"Freedom" thread or something

rogerthat wrote: lol...I can only infer from the above that you are not a very attentive reader, Geoff.  On that one point, I am now in whole hearted agreement with the libertarians in this thread.     Listen to what I am saying, read my words carefully, you are getting too enthusiastic about your own agenda. You haven't even figured out that I am simply saying human nature as it is (and not as it ought to be) does not make a truly free market a particularly great idea.

rogerthat wrote: I am beginning to think that your views are not very different from mine (which I can sum up as "at least markets do know how to create jobs, lefties fail badly even at that").  But for some reason which is not clear to me, you feel more inclined to be seen as agreeing with the hardcore libertarians.

rogerthat wrote: Markets are a necessary evil.  I cannot ever uphold a completely free market without any govt regulation but not having a market driven economy at all is not a good way to grow.  Most of the countries that achieved growth with heavy state intervention also impinged heavily on personal liberties.  E.g China.  I cannot see that approach as palatable for American citizens at all.   Communism is bad, it's basically "set sail for fail".   The then most industrialised state of India, West Bengal, voted in a leftie govt for reasons best known to themselves and they ruined it so badly that it will be a long time before businesses venture to set up shop there again.  The only ones who still do business there are retailers for the size of its market and those who are basically stuck there with nowhere to go.   Never ever make that mistake again.   Pulling a little bit to the center is fine but swing to the extreme left and you will get into trouble.   This is not ideological dislike but personal experience.  My family was stuck initially in the capital city of West Bengal and we were fortunate to be able to leave there before it was too late.

I think one of the main reasons I think rabid free-marketers and I don't get along is their insistence that taxes are evil.  So I've done some thinking about it, and analyzed why I think taxes are actually a good idea, and what it boils down to is this: taxes allow us to buy a hamburger, whereas otherwise we'd be buying a la carte.  Without taxes, we'd be buying a single bun from one place, a single slice of cheese from another, a hamburger patty from another, a slice of tomato from another...you get the picture.  And in the end you have a $30 burger.  Whereas taxes allow us to get the whole package in one deal, and get it for much cheaper.  But then you get Libertarians who come along and say "well, I don't want the slice of tomato - I found a better tomato at the farmer's market down the street.  So I shouldn't have to pay for the tomato.  Oh, and I don't like lettuce, so I shouldn't have to pay for that either."  Well, you are welcome to tell the server at the restaurant that you don't want the slice of tomato or the piece of lettuce, but good luck getting them to lower the price.
So then Libertarians rant and rave about how unjust it is that we're actually REQUIRED to pay taxes.  They go on and on about how unjust it is to be imprisoned, etc. etc.  Which they may have a point, but I am not interested in going to an a la carte scenario - that would suck, I believe.  Once again, I have to question "where are we now, what's the end goal, and how do we take little steps to get there without making our situation too much worse in the meantime?"  So what I'm interested in is getting to a place where we've packaged up the best hamburger in all of history, and it's going for a steal of a deal, and it's such a great deal and such a perfect hamburger that you'd be absolutely MAD to even consider NOT paying for that hamburger.  I think all this talk of the injustice of being required to buy the hamburger and pointing out how there are better quality tomatoes out there is just a distraction from the real issue, and I want to get past all that stupidity that would lead us into a la carte territory.

Yes, culture is very, very important.  I think it's not the first time I have said that on this thread.  We can go on and on about economic systems but they can only facilitate at best.   It's like, you can pave the SW19 lawns as well as every year for the finals, but if it's Lleyton Hewitt v/s David Nalbandian, it's not going to please the crowds no matter what.   If the people are prepared to keep national interest in mind and work together for progress, most impediments can turn relatively minor.   But if they are perpetually interested in double crossing each other, it can fuel more and more cynicism and economic failure becomes a self fulfilling prophecy.   Speaking of which, I think it's completely counter productive to ask what is so important about national interest.  It may not figure in John Lennon's universe but as long as we are born in and live in nation states, it is important.  In a roundabout way, the nation's betterment benefits us but we are usually too myopic to see this.   It starts with politicians seeking to use their position as a vehicle for upward mobility and the cynicism finally percolates down to the lowest level.

Dean wrote: timothy leary wrote: Dean wrote: ::snip::  disclaimer: I'm not defending Monsanto or GM here - if this stuff is carcinogenic then we need to know about it, but to do that we need proper controlled scientific studies - not second-rate hack-jobs and scare-mongering. http://www.catalystmagazine.net/blogs/item/1906-roundup-unready That's exactly not the kind of thing I was referring to, unfortunately Don Huber seems to be a man on a mission - he "leaked" an anecdotal letter in 2011 with no corroborating evidence, no published papers, no peer review - and there has been none in the two years since the "leak" and there has been no published evidence of this new kind of pathogen (apparently a micro-fungus only visible with a scanning electron microscope - let's see the micrographs at least) and no factual evidence of 20% infertility and 45% abortions in cattle has ever been reported (that would major news).

I too would support rates of tax on income - including corporate tax - to be as low as possible.  When the tax cost on the balance sheet is low, people are more likely to just comply and get done with it than to hire an army of lawyers and accountants to get out of complying.  I would instead support sales tax on luxury items, on purchase of property above a certain value threshold.  I would also support high rates of short term capital gains tax to discourage speculative activity in the stock and commodity trading markets.   This would ensure that a heavy burden of tax is not imposed on those who cannot afford it and also serve to direct economic activities in a direction that is arguably healthier in the long run.  If a country has a large population, it is better off creating lots of relatively low paying jobs for many rather than only a few high paying jobs.  It is better for people to at least be engaged in the workforce and crib about their pay than to have them unemployed.   I can reasonably guess that the US tax system - like the Indian one - also has lots of breaks, deductions, etc.  I think these serve to complicate the system too much (which is where mr. accountant, a la yours truly, gets his pay ) and there should be low rates of tax instead, without breaks or credits except where unavoidable.  Tax rules should be simple to understand and comply with.       

Edited by rogerthat - August 23 2013 at 10:26

Well, we are not paid just how to teach businessmen how to save a penny here or there through loopholes.  I would rather accountants were involved in making informed judgments on disclosures and capital/revenue expenditure debates.   People will still come to accountants for their tax returns because it would give them that bit of comfort that they are complying properly with the rules.  But having litigation on tax only because the law is too complicated and vague is a waste of resources.   

Edited by JJLehto - August 23 2013 at 12:34

http://www.criigen.org/SiteEn/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=379&Itemid=32