AMERICA HAS LOW TAXES MY ASS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[The One and Only...]

I will not deny that, overall, the amount of aggregate economic output consumed by taxes in America is low compared to some countries. However, the difference if overstated. The way Kevin posts, you would think that the difference between the U.S. and most other countries is 20-25%. That is simply not true. Taxes consume around 30% of America's national output, while the EU sustains 42%. That is a large difference - 12%, to be precise - but it is not as large as some would have you believe.

(It should also be noted that America's per capita economic output is close to 50% higher than that of the EU's, and that we enjoy greater employment.)

Furthermore, America has "one of the highest corporate income tax rates in the industrialized world." To say that burden on the rich on this country is far less than in others is a pure, fallacious lie.

Here are some graphs:

[mburbank]

I'm not sure you used enough exclamation points in your title. I'm not getting that this is really important to you.

Here's what I don't get. Why are taxes what squeezes that many exclamation points out of you? As opposed to starvation and war, the slave trade, child labor, the fact that wiith over five hundred channels most TV still sucks? With all the inequity and suffering going on in the world, why is it taxes gets so far up your ass it pushes all those !'s out your fingers?

I'm not questioning why it upsets you. I'm questioning why it upsets you so much. The same way I question why people pass over securities fraud in the paper but go red in the face with rage at the site of a panhandler with nice shoes.

[The One and Only...]

In this case, it's because some of you guys made it sound as though America's taxes are nonexistant to other nation's.

In general, it's because I believe that the best way of increasing living standards is through a free market.

I have a small, minor economic theory of my own that goes against the libertarians on one issue. At the current time, however, I would rather not disclose it.

[mburbank]

I find your faith in the capability of free markets quaint.

May I assume that by 'free' you mean essentially unregulated?

[The One and Only...]

An unregulated economy, yes. Save one issue.

Unregulated business practices? Let's put it this way: I support rolling back a lot of the regulations we have in place (such as the worthless OSHA), and making compromises between environmentalists and businessmen through laws involving property rights.

I find my faith in free markets supported by economic theory and historical precedent.

[mburbank]

You know what was in America and still is in China a massive boon to the economy? Slave labor! It really works and it's very cost effective.

If it wasn't for friggin' regulations, we could still use it here in America and we wouldn't be importing so much from China. I mean, I'd personally rather my Payless stocked American Made sneakers.

Oh well. We can always ship our labor offshore, have little kids make our goods. No pesky regulations about that. Then we can take out full page newspaper ads lying about it, and be protected by our right to free speech. THAT, my friend, is the best of both worlds.

[The One and Only...]

I find it very ignorant of you to think that we need half the regulations we have to get rid of sweatshop labor, which is not the same thing as slave labor. OSHA has done little to nothing since it has been established, and minimum wage has done little but keep people out of jobs. Health regulations, it should be added, do not have to go hand in hand with minimum wage.

Child labor in this country is a joke. Repealing such laws would be pointless, but to even conceive that if they were, such practices would be continued is foolish. For one thing, all children would have the freedom to refuse to work, and even if they wanted to, their parents could force them not to.

If you cannot understand why globalization would only help developing nations, then just say so.

And for god's sake, quit assuming that I against ALL regulation when I say that I believe a lot of regulation could be done without.

[mburbank]

I find it very ignorant of you to think that we don't need regulation. How much we may need is indeed debatable, which is what we have a representative democracy for.

Did you not understand that I stated slave labor and sweatshops as two different cases, or do you think that Chinese political prisoners aren't slaves?

You don't work yet, do you? I'm guessing that when you do work it won't be in a meat packing plant or a chemical factory or a col mine, where regulations have a serious impact on the survival of employees. You probably thin OSHA is all about the height of your computer keyboard and the angle of your screen.

And if you need protection from your employer, why, the Free Market will do it! After all, how cost effective would it be for an employer to risk your health and safety? You might switch jobs, and then where would he be? That's why in the history of the free market, no major succsesful employee has ever endangered their employees or made people sick or shat where it slept. The Free Market would nver let something like that happen, and thank God for it.

