my connection with the tea party

[--Pete]

Hi,

Here is some world bank research by Price Waterhouse Coopers.

http://www.pwc.com/gx/en/paying-taxes/data-tables.jhtml

Thanks, that will come in handy later. Note that that is business tax data, not personal income tax data.

So there is one government employee for every 7 workers. I would call that inefficient.

That is nonsense. It might indicate that too much is being done by the government, and even that would need additional support. It shows absolutely nothing about efficiency. For that, you would have to determine what all those people are doing and show that it could be done by fewer people in the private sector.

I do, and maybe you try to as well, but not enough of my fellow citizens can get past emotional issue politics to vote for boring people who understand leadership and management.

...

It's a good sound bite. Yeah! Let's get our torches and pitchforks and make old Ebenezer Scrooge pay for everything, or we'll ransack his house and take the pot of gold he's got buried in his cellar. What a mean old man, you know him not paying for tiny Tim's operation.

I joined these two because in a sense they belong together. They both point out the basic fallacy of democracy: “A system in which opinions are counted, not weighed.”

I mean close down or turn over most of our foreign bases to the locals. They should deal with their own issues, and we should disentangle ourselves from every brush fire in the world.

Oh, I agree with that. However, I would like to see at least seven carrier groups deployed around the world at all times and another three being refitted and prepared for rotation. Plus a healthy air force, army, and Marine corps.

My problem is with your use of “empire”. An empire is a source of wealth, not a drain on the economy. If we ran our occupations (such as they are) as traditional empires, we would be taxing the occupied peoples and taking their natural resources without compensation.

As I said, rhetoric. And bad rhetoric at that.

I think we are on the same page. I'm just a little hesitant to allow big brother access to everyone's movements and current locations. It would be too easy for the jack booted thugs to kick down the doors ala the movie "Brazil".

Ever look at the numbers for traffic and security cameras in mid to big cities? That horse is long out of the barn and has a herd of his own.

Corporate taxes would be set as the average corporate taxes of the worlds lowest 10 nations.

That would be zero, or nearly so. Might as well just eliminate them completely, especially since the corporations just pass those taxes on.

Well, no. If corporations are going to be treated as quasi people, with freedom of speech, and etc. then they should be willing to contribute enough to cover the costs of those government functions that they use. It just shouldn't be 35% while the Asian rim remains at 5-10%.

Well, first off, you’re conflating two issues that are really separate. The whole corporations as people issue – basically a way to get around the PAC limits and the campaign funding laws – is a whole different ball of snakes. But using the data you supplied above (see, I said it would be useful), the average of the 10 lowest is around 11% (according to that same information, the present USA tax rate is 47%). I suspect that data includes many things which aren’t normally considered “corporate taxes”.

I'm willing to enable "social security", so long as the money is out of the governments hands.

I know you have this obsession about keeping money out of the government’s hands; I just don’t understand it. What difference does it make where the money is between when you pay it and when you get it if it is all regulated the same way. IMO, the problem with SS as it is implemented is that the money paid in is not invested, it is immediately paid out in benefits. The only solutions to that are: ignore it; cease all withholding and benefits (and I’ll join those who are willing to test the concept behind the second amendment if this is done); set up the withholding so that they cover the expenditures plus some to be invested. The third case would, maybe, eventually, make SS a true retirement plan.

Yes, the vouchers would be to acquire basic comprehensive health insurance, and catastrophic coverage. I'm just re-privatizing the health insurance market and removing the impetus for inflation by creating a reasonable fixed price that the government will pay.

Failed the first time, but you want to try it again? Especially with a world full of examples of a better way to do it? Yeah, keep banging your head – one of these days the wall will give up.

I agree and disagree. We need musicians and artists, and I'm torn by the same issue griping classical education in every university and college. Is the purpose of college to pursue a vocation? Is there a value in just studying English literature, as opposed to studying to be an English teacher?

It is a complicated issue. It includes vocational schools as a substitute to high schools, two year junior college “training” programs, etc. I’d love to see a more challenging K-12 (especially 7-12) curriculum, stressing the humanities, math, and science. I’d love to see the undergraduate degree do the same; nothing but BAs in liberal arts (but brought up to date – a modern free man needs to understand science, technology, and math in addition to the traditional liberal arts).

Ultimately, we will have to compromise between the ideal and the real. At a minimum, we need educated people who can grasp the concepts necessary to make them informed voters and trained people who can do the jobs that need doing in a technological society. We have to do that within a reasonable budget.

Yes, we need musicians and artists. No, we do not need to pay for people who want to be musicians, artists, rock climbers, pro athletes, actors, etc. etc. etc. to go to college.

More like an honesty tax. If you play by the book, you get burned. If you manipulate and finagle the system, you can avoid getting burned. So, in general, I oppose systems where people need to lie or cheat as a matter of course. Such as, with financial aid in declaring your degree/major just to get aid. Or, when people on welfare actually earn less money if they get a job and tell the truth. It just screams for people to defraud and deceive, and that is just a bad design.

I consider this quite foolish. If people are lying or cheating, then they are breaking the law and should be punished accordingly. However, the examples you give don’t reflect the situation as far as inheritance tax is concerned. The people who are getting around it are using loopholes which are quite legal (that’s what a loophole is, after all). They are just gaming the system in a manner that is available to all.

Your attitude on this reminds me of the casino owners’ attitude toward card counting. In games where the history has no significance (like roulette and keno) they are more than happy to supply the suckers the information. However, in a game like blackjack where the history does have significance, they not only do not supply it, but accuse those who supply it for themselves of cheating. In both cases (inheritance tax and card counting) the solution is to play the game as it is or change the game to be what you want it to be. (It would be easy enough for the casinos to implement an alternate deck processes for blackjack where each deal is from a fresh deck. It would require better shufflers than are available now, but that’s no big issue.)

OK, I’m two hours late for lunch, so this it it for now.

--Pete