Wednesday, September 5, 2012

Let's Ban Profits!

8 comments:

Anonymous said...

Let's face it, once we start playing the 'find a crazy kook at a political convention and stick a microphone in their face' game, nobody is going to come out looking very good.

claudio said...

What's your point? There's ignorance in all of the political spectrum? News at 11.

Rob said...

I'm having a hard time trying to work out whether you're suggesting to take the clip at face value, or just want to expose how dirty the campaigning is. Care to weigh in?

Michael Meeks said...

As a non-US guy, I loved the interview; almost as silly as claiming that cutting taxes increases revenue :-)

Jeffrey Stedfast said...

adam, claudio, Rob:

I posted it for its comedic value, I'm not suggesting anyone take it at face value.

Meeks!

Actually, raising tax rates *can* lower revenue and lowering tax rates *can* increase revenues. It's not a linear relationship.

Consider this: if you tax everyone at 100%, will you get more revenues or less? If you think people's behavior is static, then you'll believe revenues would go up, but people are not static - they are dynamic. If you tax people at a rate of 100%, they won't work as hard and so revenues will go down.

It all comes down to work vs reward.

Joe "Rotund" Tennies said...

I disagree with the "ban profits" (obviously), but here's my suggestion:
* Cap the difference of a member of upper management's salary + non-performance bonuses vs. the average salary of non-upper management for publicly traded companies
* No bonuses (performance or non-performance) may be given out in fiscal years in which a company reports layoffs to the Department of Labor. (as in they have to warn the Department of Labor due to the size of the layoff)

Joe "Rotund" Tennies said...

Jeffrey, Then by your same logic taxing at 0% must cause infinite revenue? It's a non-linear relationship, but using the extreme values is not the locations we are talking about. If you are going to cut taxes in half, you need to double jobs. Actually, probably triple as you would be in a boom and you need to allow for the bust portion of the cycle. (You can probably just pay down the national debt w/ the profits in the meantime. We'll worry about what to after its paid off later as it's not a concern at this point).

Jeffrey Stedfast said...

Joe: thanks for putting words in my mouth.

I never said that lowering tax rates to 0% would net infinite revenue nor did I ever suggest it would.

I merely said that it's not a linear relationship. Is that really so hard to understand?

Take a chill pill.

Code Snippet Licensing

All code posted to this blog is licensed under the MIT/X11 license unless otherwise stated in the post itself.