Author Topic: The debt talks  (Read 26157 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Well what happens is, lower taxes means multiple things, such as ensuring the money is actually spent in the economy, buying food, goods, services instead of centrally stored in the treasury where it stays for a long time until it's being used for big projects that only a few big corporations have a use for. You're able to provide most government services with basic taxes, especially when the economy is supported by a strong middle class. Third world countries may have low taxes, but it only benefits the top 1% (or less) because they don't have a middle class, serving only as safe havens for huge corporations.

Your money can go much further when you're able to spend it for your own goals, the more money you saved up the bigger investments you can make. This also results in economic growth, which can lead to more jobs, meaning less people dependant on government. In time, as its a process, you'll find that, combined with the other things I mentioned, come out much stronger than continuing the way things go now.
At this point most (new) taxes are redistribution of wealth, which especially with big bureaucratic government causes most of the redistributed wealth spent off-shore or only to a select few (such as special providers of food and services for the royal families in the middle ages)

That's my view on it at least.

It's really too bad your view is based on out-dated financial ideology rather than hard economic lessons.

Fact:  some of the so-called welfare states with reasonable tax frameworks maintain the highest standards of living in the world, well beyond the US, Canada, Britain, and Australia.

As for the middle class, if you'd care to look at US financial demographics sometime, the middle class doesn't really exist in the traditional sense.  Lower-middle classes lump together, while the upper class outpaces them both by leaps and bounds.  Of course, the upper class doesn't really pay taxes, so the tax burden for the country is paid by the lower and middle classes (corporations, despite having a higher tax rate in the US than other G8 nations, actually pay very little tax due to the notorious loopholes and deductions in the US tax code).

This neo-con ideology of low taxes is laudable provided governments collect enough to pay for government expenditure programs.  The United States does not.  Several Canadian provinces do not.  The obsession with low taxes does everyone a disservice - instead, if all tax loopholes (read: deductions) were eliminated, tax rates were maintained or lowered slightly for the lower and middle classes, raised for the upper classes, and lowered but reformed (again, deductions and loopholes gone) for corporations, governments would have a much fairer tax system.

Low taxes is not a panacea for the economy.  A fair tax system, with governments collecting enough revenue to pay their bills, allow people to get the help they need, and spend to support economic growth when necessary is a good start, though
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline Androgeos Exeunt

  • Captain Oblivious
  • 212
  • Prevents attraction.
    • Wordpress.com Blog
But america is filled with magical thinking, so it's about right.

Like meritocracy.  :rolleyes:

What's wrong with it?
My blog

Quote: Tuesday, 3 October 2023 0133 UTC +8, #general
MP-Ryan
Oh you still believe in fairy tales like Santa, the Easter Bunny, and free market competition principles?

 

Offline Mikes

  • 29
But america is filled with magical thinking, so it's about right.

Like meritocracy.  :rolleyes:

What's wrong with it?

That most people in the US take for granted that their country is "meritocratic" while in reality "meritocracy" in America hardly exists anymore? That the same nations (EU or otherwise) that get sneered at for being socialist are often objectively much more meritocratic than the US every was?

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
If you honestly believe the differences in social meritocracy in the Western world are really that much anywhere, you're not very smart.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
If you honestly believe the differences in social meritocracy in the Western world are really that much anywhere, you're not very smart.

Exactly.  In most Western democracies, the biggest predictor of your income is still your parents' income.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline Unknown Target

  • Get off my lawn!
  • 212
  • Push.Pull?
If you honestly believe the differences in social meritocracy in the Western world are really that much anywhere, you're not very smart.

Sorry, I don't understand what you mean? I think maybe I'm confused by the wording.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Sorry, I don't understand what you mean? I think maybe I'm confused by the wording.

There's no great difference in level of meritocracy anywhere in the west.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
So you don't believe in the social mobility thingy?

 

Offline Turambar

  • Determined to inflict his entire social circle on us
  • 210
  • You can't spell Manslaughter without laughter
So you don't believe in the social mobility thingy?

social mobility is a myth perpetuated by the super rich to keep the poor voting against their own interests
10:55:48   TurambarBlade: i've been selecting my generals based on how much i like their hats
10:55:55   HerraTohtori: me too!
10:56:01   HerraTohtori: :D

 

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
I meant the reverse: that the social welfare states of europe apparently have better social mobility than the states. NGTM seems to not believe in this, stating that meritocracy is basically the same in western countries.

