conservation of Euros
in [Design]
|
Prev: Which type of volatile RAM has the least duration of data remanencewhen power-offed?
Next: Analog Circuits (world class designs) B. Pease
From: Jim Thompson on 13 May 2010 18:17 On Thu, 13 May 2010 13:13:00 -0700 (PDT), Greegor <greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote: >BS > Of course you love it. You are a right-wing >BS > nitwit, and enthuse about every proposition >BS > that favours the rich, as "The Fair Tax" most >BS > certainly does. Bill Sloman, Nijmegen > >For an Aussie who lives near Amsterdam you >sure are emotional about taxation in the USA! > >You are cartoon like in your liberal extremism. Isn't a VAT very much like the "Fair Tax", a flat rate for all? ...Jim Thompson -- | James E.Thompson, CTO | mens | | Analog Innovations, Inc. | et | | Analog/Mixed-Signal ASIC's and Discrete Systems | manus | | Phoenix, Arizona 85048 Skype: Contacts Only | | | Voice:(480)460-2350 Fax: Available upon request | Brass Rat | | E-mail Icon at http://www.analog-innovations.com | 1962 | The only thing bipartisan in this country is hypocrisy
From: Michael A. Terrell on 13 May 2010 18:26 Greegor wrote: > > BS > Of course you love it. You are a right-wing > BS > nitwit, and enthuse about every proposition > BS > that favours the rich, as "The Fair Tax" most > BS > certainly does. Bill Sloman, Nijmegen > > For an Aussie who lives near Amsterdam you > sure are emotional about taxation in the USA! > > You are cartoon like in your liberal extremism. At least his initials fit his views. -- Anyone wanting to run for any political office in the US should have to have a DD214, and a honorable discharge.
From: John Larkin on 13 May 2010 18:39 On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:12:11 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman <bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: >On May 13, 6:32�pm, John Larkin ><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >> On Thu, 13 May 2010 07:32:26 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com >> wrote: >> >> >> >> >On May 13, 4:39�am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >> >> On May 13, 1:51�am, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> > On May 12, 5:48�pm, "krw wrote: >> >> > > On Wed, 12 May 2010 09:34:59 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >> >> >> > > >Maybe. �A 10% VAT would raise $1.5T a year, enough to pay for Obama's >> >> > > >permanent spending bender on...whatever it was we got for all that >> >> > > >dough he spent--I can't remember. >> >> >> > > *Maybe*. �The deficit for just April was $83B. �Note that April is also the >> >> > > month when the government intake is *highest*, do to the April 15 tax filing >> >> > > date. �In 43 of the last 56 years April has been a net surplus month. � >> >> >> > > <snip> >> >> >> > A 10% VAT gives Obama $125B more/month to fritter away on nothing. >> >> > (Enough for break-even, not enough to pay off any debt.) >> >> >> > Of course that assumes �people continue to buy stuff at the same rate, >> >> > which they won't. �They won't work at the same rate either. �Better >> >> > make it 18%, like Europe. �And, naturally, that won't be enough >> >> > either. �He'll spend more. >> >> >> > That said, Obama won't push a VAT--it doesn't redistribute wealth. >> >> > Deficit spending does. >> >> >> Actually, VAT does redistribute wealth - away from the poor towards >> >> the rich. The poor spend most of their income on buying stuff, which >> >> attracts VAT. >> >> >True. >> >> >> The rich divert a larger part of their income into investment, which >> >> doesn't attract VAT. >> >> >Naturally. �As a nation, we spend 10% of our time and creative energy >> >figuring out how to pay our taxes, and 5% (maybe more) planning the >> >course that minimizes them. >> >> >> Technically speaking, this makes VAT is a >> >> regressive tax. >> >> >In the US we have a proposal called "The Fair Tax," a simple 23% >> >national sales tax. �It would replace all of our federal tax system >> >(personal and corporate income tax, Medicare, Social Security, etc), >> >and eliminate all the credits, deductions, receipts, bookkeeping and >> >time spent dodging & gaming the various income taxes. �The latter >> >costs us hundreds of billions a year, not to mention human energy >> >wasted unproductively. >> >> >A simple "prebate" makes the Fair Tax progressive. >> >> Just exempt basics, like sensible food, reasonable rent, generic >> medicines, public transport, education, stuff like that. Use tax >> policy to steer behavior. > >They tried that in the UK. It rapidly got silly. Food was VAT-exempt, >but eating in a restaurant was not a necessity, so you had to pay VAT >on the bill - unless you bought a take-away meal. That's the way sales tax works in California. If I buy uncooked chicken at Safeway, there's no sales tax. If I buy cooked, hot, ready-to-eat chicken, it's taxed. It's simple, because it's a visible, automated-cash-register, point-of-sale tax. Restaurant food is taxed whether you eat it there or not. I can't imagine how you could work a thing like this all the way back up the VAT chain. It would be easy to structure a national sales tax to exempt the things poorer people actually need. There would be some cheating around the edges, but there always will be some cheating. But things like VAT carousel fraud couldn't happen. (One shop near here sells " *WARM* " corned-beef sandwiches because hot ones have a higher tax rate.) I like the sales tax, as opposed to income tax, because it puts business on a better basis against imports, so saves jobs. And because it would be enormously simpler and cheaper to comply with. No accountants, no tax returns, no exemptions, no deductions, no quarterly estimates, no loopholes... almost. Tax consumption. Don't tax savings or investment or job creation. If a person is rich but doesn't spend any money, nobody can reasonably be jealous of his wealth. John
From: krw on 13 May 2010 18:47 On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:17:02 -0700, Jim Thompson <To-Email-Use-The-Envelope-Icon(a)On-My-Web-Site.com> wrote: >On Thu, 13 May 2010 13:13:00 -0700 (PDT), Greegor ><greegor47(a)gmail.com> wrote: > >>BS > Of course you love it. You are a right-wing >>BS > nitwit, and enthuse about every proposition >>BS > that favours the rich, as "The Fair Tax" most >>BS > certainly does. Bill Sloman, Nijmegen >> >>For an Aussie who lives near Amsterdam you >>sure are emotional about taxation in the USA! >> >>You are cartoon like in your liberal extremism. > >Isn't a VAT very much like the "Fair Tax", a flat rate for all? The difference is that a VAT is collected every time a widget changes hands (when "value (is) added") and is a tax on the seller. A the buyer pays sales tax and it isn't levied on items to be resold. The effect is similar, but a VAT has to be tracked through every step of the food chain. A sales tax only has to be reported by the eventual seller. Bye, bye, IRS (not going to happen).
