The Magic Caf
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » So what's the best income tax rate? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9..21~22~23 [Next]
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
While it seems pretty obvious that inflation and unemployment are important factors in well-being, it seems bizarre to weight them equally. I find it hard to believe that, say, 15% unemployment with 1% inflation is just as bad as 6% unemployment with 10% inflation.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
tommy
View Profile
Eternal Order
Devil’s Island
16355 Posts

Profile of tommy
I have heard experts say we are going into a deflation. I can't seem to get my head around that. In simple terms can anyone explain to me what that will mean?
If there is a single truth about Magic, it is that nothing on earth so efficiently evades it.

Tommy
MagicSanta
View Profile
Inner circle
Northern Nevada
5845 Posts

Profile of MagicSanta
Believe me, unemployment and poverty suck.
gdw
View Profile
Inner circle
4826 Posts

Profile of gdw
Listening to those who are constantly trying to "pull levers and push buttons" to adjust the economy is like listening to the circles within circles of an Earth centric universe.
Constantly having to make never ending adjustments, each perpetuating more adjustments simply because they refuse to abandon initial assumptions.
It's amazing, people will criticize you for "biting the hand that feeds you," while they're busy praising the hand that beats them.

"You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one."

I won't forget you Robert.
Mr. Mystoffelees
View Profile
Inner circle
I haven't changed anyone's opinion in
3623 Posts

Profile of Mr. Mystoffelees
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 19:53, tommy wrote:
I have heard experts say we are going into a deflation. I can't seem to get my head around that. In simple terms can anyone explain to me what that will mean?


I think it means we will be using a new word to describe a depression...
Also known, when doing rope magic, as "Cordini"
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 19:53, tommy wrote:
I have heard experts say we are going into a deflation. I can't seem to get my head around that. In simple terms can anyone explain to me what that will mean?


Presumably it means that costs are going to go down. Your Euro will buy more next year than this year. The big question is whether you'll be making as many next year as this.

John
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20867 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2010-12-11 14:50, balducci wrote:
Quote:

Laffer curve. Just wanted to throw it out because someone will bring it up anyhow.

Indeed. Carrie already had earlier in the thread. Anyway, the problem is that people take a theoretical idea like the Laffer curve to defend their tax policy ideas, and ignore the fact that the theoretical construct of the Laffer curve simply ignores / violates reality. They also ignore the fact that there is more than one shape of non-linear curve out there available to work with (i.e., Laffer's choice is one of many, and the others are more realistic).

Excerpted from elsewhere online:

The Laffer curve is a compelling economic concept. It claims that government revenue as a function of tax rates is shaped as an inverted-U. This means that, at first, raising the tax rate from zero will increase tax rates. However, there is some tax rate which maximizes government revenue (but not necessarily social welfare). When tax rates are increased beyond this point, however, tax revenues decrease because as income taxes rise, the disincentive to work becomes sufficiently great that the higher per hour amount of tax receipts will be more than offset by the workers incentive to work less hours.

The theory is theoretically sound and elegant, but do economists actually know what the tax rate which maximizes government revenue will be?

The mathematician Martin Gardner claims not [via] his satirical construct called the neo-Laffer curve. “The neo-Laffer curve matches the original curve near the two extremes of 0% and 100%, but rapidly collapses into an incomprehensible snarl of chaos at the middle. Gardner based his curve on actual US economic data collected in a fifty year period by statistician Persi Diaconis.”

Gardner makes the sound point that the Laffer curves is very appropriate for theoretical analysis and as a pedagogical tool, but it does not sufficiently reflect reality in order for politicians to make tax policy based on the construct.

---

Another article on the Laffer curve:

http://scienceblogs.com/goodmath/2007/07......from.php

I recommend reading the whole thing.


I have to say we agree. It is a great "theoretical" concept, but not easy to govern with. I think it is easier to look BACK at a dilema and apply the curve than to try to apply it and look forward.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20867 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2010-12-11 22:23, Magnus Eisengrim wrote:
Funny how these discussions descend into claims of single causes for complex phenomena--but only when it backs up our prior beliefs.

Can anyone here really make a case that a particular US president's tax policy is responsible for changes in employment rates during the presidency? Don't you have a tiny suspicion that things like, say, global commodity prices, trading relationships, wars or crop successes and failures MIGHT have a a little influence?

John


As much as I am reluctant to throw a fact into this discussion, a president does NOT deceide tax policy.

Your first sentence is inspired. Single causes for complex problems when it fits our beliefs. I like it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20867 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 11:51, Payne wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 09:08, Carrie Sue wrote:
Looks fake to me.

I'm sorry, but the idea that Carter created more jobs than Reagan, when Carter left this nation in what he referred to as a national malaise?

Wrong number. I don't buy it.

Carrie


Read it and weep

"Most surprising is that Carter ranks first in job creation as 10 million jobs were added during his four years in office, more on an annualized basis than Clinton or Reagan."

From http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html

He also raised taxes seven times expanded the deficit and expanded the federal government

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/......408.html


Isn't it easier to have an annualized number after only 4 years than 8?

I guess we have it all figured out in only 5 pages. All the lib socialist types want higher taxes, and want to eliminate the rich. (But once you do, who do you SOAK for taxes then?) And all the lib socialist types hate RR and a Bush of any sort.

