regardless of where they make it...correct? I am not sure.
Even if not, If they are not operating within a captialist society then it really isn't a fault with capitalism, but a fault with the other country/region. I see that second statement as an advantage of capitalism and not a reason it sucks.

The reason it sucks is because it generates greed by ingrates who wish to make the salary of a doctor while sitting on their rear watching Opera all day. You want to talk "fair"?!

You can't have a society were everyone is paid what they are worth. That is the problem with all other economic systems but capitalism.

	21-01-2003 01:45									#46
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

But when people "save" money at the bank, the bank "invests" it back in the economy.

Now if Keynes was talking about saving your money by totally withdrawing it from circulation (putting it under your mattress), he'd be spot on.

	21-01-2003 01:46									#47
	Increase Your PM Length

The economist that I was refering to is Henry George. The book is called "Progress and Poverty." It's on the internet http://americanhistory.about.com/gi....org%2Fchp1.htm

These guys who supported a wealth tax were kept out of the university system by intellectuals who were against the wealth tax. That's why we have an income tax instead today.

	21-01-2003 01:49									#48
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by JohnT But when people "save" money at the bank, the bank "invests" it back in the economy. Now if Keynes was talking about saving your money by totally withdrawing it from circulation (putting it under your mattress), he'd be spot on.

He was and that is what we call wealth. Only a potion of what people save is invested back into the economy the rest is used for speculation. This portion is a drain on the economy. A wealth tax would supposedly reduce this drain.

	21-01-2003 02:00									#49
	Support Apolyton

"He was and that is what we call wealth. Only a potion of what people save is invested back into the economy the rest is used for speculation. This portion is a drain on the economy. A wealth tax would supposedly reduce this drain."

But speculation is investing too, albeit of a risky kind. If I, in 1859, decided to go to Pennsylvania and see if I could drill oil for sale (though there was very little market for it), that would be speculation. But it happened, and the world is a better place for the speculative interests of Edward Drake.

All a wealth tax would do in this instance is depress stock prices, further dampening investment. Imagine if every wealthy person in America had to sell 100% of their assets, every year, because of a silly, punitive "wealth tax." I think the effect on capital and investment could charitably be called "disasterous."

	21-01-2003 02:01									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Alpha Centauri

quote: Originally posted by Japher You can't have a society were everyone is paid what they are worth. That is the problem with all other economic systems but capitalism.

People are paid what they are worth with a capitalist society?! A ditch digger should be the richest man then. Well, maybe those nurses who have to help you with your bowel movement

The rich are always going to get out of their taxes even if we were to tax them more. There is no way to make it fair.

	21-01-2003 02:07									#51
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

quote: Originally posted by JohnT "He was and that is what we call wealth. Only a potion of what people save is invested back into the economy the rest is used for speculation. This portion is a drain on the economy. A wealth tax would supposedly reduce this drain." But speculation is investing too, albeit of a risky kind. If I, in 1859, decided to go to Pennsylvania and see if I could drill oil for sale (though there was very little market for it), that would be speculation. But it happened, and the world is a better place for the speculative interests of Edward Drake. All a wealth tax would do in this instance is depress stock prices, further dampening investment. Imagine if every wealthy person in America had to sell 100% of their assets, every year, because of a silly, punitive "wealth tax." I think the effect on capital and investment could charitably be called "disasterous."

This is what seculation is. When you buy something at price A in the hopes that the price will increase. Their is a reoccuring problem in the stock market. That is that most of the wealth has only speculative value. It is not helping the economy at all. In fact, it is dragging it down. What is worse, when the bubble bursts you have big problems, because then peoples spending goes way down.

	21-01-2003 02:11									#52
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by JohnT All a wealth tax would do in this instance is depress stock prices, further dampening investment. Imagine if every wealthy person in America had to sell 100% of their assets, every year, because of a silly, punitive "wealth tax." I think the effect on capital and investment could charitably be called "disasterous."

Of course they aren't going to do that, but can you imagine how stimulative that would be to the economy? If you can, you are beginning to learn something here.

	21-01-2003 02:19									#53
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: A ditch digger should be the richest man then. Well, maybe those nurses who have to help you with your bowel movement

while i agree that a nurse or a ditch digger are doing very difficult jobs - anyone can do that with little training.

people who invest their lives and intellect into society should rightly so get more.

i have to say though, that i disagree with the totally bloated salary company CEOs often give themselves. They could open a new factory with that sum.

	21-01-2003 02:20									#54
	Browse Apolyton AD-FREE

quote: Originally posted by DuncanK Of course they aren't going to do that, but can you imagine how stimulative that would be to the economy? If you can, you are beginning to learn something here.

Actually, it would be more likely that I'm just using your favorite analytical model to look at the same facts. Why not do the reverse, Duncan?

	21-01-2003 02:22									#55
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

John T,

The thing that you are missing is the fact of diminishing returns. With each extra dollar that is invested in the economy that dollar earns less and less. At some point people with savings wont invest anymore until the return on their investments increase. Those returns only increase when peoples income increases.

	21-01-2003 02:24									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Originally posted by JohnT Actually, it would be more likely that I'm just using your favorite analytical model to look at the same facts. Why not do the reverse, Duncan?

The neo-calssical model is just a joke. It is just used for rhetoric. It simply can't hold up.

	21-01-2003 02:28									#57
	Got spare money?

quote: People are paid what they are worth with a capitalist society?! A ditch digger should be the richest man then. Well, maybe those nurses who have to help you with your bowel movement The rich are always going to get out of their taxes even if we were to tax them more. There is no way to make it fair.

The comments I made were an attack at:

quote: You can't have a fair tax system. That's one big reason that capitalism sucks

Mainly stating that one can have a fair tax system and that one can be paid within a capitalist society. I did not indicate that these two things existed. Yet, I do agree with

quote: while i agree that a nurse or a ditch digger are doing very difficult jobs - anyone can do that with little training. people who invest their lives and intellect into society should rightly so get more.

The argument I was trying to make was that in a non-capitalist society neither (equal pay, fair taxation) could exist.

	21-01-2003 02:32									#58
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Sirotnikov people who invest their lives and intellect into society should rightly so get more.

Why, is college such hard work? Is it less desirable than work?

	21-01-2003 02:34									#59
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by Japher The argument I was trying to make was that in a non-capitalist society neither (equal pay, fair taxation) could exist.

No, I admit it would not be completely fair, but certainly much closer.

	21-01-2003 02:49									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

quote: Why, is college such hard work? Is it less desirable than work?

Good questions.

College is like an investment of oneself. It show that one cares about their capacity to learn and to grow, something which is desireable within positions that yield greater control. Granted that some degrees may be pieces of cake, that some students can coast, yet just by attending one shows that they are disciplined, and understand that time leads to success, not instant gratification of current desires (merely getting a job).

College, in general, is not hard (though I found it to be). Yet, the discipline required to excel and achieve through and within academia is difficult and requires a progression of maturity to step into the real world, while keeping all of the knowledge one learned within the school.

Go to college get a good job for good pay - works and is fair, IMO
Don't go to school, work digging a ditch for lesser pay - works and is fair, IMO
Go to college and don't get a good job - happens, and to those it happens to, for the most part, is fair, IMO
Don't go to college, apply yourself and succeed - happens and is fair, IMO

So you know, a higher percentage of Millionares either did not go to college or admit to not using any of the schooling they receive to make them rich... where schooling is different then an education. -Source, Thomas J. Stanley, "The Millionare Mind"

quote: No, I admit it would not be completely fair, but certainly much closer.

ok