[edit: link removed, picture inserted, incomplete sentence left as-is]...presenting a comparison of McCain and Obama tax plans. I didn't think too much of it at the time. I did, however, post this note on my wall in response to an anti-Obama sermon someone else had posted (No kidding, the present "The Parable of the Talents" as an argument that Obama's tax plan is not biblical!):
Dan Eastwood is fairly certain the world will not come to an end when Obama gets elected, but snickers a bit at the people who whine about it so.
To which a good friend of mine replied:
"I, too, am pretty sure the world won't end... Of course there's a bit of distance between "world ending" and "hey, get your hand out of my pocket!"
I was about to write back something about "hands in pockets" and that hands of taxation are already in everyone's pockets, so I searched "tax plans" for ammunition, and how this article from Freakonomics: Competing Tax Plans: Two Perspectives.
Voila! The same misleading graph appears again, along with two other ways of presenting the same data that look very different, and a nice discusion. A little real information is better than a pointless argument any day. Rather than repost all that here, I urge you to go read the the Freakonimics article, it's short and well worth the effort. Or, if you are ambitious, go read this newly released report by the Tax Policy Center.
And who IS John Galt, anyway? (Thanks Matt!)
Happy to be of service ;)
ReplyDeleteI must be getting kind of dense... I went to the Freakanomics article, and didn't really see any particular difference between the charts... the underlying message was the same in all cases: Obama=more taxes on the high end and lower on the low end; McCain = generally lower across the board. Neither of those themes seem to deviate form what either camp is saying... soooo... I'm not really sure what to take away from that.
I DID enjoy some of the banter in the comments... though #15's comment, even if true, is a tad disburbing of a philosophical basis.
No, I think you have it right. the first two are all essentially the same information presented in different ways. The second adds in the proportion of the population actually face that tax rate change.
ReplyDeleteThe third is like the second, but representative of total taxes instead of total people.
The point I was getting at is the "tax hands" are already in our pockets, but deeper in some than others.
The disturbing banter:
BEGINQUOTE:: “I never understood the Robin Hood doctrine - and no, I’m not anywhere near the top.”
Here’s a better way to look at it, in terms of the social contract:
“If you, the top 1% or so pay 20% or so of all taxes, we plebians will not rise up and violently overthrow you to take the other 80%”.
This has worked fairly well here in the U.S., and explains why the rich rarely complain more than a little about their tax burden.
— Posted by Chance ::ENDQUOTE
Yes, that is the sort of disturbing that earned Marie Antoinette a free haircut. Unchecked accumulation of wealth eventually leads to one person with everything, so there has to be a limit somewhere in the system. I guess if taxes don't do enough to keep things fair, the peasants will storm the Bastille. Just what qualifies as "enough taxes" is the tricky bit.
It seem like "wages" might just as easily substitute for taxes here, which is the same except the it cuts government out of the picture. Maybe we should be asking, "How much are we willing to pay for our government?"
The trick, I guess, is to make people WANT to pay more than their fair share... Otherwise, rather than wait around for the pitchfork-wielding mobs, they might just say "huh... higher taxes for success... penatlies for using offshore labor... Might as well just move, lock-stock-and-barrel to Ireland or someplace that actually wants to encourage success and recognizes that a littl bit of a lot is better than a lot of a little bit."
ReplyDeleteObviously balances are necessary, but the philosphies expressed in the campaign (lies, yes, I know) give me pause.
Seriously: when I finally stop doing this Marine thing I've been doing these last 26 years, I have a number of business ideas I'd like to start. Every single one of them has the potential to expand beyond, say $250k in my pocket each year (given a few timely acts of god, mind you). I've been planning on starting them in Wyoming, for the tax situation (as opposed to, say, California), and all are extremely portable... so why WOULDN'T I start them in Ireland instead?
Guess we'll see how stated plans translate into action, but rather than face the mobs at all, when they get too greedy, be prepared for people just bypassing the mobs all together.
Who is John Galt?
Maybe we just need to clone Oprah, she doesn't seem to mind the prospect of paying more taxes (and she will).
ReplyDeleteGood luck with those plans too. I look forward to some of those ideas making their appearance on the Nova Unlimited page. I occasionally rattle on about starting up some sort of business for myself. One of these days perhaps.