Posted on 09/20/2012 10:26:22 AM PDT by Perdogg
Yes, I referred to some of the taxes everyone pays either directly or indirectly.
No cell phones, AC etc. but the ancient Romans created the concept of “bread and circuses” to keep the urban lumpenproletariate under control. It was necessary there because there was little work for it to do since slave labor was rampant in Roman and it did the majority of labor’s jobs.
In ancient Athens the urban poor was paid to sit on juries (in some cases of hundreds of people) and attend the Assembly. They created havoc in both places. Read “The Wasps” by Aristophanes, a hilarious description of the phenomenon, for a good picture.
Is national defense a luxury in your world?
No. He is saying we should leave all the rotten stratospheric taxes that we have today in place. However, we can still significantly grow the leviathan government by using a Value Add VAT tax on top of all we already have - that would mean that all pay taxes.
What did the Founding Fathers have in mind? And how much did it cost?
I think they get away with it being constitutional because each bracket of income is charged the same rate. So, for example, everybody’s first $50,000 is charged one rate. But if you make over $50,000, that amount above it is charged the next rate. You still pay the same lower rate on your first $50,000.
Doesn’t mean it’s a good system. A constitutional amendment to make a flat tax is a good idea. Then Obama can’t go around talking about how he’s going to raise taxes “only” on the rich. If he raised taxes, it would have to apply to everybody. Imagine how that would destroy that campaign message, no longer being able to talk about raising taxes unless it had to apply to everybody proportionally.
The Founding Fathers’ biggest worry were multi-masted sailing ships and indians. If we based national defense on what the Founding Fathers had in mind, we’d just be buying lots of muskets. You good with that?
Rush keeps yammering on about this move which does not appear to be ideological but rather panic. He seems utterly unaware that this lag in result exists.
Economics has plenty of econometric studies which accurately predict the sign of movement and often more about the results of policy changes. It is not like chemistry because the human element and choice is more involved in the results of changes. And there are economists whose writings are always of use.
There are also difficulties posed by the sheer comprehensiveness of the subject. What other combines historical analysis, statistics, advanced mathematics, psychology, sociology, logic, even an ability to draw?
There is a big difference in predicting the future of a stock and predicting what changing the interest rate will do. Or predicting what the impact of a regulation change will do.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.