- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
On a dollar basis, taxation does not hurt nor benefit an economy
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:14 pm
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:14 pm
The vast majority of taxation goes, eventually, into the pockets of people that will spend it.( people on state aid, government employees, etc). This money eventually goes right back to the businesses that pay for it.
It is a net zero on the functioning of the economy. If the taxation was not there, a firm will have the money. If the taxation is there, a firm will lose the money for a short period of time, but will gain it back through consumers.
Thoughts?
It is a net zero on the functioning of the economy. If the taxation was not there, a firm will have the money. If the taxation is there, a firm will lose the money for a short period of time, but will gain it back through consumers.
Thoughts?
20
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:19 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Taxation is a punitive action. it works to penalize success and it work to move power from the I dividing or corporation into the hands of a politician
This post was edited on 9/29/14 at 1:20 pm
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:20 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
It is a net zero on the functioning of the economy. If the taxation was not there, a firm will have the money.
If the firm doesn't spend that money it effectively disappears from the economy.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:22 pm to SpidermanTUba
Within certain left and right limits, maybe.
Otherwise, taxation significantly slows down the velocity of money.
Otherwise, taxation significantly slows down the velocity of money.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:22 pm to SpidermanTUba
quote:
If the firm doesn't spend that money it effectively disappears from the economy.
Unless they bury it in their backyard, this is 100 % Complete and utter bullshite. As per usual from you, phony scientist.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:24 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
In the absence of taxes, those dollars would naturally be allocated to its most efficient use, where it is most demanded by the average consumer. The government intervenes in this process, takes a huge chunk of money for itself and out of the consumer's hand, and becomes itself a massive consumer, thus skewing the allocation to its most efficient use. 100 people will allocate resources more efficiently than just 1, especially when that 1 is not really accountable to anyway and makes decisions based on political favors.
Remove taxes, all else equal, and the economy will be a good deal stronger. Of course, you would need to find a way to pay for the court system that helps ensure an efficient economy by protecting property rights and enforcing contracts.
Remove taxes, all else equal, and the economy will be a good deal stronger. Of course, you would need to find a way to pay for the court system that helps ensure an efficient economy by protecting property rights and enforcing contracts.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:24 pm to tigeraddict
quote:In the short term, yes. In the long term, the firm will get the money back because of spending on the part of folks that got the money.
. it works to penalize success
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:28 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
Maybe If you look at it on a global scale but when u look at it on a smaller scale taking money via taxes from California corporations an giving it to a louisiana resident doesn't help the California corporation.
Preventing a corporation from hiring another employee because of taxation does not make the corporation more productive because of the additional employee.
Taxation is an impedance to growth and expansion.
Preventing a corporation from hiring another employee because of taxation does not make the corporation more productive because of the additional employee.
Taxation is an impedance to growth and expansion.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:32 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
And on a work/calorie basis, there's no difference between walking and running in exercise. As long as you ignore the efficiency of things.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:32 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
You have to remember a dollar can be more productive in some portfolios.
An investor doing analysis every waking hour on where to invest is going to be more productive than someone who wants a dollar so they can get an extra pack of socks at the dollar general. You can't assume the dollar is equally valuable to both people in an investing sense.
An investor doing analysis every waking hour on where to invest is going to be more productive than someone who wants a dollar so they can get an extra pack of socks at the dollar general. You can't assume the dollar is equally valuable to both people in an investing sense.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:32 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
the firm will get the money back because of spending on the part of folks that got the money.
And the poor sap from whom the money was taken? What loss would be assigned there?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:33 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
HHM, you're trolling. Your post will draw out the Krugman diciples, though.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:38 pm to LeonPhelps
quote:I think you just argued for the economic benefits of redistribution.
100 people will allocate resources more efficiently than just 1
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:40 pm to Korkstand
quote:
I think you just argued for the economic benefits of redistribution.
or genocide. what could be more "efficient?"
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:43 pm to UncleFestersLegs
The poor sap will get the money back through people buying his product
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
what is this i dont even
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:46 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
The poor sap will get the money back through people buying his product
And if he cleans toilets at Jack in the Box?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:47 pm to HempHead
Hemp, is money destroyed when it is transferred? NO.
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:48 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
quote:
The poor sap will get the money back through people buying his product
So a shipbuilder will not be affected by a luxury tax on items over $1M? Or are we not wanting to get to that level of detail?
Posted on 9/29/14 at 1:49 pm to HailHailtoMichigan!
So what you're saying is "the money belongs to everybody" and taxing it is just a different way of spending it. right?
Page 1 of 4
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News