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
I meant the reverse: that the social welfare states of europe apparently have better social mobility than the states. NGTM seems to not believe in this, stating that meritocracy is basically the same in western countries.

Social mobility, much like meritocracy, exists in bubbles. When there is a void to fill as the result of technological or political upheaval, it becomes possible. In an existing system, it is largely a myth.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Unknown Target

  • Get off my lawn!
  • 212
  • Push.Pull?
For the record, the meritocracy in America is doing a rather piss-poor job of putting people who are merited in positions anyway; politicians don't win because they know anything, their skills are at getting votes and accumulating money. Decision making or debate skills are not necessarily a part of the job. :\

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
You just managed to restate the entire last page.

 
So you don't believe in the social mobility thingy?

social mobility is a myth perpetuated by the super rich to keep the poor voting against their own interests

Honestly, I have not encountered such a case in the Netherlands. The only method used here to keep the poor voting against their own interests is the fear of immigrants (An issue often inflated to hide the less... favorable policies of the party).

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Honestly, I have not encountered such a case in the Netherlands. The only method used here to keep the poor voting against their own interests is the fear of immigrants (An issue often inflated to hide the less... favorable policies of the party).

Guess what "the poor" and first-generation immigrants have in common...

(...they're both poor).
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

 

Offline Unknown Target

  • Get off my lawn!
  • 212
  • Push.Pull?
You just managed to restate the entire last page.

Like a boss.
Really though? I thought I was adding something, oh well. :)

 
Honestly, I have not encountered such a case in the Netherlands. The only method used here to keep the poor voting against their own interests is the fear of immigrants (An issue often inflated to hide the less... favorable policies of the party).

Guess what "the poor" and first-generation immigrants have in common...

(...they're both poor).

But it causes that particular group of poor people to vote for the parties which are actually good for poor people, whilst it causes the 'middle class' (who never met them) to vote for methods against the poor.

 

Offline MP-Ryan

  • Makes General Discussion Make Sense.
  • Global Moderator
  • 210
  • Keyboard > Pen > Sword
Honestly, I have not encountered such a case in the Netherlands. The only method used here to keep the poor voting against their own interests is the fear of immigrants (An issue often inflated to hide the less... favorable policies of the party).

Guess what "the poor" and first-generation immigrants have in common...

(...they're both poor).

But it causes that particular group of poor people to vote for the parties which are actually good for poor people, whilst it causes the 'middle class' (who never met them) to vote for methods against the poor.

I'll confess an ignorance of the intricacies of Dutch politics, but there is a disturbing trend that many poor-and-uneducated voters tend to lean toward the policies of more conservative ideologies, which also tend to be anti-immigration.  Thus, you end up with vote-splitting in the low socioeconomic demographics.  We see this phenomenon in North America all the time, particularly at the state/province level.

If this is not happening in the Netherlands, and you instead see the low and middle classes tending to vote en bloc for policies that don't clearly benefit anyone but the wealthy, then it's welcome news.
"In the beginning, the Universe was created.  This made a lot of people very angry and has widely been regarded as a bad move."  [Douglas Adams]

  
Quote
Thus, you end up with vote-splitting in the low socioeconomic demographics.

Yeah well, the low socioeconomic demographics tended to vote either for the 'left wing' parties, or for the party which called itself right wing whilst actually being the same as the left wing parties but with a much more agressive anti-immigrant and 'old-men-are-the-future' mentality (If the name Geert Wilders rings any bell, its his party). Unfortunately, the only policy of that party that has stayed the same over the last few years is the anti-islam point, the party is basically doing donuts on everything else, which a lot of people had to find out the hard way <.<. The problem with the dutch politics into explaining this, however, is that every party essentially has things that are good for the poor, and there's an awfull lot of parties.

There's also another interesting trend in Dutch politics: Educated rich people deliberility voting against their own interests. This has caused for a strange balance of power in our current goverment.
« Last Edit: August 25, 2011, 02:10:30 am by -Joshua- »