1/24 "'I think the evidence is going to become more and more clear that the
economy is not as hopeful as we would like, which I hope will strengthen
my case (for a tax cut)," Bush told reporters at the start of the
meeting."
\_ I read an interesting discussion on why simplistic view
of economics is fundamentally flawed. What if the
economy was in a boom cycle? Does that mean the
reverse is true, that it's time for a tax hike?
How would Bush explain this one?
\_ It means the economy is doing well _despite_ higher
taxes. Taxes, fees, and regulations hinder economic
growth. The right idea is to set tax levels and other
regulations at a high enough level to maintain infra-
structure, run the government, do some social welfare,
and keep the water drinkable, while limited economic
impact as much as possible. It's a delicate balancing
act. There is no good time for a tax hike, economically
speaking. Taxes are a relatively new concept compared
to economics over the course of human history.
\_ What are you talking about? The Romans had
taxes. Is 2000 years relatively new?
\_ Yes. And would you point to a dead and failed
mess like Rome that collapsed under it's own
weight and mismanagement, not outside influences
as a successful way to run a nation? Yes, the
Romans got beat on by various 'barbarians', but
taking a step back, it was their own fault they
got pounded. It didn't have to be that way.
\_ You dumb, he wasing arguing for the Roman
system or a tax system. His point was that
2000 years isn't new. Besides, how do you
foresee the US isn't going to collapse under
its own weight and mismanagement?
\_ And the Chinese had taxes 4000 years ago too.
\_ As well as a slave-based economy, massive
inflation, and not much of a trade deficit,
compared to the US. -John
\_ And they drank from lead cups, wore togas,
and had cool parties.
\- The Romans certainly did it "their way" --psb
"... a capital levy often defeats its own
purpose. The return was at once seen to be
disappointing. From virtue or from caution,
men refused to purchase estates as they came
on the market. Money soared in value.
The Triumvirs then imposed a levy on the
posession of opulent females, arousing
indignant protest ... other taxes, novel and
crushing, were invented ..."
--Sir Ronald Syme, The Roman Revolution, Book XIV. |
http://csua.com/feed/