[The One and Only...]

I never said we don't need regulation, but I think we need less of it.

What can we do about Chinese slaves? Stop trade? Trade only helps the case of the worker in such conditions. For example, the garment industry in Bangladesh flourished while trading with the United States. However, it had to fire its child workers as a result from foreign pressures. What happened? These children went back into "begging in the streets, engaging in prostitution and other crimes, or doing hard labor." They did not stop working because they could not stop working.

But wait!!! If farmers were allowed to grow all of their crops, they could *GASP* export some of their food at lower prices to foreign countries!!! That means that mommy and daddy might be able to to provide more for their families, and that their son might not have to give out blowjobs on the streets!!! Amazing how a lack of regulation helped everyone, isn't it?

WAIT, THERE'S MORE!!! Those countries get to charge taxes on those rich, evil, white capitalist's income gained inside that country!!! Could this possibly be one reason why so many third world countries are eager to get in the world market? SHOCKING, ISN'T IT?

When you, burbank, have lived in a third world country, worked in a Coke factory that fired you because of foreign pressures that their practices were "immoral" and wage rates had to rise, and had to return to life of selling yourself, THEN you might be able to tell me about regulatory policy. Until then, I would count myself lucky, and brush up on my facts.

[mburbank]

"I never said we don't need regulation;"
-You

"An unregulated economy, yes. Save one issue."
-You

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were speciffically and only refering to regulations on Business. I think the two are inextricably linked, but what the hell.

Child labor in this country certainly didn't use to be a joke. And a child's 'right to refusal', which they didn't have then, would scarcely have helped when the alternative was going hungry because wages were so low. Minimum wage used to ensure a family could stay ahead, but hey, that's one a them ding dang regulations. Kind of like child labor laws. Huh. That might be my point.

I think Globalization could help developing nations, but not without, what now? Regulation. Otherwise there is nothing to stop it from being a race to the bottom. In a Global economy, give me one reason not to use the cheapest labor force. I'm sure eventully you'll find a country willing to make it's population work for nothing but food. Oh, wait, we already give most favored trading status to countries that already do that. It's not a question of not understanding, lil johnny arrogant, it's called disagreeing.

"begging in the streets, engaging in prostitution and other crimes, or doing hard labor."
If you're going to quote things you ought to source them.

" They did not stop working because they could not stop working. "
You're kidding! Didn't they have a right to refuse to work?

"But wait!!! If farmers were allowed to grow all of their crops, they could *GASP* export some of their food at lower prices to foreign countries!!! That means that mommy and daddy might be able to to provide more for their families, and that their son might not have to give out blowjobs on the streets!!! Amazing how a lack of regulation helped everyone, isn't it?"

Multiple !!! frenzies, as was my original point, lead to not stating what country you're talking about, who's farmers, what regulations and which blowjobs. I'm sure none of that means a gut embrace of polemic on your part, but it doesn't enspire confidence in your argument either. Don't Vinth out.

Your direct link between liberal pressure and sexual exploitation is also Vinthonian. If you have a source for this belief, state it. All nations have appalling, reprehensible sex trade. The statistical links between numbers of people, conditions, and the rise and fall of employment in these fields as compared to prevailing wage laws are currently undocumented. Besides, here too there is freedom of choice. In the recently Liberated Afghanistan, those forced out of work go into unregulated poppy cultivation. In South America, they often prefer unregulated Coca farming.

When you, One and the Same have worked... well, when you've worked, it might make me take your views on workplace regulation somewhat more seriously. And when you've worked in the third world, I will assume that your opinions might have some element of compassion in them as opposed to dogmatism.

[mburbank]

Oh, and PS;

What does

"In general, it's because I believe that the best way of increasing living standards is through a free market. "

Have to do with how insanely !!!!!!'ed you are about taxation?

[The One and Only...]

Originally Posted by mburbank

"I never said we don't need regulation;"
-You

"An unregulated economy, yes. Save one issue."
-You

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you were speciffically and only refering to regulations on Business. I think the two are inextricably linked, but what the hell.

