Re: SSN entitlements, US (still): Population and longevity

From: kevincar (kevindotcar_at_yahoo.com)
Date: 07/17/04 

Date: 17 Jul 2004 00:26:08 -0700

"Kent Paul Dolan" <xanthian@well.com> wrote in message news:<0210bfcc823d8dcd70b59c1242c18a46.48257@mygate.mailgate.org>...
> "kevincar" <kevindotcar@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
[---]

> Next, _ALL_ taxes increase economic barriers to
> market entry, that's precisely why, in the US, taxes
> on the Internet have been forbidden and that measure
> renewed; give the baby time to grow before you break
> its back.
>
  Not true anymore- Sales tax everywhere.
  And OK Kent, I'll bite on this one :-) Taxes are
  NOT a market barrier-to-entry but a "fee" for
  services performed by the government (is it just me
  or is it getting hot in here?)

> Thus, "they increase economic barriers to market
> entry" is not a better argument against any one tax
> than it is against taxes in general, and we _need_
> taxes in general, so that argument is invalid.
>
  THAT my dear sir is a VERY broad-brushed opinion, and
  not fact; I could more easily say (and 3 branches
  of govt parrot this) that the gubermint performs vital
  functions that can't be performed by the private sector
  and therefore we need to give %50 of our income
  to them every, oh, lets make it April.

> The rest of the story is, though, it isn't that we
> (in the US) don't have work that needs doing, it's
> that we don't have humans to fill those jobs, due to
> our ongoing "baby bust" demographic bubble being the
> cohort entering the workforce, nor a great love for
> massive immigration, and absolutely (except for CEOs
> and CFOs) _detest_ outsourcing to overseas sites.
>
  No, the simple problem is (as you said earlier,) that
  there is an un-fulfillable promise being made that was
  implied over 70 years ago that most people are betting
  the farm on - Economic equilibrium is what it is; JMK
  proved in the 30's that economies can be in full
  equilibrium during a raging depression;
  Overseas outsourcing is an expression of economic
  equilibrium, in that US programmers, financial
  planners, radiologists and insurance actuarials were
  demanding $100K + salaries a year for work that
  was really not that hard (yes, I'm a programmer,
  have been for 32 years), AND not heeding history's
  lessons that cheaper alternatives will ALWAYS be
  found... It's the first rule of business: You make
  a buck on either the turnaround or the margin.

> So, if we want the work done within our own borders,
> we need to automate a great deal of it.
>
> Now, however, a big portion of the "workforce" is
> automata, and under the current system, they have no
> income taxes, and thus contribute no great amount of
> tax revenue, and most of that to the local, not
> federal, tax base. Nothing, that is to say, at least
> in comparision to an income tax on a human working
> doing the same tax. There are indeed local revenue
> physical plant taxes (I think not Federal ones, but
> I don't _know_ that), but by having the income tax as
> an alternative to employer oriented taxes, the
> greater politician buying power of big business than
> of the individual employee, assures that the tax
> burden will never be fairly shared by the business
> side while individual income taxes exist to absorb
> it instead.

  Well, yes and no. Businesses pay LOTS of things
  that we don't; payroll taxes, communications taxes,
  malpractice tax, reinsurance fees, and lots more...
  it's no bed of roses, lemme tell U.
   
  I think what may be skewing your judgement is a belief
  (and a not-invalid one, I may add) is that corruption
  plays a part in corporate finance; I have had many
  jobs in the largest companies in the world, and there
  have been malapropisms in many- that is why
  companies WANT to be huge; they can get away with more,
  through the guise of "economic leverage" - yupyup.
  
  There HAS been a real reason for this in the past;
  Government was banking on corporations getting big,
  so that they can hire of us hoi polloi... ie, the
  "trickle-down economics" theory. But nowadays, as
  companies become more global, there is less that both
  governments, AND the companies themselves can do
  to control their destinies... both legally AND
  illegaly ... Why do you think gambling is
  becoming accepted in all 50 states? heck, it's about
  the only thing that you (and the state) can DEPEND
  on (that the house always wins). The reality is
  that no one really knows what to do; economics is
  becoming too hard to figure out.
>
> By treating a robot worker as a taxable entity with
> an "income tax" at the same level as a/several
> human(s) with the same productive abilities, we put
> tax money lost by the baby bust back into the
> Federal treasury, and the existing Ponzi scheme of
> government social security can at least stagger
> along until a better solution is implemented.
>
 Define "Robot". My digital watch? My automated SQL
 Server DTS that replaced four secretaries? Or do I
 limit it to my Cincinnatii Millicron Model 1200
 Assembly Armature?
>
> Robots don't vote, and a campaign to "let the robots
> pay their fair share" would find _immense_ support
> from folks who thought the the result would be
> lower, or less rapidly rising, taxes on them, IMAO.
  
 Again, you're really losing me- U might have some great
 economic grand idea, but it's as clear as fog...
 people are people, and machines are machines, and labor
 is labor.
 But to follow-thru with your idea, I could
 argue that the government is taking the path of least
 resistance, by taxing those people who CREATE the
 labor-saving machinery at a higher rate... to the
 government it's a wash; to use the automated SQL
 Server doo-hickyprogram that replaces 4 secretaries
 as an example;

  1 single geek-engineer @ $100K = $40K in tax revenue
  vs.
  4 married secretaries @ $35K/year = 4 * $10K in tax revenue

  Granted, as more jobs disappear overseas, the gov't
  will get more and more upset, as the tax base dwindles,
  but a new equilibrium will be found; probably via
  economic protectionism, war, terrorism, but you already
  poo-pooed that idea, so I won't bother you with it :-)

  One thing that someone considered is a "mileage tax"
  for IP packets, but then along cane P2P... We are in
  a very interesting time; it's almost like a "Global
  Economic Warming" trend; it's very hard to stop a planet
  (or so I've heard... I haven't reallt tried, though).
>
> xanthian.

K.C

Relevant Pages

  • Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes
    ... good money, but not too high to cause investment in alternatives. ... don't trust the government to "redistribute" anything, ... Unfortunately in many states these taxes go directly into the states general funds and never do get spent on improving the roads if the roads in my area are any indicator. ... Just apply the state's sales tax rate. ...
    (rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang)
  • Re: OT: oil profits
    ... I was focusing on government as % of GDP. ... higher taxes to fund even more programs and with them, ... The USSR did have a modest tax to try to take account ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.bos-redsox)
  • Re: OT: oil profits
    ... I was focusing on government as % of GDP. ... higher taxes to fund even more programs and with them, ... The USSR did have a modest tax to try to take account ...
    (alt.sports.baseball.bos-redsox)
  • Re: We Needed A Big Gas Tax Like We Need a Scathing Case of Herpes
    ... then the American consumer is so darn happy with the cheap gas ... > I want the market to set the price of gas, not the government. ... the government gives us other breaks on other taxes. ... of tax breaks for the increase in gas taxes. ...
    (rec.autos.makers.ford.mustang)
  • Re: McCain-onomics
    ... avoids connecting the dots between taxes and what they finance. ... "The federal gasoline tax helps pay for highway ... should lecture John McCain on economics. ... believe that the best government is the least government. ...
    (soc.retirement)