From: krw on 13 May 2010 21:15
On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:39:28 -0700, John Larkin <jjlarkin(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >On Thu, 13 May 2010 15:12:11 -0700 (PDT), Bill Sloman ><bill.sloman(a)ieee.org> wrote: > >>On May 13, 6:32�pm, John Larkin >><jjlar...(a)highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote: >>> On Thu, 13 May 2010 07:32:26 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> >On May 13, 4:39�am,Bill Sloman<bill.slo...(a)ieee.org> wrote: >>> >> On May 13, 1:51�am, dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >>> >> > On May 12, 5:48�pm, "krw wrote: >>> >> > > On Wed, 12 May 2010 09:34:59 -0700 (PDT), dagmargoodb...(a)yahoo.com wrote: >>> >>> >> > > >Maybe. �A 10% VAT would raise $1.5T a year, enough to pay for Obama's >>> >> > > >permanent spending bender on...whatever it was we got for all that >>> >> > > >dough he spent--I can't remember. >>> >>> >> > > *Maybe*. �The deficit for just April was $83B. �Note that April is also the >>> >> > > month when the government intake is *highest*, do to the April 15 tax filing >>> >> > > date. �In 43 of the last 56 years April has been a net surplus month. � >>> >>> >> > > <snip> >>> >>> >> > A 10% VAT gives Obama $125B more/month to fritter away on nothing. >>> >> > (Enough for break-even, not enough to pay off any debt.) >>> >>> >> > Of course that assumes �people continue to buy stuff at the same rate, >>> >> > which they won't. �They won't work at the same rate either. �Better >>> >> > make it 18%, like Europe. �And, naturally, that won't be enough >>> >> > either. �He'll spend more. >>> >>> >> > That said, Obama won't push a VAT--it doesn't redistribute wealth. >>> >> > Deficit spending does. >>> >>> >> Actually, VAT does redistribute wealth - away from the poor towards >>> >> the rich. The poor spend most of their income on buying stuff, which >>> >> attracts VAT. >>> >>> >True. >>> >>> >> The rich divert a larger part of their income into investment, which >>> >> doesn't attract VAT. >>> >>> >Naturally. �As a nation, we spend 10% of our time and creative energy >>> >figuring out how to pay our taxes, and 5% (maybe more) planning the >>> >course that minimizes them. >>> >>> >> Technically speaking, this makes VAT is a >>> >> regressive tax. >>> >>> >In the US we have a proposal called "The Fair Tax," a simple 23% >>> >national sales tax. �It would replace all of our federal tax system >>> >(personal and corporate income tax, Medicare, Social Security, etc), >>> >and eliminate all the credits, deductions, receipts, bookkeeping and >>> >time spent dodging & gaming the various income taxes. �The latter >>> >costs us hundreds of billions a year, not to mention human energy >>> >wasted unproductively. >>> >>> >A simple "prebate" makes the Fair Tax progressive. >>> >>> Just exempt basics, like sensible food, reasonable rent, generic >>> medicines, public transport, education, stuff like that. Use tax >>> policy to steer behavior. >> >>They tried that in the UK. It rapidly got silly. Food was VAT-exempt, >>but eating in a restaurant was not a necessity, so you had to pay VAT >>on the bill - unless you bought a take-away meal. > >That's the way sales tax works in California. If I buy uncooked >chicken at Safeway, there's no sales tax. If I buy cooked, hot, >ready-to-eat chicken, it's taxed. It's simple, because it's a visible, >automated-cash-register, point-of-sale tax. Restaurant food is taxed >whether you eat it there or not. In Vermong there is a so called "bagel tax". If you buy one bagel, it's taxed as "prepared food". If you buy six they're not taxed because they've now become "groceries". NY has similar silliness, orange juice is not taxed, Hawaiian Punch and Tang are. >I can't imagine how you could work a >thing like this all the way back up the VAT chain. VATs tend to be sales taxes, in reality. >It would be easy to structure a national sales tax to exempt the >things poorer people actually need. There would be some cheating >around the edges, but there always will be some cheating. But things >like VAT carousel fraud couldn't happen. > >(One shop near here sells " *WARM* " corned-beef sandwiches because >hot ones have a higher tax rate.) > >I like the sales tax, as opposed to income tax, because it puts >business on a better basis against imports, so saves jobs. And because >it would be enormously simpler and cheaper to comply with. No >accountants, no tax returns, no exemptions, no deductions, no >quarterly estimates, no loopholes... almost. > >Tax consumption. Don't tax savings or investment or job creation. If a >person is rich but doesn't spend any money, nobody can reasonably be >jealous of his wealth. Leftists and those on the receiving end aren't reasonable. |