Well, you are correct, they are linked. But I don't consider them to be the same thing. When I think of economic policy, I think of the Federal Reserve, legal tender laws, minimum wage, the central bank, etc. When I think of business regulation, I think of health standards, environmental standards, etc.

Child labor in this country certainly didn't use to be a joke. And a child's 'right to refusal', which they didn't have then, would scarcely have helped when the alternative was going hungry because wages were so low. Minimum wage used to ensure a family could stay ahead, but hey, that's one a them ding dang regulations. Kind of like child labor laws. Huh. That might be my point.

Uh-huh. Look up the real facts about minimum wage. It was used in a Keynesian ploy to reinflate the economy by maintaining wage rates and prices artificially. During times when the minimum wage actually holds value (it holds very little now), prices are generally maintained at a higher level. This was essential to the Keynesian viewpoint that was predominant during the 30's. I trust you know who Keynes is, yes?

It was also used by those who accepted that minimum wage was necessary in order to ensure that consumers had the power to purchase goods. This, however, was used more as political rhetoric, and has been smashed time and time again.

I think Globalization could help developing nations, but not without, what now? Regulation. Otherwise there is nothing to stop it from being a race to the bottom. In a Global economy, give me one reason not to use the cheapest labor force. I'm sure eventully you'll find a country willing to make it's population work for nothing but food. Oh, wait, we already give most favored trading status to countries that already do that. It's not a question of not understanding, lil johnny arrogant, it's called disagreeing.

Tisk, tisk. Have you forgotten than business has to compete for labor resources? Have you also forgotten that prices, overall, tend to lower with wages, thus barely affecting the real wage at all? Have you forgotten that if the real wage did fall, it would lead to greater employment? All of these are basic factors in the free market.

"begging in the streets, engaging in prostitution and other crimes, or doing hard labor."
If you're going to quote things you ought to source them.

Child Labor or Child Prostitution?

"They did not stop working because they could not stop working. "
You're kidding! Didn't they have a right to refuse to work?

I meant that in a different way. They had to work in order to live, not because they were literally forced to.

Multiple !!! frenzies, as was my original point, lead to not stating what country you're talking about, who's farmers, what regulations and which blowjobs. I'm sure none of that means a gut embrace of polemic on your part, but it doesn't enspire confidence in your argument either. Don't Vinth out.

You honestly couldn't follow that? You know that our government pays farmers to throw away/only grow so much food, right? There are various reasons for this, none of which I believe justify the action.

Your direct link between liberal pressure and sexual exploitation is also Vinthonian. If you have a source for this belief, state it. All nations have appalling, reprehensible sex trade. The statistical links between numbers of people, conditions, and the rise and fall of employment in these fields as compared to prevailing wage laws are currently undocumented. Besides, here too there is freedom of choice. In the recently Liberated Afghanistan, those forced out of work go into unregulated poppy cultivation. In South America, they often prefer unregulated Coca farming.

I cited the source above. Seriously, though: you cannot understand that when there are no jobs and more money has to be made (which cannot be solved with an international minimum wage, since it would cause massive unemployment in third world countries), one might need to resort to illegal measures?

When you, One and the Same have worked... well, when you've worked, it might make me take your views on workplace regulation somewhat more seriously. And when you've worked in the third world, I will assume that your opinions might have some element of compassion in them as opposed to dogmatism.

My viewpoint does have compassion. I simply hold a different opinion as to what would be better for the lower class, since I do not always associate that with the American worker.

[VinceZeb]

OAO, I will save you the trouble with arguing with Max.

1) Find a Teddy Ruxbin bear

2) record any kind of left wing rant on the goverment, taxes, big business, George Bush, etc.

3) put the tape in the back of the bear and push play

You get the same results.

[ranxer]

ok, im impaitient, and havnt read but the first few posts by oao but i gotta say at this point ( because im sick of looking into what the fuck yer trying to say) that OAO you make me SICK!

WHAT IS WRONG WITH OSHA???
1. what is wrong with protecting workers health and safety in general?