Got it.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Destiny
View Profile
Inner circle
1429 Posts

Profile of Destiny
I like Kate Bush.
Magnus Eisengrim
View Profile
Inner circle
Sulla placed heads on
1064 Posts

Profile of Magnus Eisengrim
And Kate's...?
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity.--Yeats
Destiny
View Profile
Inner circle
1429 Posts

Profile of Destiny
Are you making naughty innuendo's or are you innocent of the talents of the great Kate?
Al Angello
View Profile
Eternal Order
Collegeville, Pa. USA
11047 Posts

Profile of Al Angello
I kinda like "running up that hill" but Kate Bush is a little too spooky for my taste.
Al Angello The Comic Juggler/Magician
http://www.juggleral.com
http://home.comcast.net/~juggleral/
"Footprints on your ceiling are almost gone"
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20867 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
It is possible that it was both. I certainly am innocent of her talents.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
Bill Hilly
View Profile
Elite user
449 Posts

Profile of Bill Hilly
Bill Hilly
View Profile
Elite user
449 Posts

Profile of Bill Hilly
I used to have a folk & bluegrass program an commercial radio... My boss did call it "That Folk & Bluegrass" (say it fast).

Played a lot of Kate's music - love it.
Bill Hilly
View Profile
Elite user
449 Posts

Profile of Bill Hilly
Should have said first TWO seconds.
EsnRedshirt
View Profile
Special user
Newark, CA
895 Posts

Profile of EsnRedshirt
Quote:
On 2010-12-13 10:36, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 11:51, Payne wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 09:08, Carrie Sue wrote:
Looks fake to me.

I'm sorry, but the idea that Carter created more jobs than Reagan, when Carter left this nation in what he referred to as a national malaise?

Wrong number. I don't buy it.

Carrie


Read it and weep

"Most surprising is that Carter ranks first in job creation as 10 million jobs were added during his four years in office, more on an annualized basis than Clinton or Reagan."

From http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html

He also raised taxes seven times expanded the deficit and expanded the federal government

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/......408.html


Isn't it easier to have an annualized number after only 4 years than 8?

I guess we have it all figured out in only 5 pages. All the lib socialist types want higher taxes, and want to eliminate the rich. (But once you do, who do you SOAK for taxes then?) And all the lib socialist types hate RR and a Bush of any sort.

Got it.

Nah, we don't want to eliminate the rich. We just want them to stop trying to eliminate the middle class. And Bush Sr. wasn't all bad- at least he knew when to pull out of a war.
Self-proclaimed Jack-of-all-trades and google expert*.

* = Take any advice from this person with a grain of salt.
balducci
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
230 Posts

Profile of balducci
Quote:
On 2010-12-13 10:36, Dannydoyle wrote:

Isn't it easier to have an annualized number after only 4 years than 8?

Come again?
Make America Great Again! - Trump in 2020 ... "We're a capitalistic society. I go into business, I don't make it, I go bankrupt. They're not going to bail me out. I've been on welfare and food stamps. Did anyone help me? No." - Craig T. Nelson, actor.
Dannydoyle
View Profile
Eternal Order
20867 Posts

Profile of Dannydoyle
Quote:
On 2010-12-13 12:48, EsnRedshirt wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-13 10:36, Dannydoyle wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 11:51, Payne wrote:
Quote:
On 2010-12-12 09:08, Carrie Sue wrote:
Looks fake to me.

I'm sorry, but the idea that Carter created more jobs than Reagan, when Carter left this nation in what he referred to as a national malaise?

Wrong number. I don't buy it.

Carrie


Read it and weep

"Most surprising is that Carter ranks first in job creation as 10 million jobs were added during his four years in office, more on an annualized basis than Clinton or Reagan."

From http://www.forbes.com/2004/07/20/cx_da_0720presidents.html

He also raised taxes seven times expanded the deficit and expanded the federal government

http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/......408.html


Isn't it easier to have an annualized number after only 4 years than 8?

I guess we have it all figured out in only 5 pages. All the lib socialist types want higher taxes, and want to eliminate the rich. (But once you do, who do you SOAK for taxes then?) And all the lib socialist types hate RR and a Bush of any sort.

Got it.

Nah, we don't want to eliminate the rich. We just want them to stop trying to eliminate the middle class. And Bush Sr. wasn't all bad- at least he knew when to pull out of a war.


You just want to make it so the rich are not so rich. That is the goal. And how is it that they are the ones who want to eliminate the middle class? Come on cut and paste some great libe web page gibberish for us this should be fun. Some great class warfare is about due in this thread isn't it?

Like I said rich is anyone who makes more than you do. This thread has been patheticaly predictable. The libs show how even Carter was a great job creater, and how ol RR was just a pathetic dupe. Man you guys are not even fun to read any more.

The RR/Bush fans stick to the same story line as well. At this point we should all just number our opinions, that way when we want to put one in we can just put donwn something like 22 and we all know what we mean, that way it saves time on reading. Redshirt can put down say 11 for his class warfare point, and so forth.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus
<BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Not very magical, still... » » So what's the best income tax rate? (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9..21~22~23 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2022 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.05 seconds requiring 5 database queries.
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café
are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic.
> Privacy Statement <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL