[quote]nickj_777 wrote:
What you discussed below is very insightful and I apologize for the name calling.[/quote]
No worries man, fair enough
I will be one of the first to say we need to chop spending, and chop the living shit out of it.
It isn’t going to happen any time soon, not without total global meltdown (which could happen I suppose if the right dominoes fell at once).
But back to the original topic:
This costs $10. I’m not buying that paper.
You may want to re-read this one, because it leans more towards proving my point. I mean it flat out says lower marginal rates cause less revenue loss and broaden the base. Those in the top marginal brackets saw large increases in taxable income (more revenue)…
The other thing is this paper freaks me out in that it pretty much proves combined with this I was reading earlier: http://taxprof.typepad.com/taxprof_blog/2012/10/lucas-.html The government really just sees the people as voter stock to be studied and experimented on…
PArdon me while I go re-make my tin foil hat…
Yes my faith in the elected diminishes continually. In communist countries people abuse people with capitalistic society people abuse people. All you can do is take care of your own. One thing I am learning is you can find numerous studies supporting and disavowing your points and others. We constantly use our own experiences and try to shape the world by what we know and think is right. But what about just being pragmatic and trying to reach a consensus not trying to create a utopia.
Tax question:
In an auto accident settlement, which if any portion of the settlement is taxed? Does 26 USC Sec. 5891 cover this?
I believe the damages to the vehicle should not be taxed, but lost wages are, correct? I have no idea how payment for medical works.
Thanks,
Chris
Without looking it up, so I could be wrong for sure:
I believe insurance proceeds are taxable to the extent they exceed your losses.
[quote]countingbeans wrote:
Without looking it up, so I could be wrong for sure:
I believe insurance proceeds are taxable to the extent they exceed your losses.[/quote]
I was thinking along those line. I know the tax code isn’t exactly logical all the time though.
Thanks,
Chris
@ Counting Beans
I had a question what should government’s move be when interest rates for loans are low and there is no response by the private sector to take loans when there is no demand for private products? Correct me if I am wrong but the federal reserve has held low interest rates for banks to take loans to hand out to corporations and small businesses to take loans to reinvest in themselves. Government keeps taxes low to encourage reinvestment by small business. The hope is that small businesses reinvest the non-taxed income in themselves to grow and prosper and then in turn high labor to manage the new demand for their products. But what is the best move when America lacks strong domestic manufacturing and exports (partially attributable to minimum wage laws from what I gather)? How do you encourage private capital to reinvest in American businesses if low taxes and low interest rates are not creating growth?
I see a bizare situation where the traditional method of cutting taxes to encourage and overleged citizenry to consume more could be disastrous too. America overconsumes and undersaves leading to too much personal debt servicing and this will hamper consumption much like it did in Japan.
My point is what is the best move for any political leader in this economic climate? If you cut taxes you increase budget deficits. If you cut taxes businesses grow but people incur more debt to buy more products. People will be hired to fill the demand but I worry that as soon as people all really start focusing on debt servicing there will be a market shrinkage and labour will be released. If government spends its way out then future generations may be burdened by taxes to fix economic climates that persist now. Austerity may temporarily increase poverty rates as government workers are layed off and those on assistance now are considered impoverished as their income assistance is taken away.
From your opinion what is the best way to improve the economy in a practical way that is politically viable and possible?
Cheers
Nick, I’m not ignoring your post. It deserves more thought, give me time.