2. um nevermind, you just make me sick to be an american... i KNOW for a fact that you only represent the extemist vocal minority so at this point i'm going to keep working towards reforms of the system as it stands ..

3. sorry im too impaitient to read the rest right now and i commit the fo pau of posting some crap that doesnt apply to the last 4 or 5 posts but.. whaat the fuck ever. later..

[The One and Only...]

Just for the tip of the iceburg, read this.

[ranxer]

ok, so there's criticism of osha..

there's beurecratic problems at osha .. i don't have any experience with that..

I do however have experience onthe workers end of things..

while i was in the military i was told to work in INSANE conditions such as the paint locker on the bow of a ship where the chemical smell told me that i was getting brain damage in 15 minutes.. i REFUSED to work under those conditions .. and had osha to call on to defend me..
on my next job i worked with electrical equipement that was bad for my health under osha regulations but had no smell or confined quarters to really complain about but when the osha inspectors were scheduled to visit i and several others had a freaking TON of work to do to get the place up to osha snandards..

the only complaint i had of osha under the conditions as a laborer was that thier rules of compliance were based on common sense.. so if i had a brain i wouldn't have a problem with the chemicals i was working with.. the osha regs it seemed to me only protected those without common sense for the most part.. other than that they made me protect myselft from errors that i (an adept individual with intelligence and common sense) would have no problem avoiding.

so from my experience osha did a good job defending moronic idiots from killing themselves and costing whatever company they worked for a lot of downtime and hospitization.

[Ninjavenom]

blah blah blah economy blah blah blah china blah blah blah george bush blah blah blah

[mburbank]

Vinthy; Here's why I engage OAO and use you simply for my amusement. He has an informed opinion. I disagree with it almost in it's entirety, but he can speak to it and back it up. You have ignorant , self serving gut reactions that you are far too lazy to even discover you can't support.

As to your hysterical Teddy Ruxpin comment:

A.) Since OAO had already responded by adressing my arguments and not just making the insultifying of the giver his gold standard, you saved him nothing.

B.) Your bear sugestion would save ME time. It wouldn't do anything for him. Unless you meant to suggest that as opposed to arguing he should play a recording of left wing polemics.

Is there anything you can do without appearing to be a lazy moron? Say, why don't you shock me and respond by tlking about your sexual prowess and members of my family. That'd be novel.

OAO, since you were kind enough to site sources, I will do you the courtesy of reding them before responding. One question though. Deep in your heart, doesn't it bother you and make you ask some serious questions when Vinth agrees with you so often?

[Zhukov]

Does anybody know what the tax rate was in the USSR? I have a niche to fill and I don't care about this thread.

Ranxer was in the military? Wow, who knew.

[The One and Only...]

Ranxer, you have had a shitty past. Really, you have. That reminds me off the little chinese place that made you pile up your TP on the floor down where I live... I forget why, but I'm sure that place bribed their health inspectors.

The problem with OSHA is that it tends to protect the stupid workers rather than the interests of the workers as a whole. That, and some of the regulations are just plain dumb. I don't think that the consumers should have to pay for sound-proof rooms when it would be cheaper to purchase other safety gear. The fines are a bit stiff, as well, and are sometimes rediculous. Why should an employer suffer because his employee didn't wash his hands when he was specifically told he had to. It just doesn't make sense.

In my opinion, we need to seriously revise our regulatory policy. Not eliminate, but to get rid of these unnecessary elements that really haven't amounted to anything other than harm overall. Anything other than the national framework need to be up to the states. Then, we need to leave up to the local/state police to enforce these standards. File a complaint to the police department, and then they send over their inspector.

Doesn't that seem to make a lot of sense?

Max, I'm actually very skeptic of returning to a gold standard or free market banking. I did a little thinking... well, let's just say I favor a system very different from the one now, but it remains a fiat system (i.e. currency is not tied to any standard). I still favor a 100 percent reserve requirement, though, and the elimination of the central bank.

It doesn't bother me. You know what bothers me? The patriot act. There are so many things wrong with that law...

[mburbank]

See? We have common ground.