What the hell IS that? Something from the days of King George II?
I used to believe all that horse pucky about flat taxes and closing up of loopholes. Then I got into a chat with a fellow commuter who, upon listening to my rant simply asked me "Why do you think they put in the tax loopholes in the first place?" I answered...well, to keep the rich guys from paying so much taxes. He said that the rich guys are paying for lots of stuff...being rich means you have the means to spend it. They buy stuff like houses and cars and companies, some or all of which eventually provides employment. Some of it is good. Some of it is bad. The government rewards good purchasing habits with tax exemptions. Loopholes, if you will.
Tax loopholes are placed there for a fairly simple reason...that reason is, you don't want to just fund something you want, you want people to do it on their own. (The government "could" buy everybody a house, but they would rather you buy one yourself! Give to charity. Contribute to a political party.) If people do what the government wants, they get a reward. What reward is that? Well, if they do what you want, they won't take all those tax dollars. (They decide NOT to rob you!) If they don't do what we want, then we tax them as hard as we can. (taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, so called "sin" taxes)
No government will give up those tax loopholes which get so much done at so little cost.
And so, Economics 201 comes back to haunt us. Too bad it takes a Clinton to point out the obvious.
Stag, I cannot agree with your friends comment. Loopholes, per se, are not there to reward desired behavior. Do some of them exist for that reason? Yes. Is that the genre's primary reason for existence? No. The primary reason is tax avoidance.
Bill, yes we did. It's nice to be on the winning side. Now to see if the weeping and cauterwailing on the other side can convince them to shape their party up.
3 comments:
Trickle down economics.
What the hell IS that? Something from the days of King George II?
I used to believe all that horse pucky about flat taxes and closing up of loopholes. Then I got into a chat with a fellow commuter who, upon listening to my rant simply asked me "Why do you think they put in the tax loopholes in the first place?" I answered...well, to keep the rich guys from paying so much taxes. He said that the rich guys are paying for lots of stuff...being rich means you have the means to spend it. They buy stuff like houses and cars and companies, some or all of which eventually provides employment. Some of it is good. Some of it is bad. The government rewards good purchasing habits with tax exemptions. Loopholes, if you will.
Tax loopholes are placed there for a fairly simple reason...that reason is, you don't want to just fund something you want, you want people to do it on their own. (The government "could" buy everybody a house, but they would rather you buy one yourself! Give to charity. Contribute to a political party.) If people do what the government wants, they get a reward. What reward is that? Well, if they do what you want, they won't take all those tax dollars. (They decide NOT to rob you!) If they don't do what we want, then we tax them as hard as we can. (taxes on alcohol and cigarettes, so called "sin" taxes)
No government will give up those tax loopholes which get so much done at so little cost.
And so, Economics 201 comes back to haunt us. Too bad it takes a Clinton to point out the obvious.
I'll let you guys explain it. I trust Clinton more than Romney.
But we did have us an election, didn't we?
Stag, I cannot agree with your friends comment. Loopholes, per se, are not there to reward desired behavior. Do some of them exist for that reason? Yes. Is that the genre's primary reason for existence? No. The primary reason is tax avoidance.
Bill, yes we did. It's nice to be on the winning side. Now to see if the weeping and cauterwailing on the other side can convince them to shape their party up.
Post a Comment