Iran, Iraq & Terrorism - In Historical Context

[beorhthelm]

The question of a tax on labour is a moral philosophical question. [...]the Constitutional question [...] the Constitution states

the US Constitution. there are others and ours says nothing about the subject. it is partially philosophical, more simple economical one (out of necessity), but you still dont answer why you are obsessed with such a US-centric issue.

I agree that an import tax may result in a reduction in some forms of trade (depending on where the taxes where levied), but this would ultimately mean that Americans would go back to producing again, and would import less cheap crap from China. A countries wealth is measured by what it produces, not what it buys with debt. But it is mutually beneficial to trade, so I dont see a large consumer market like the US being shunned by other nations.

to make US production cost the same they need to impose very high tariffs. those high tariffs restrict imports and countries dont like paying a tariff, so impose one themself. so while it is mutually beneficial to trade, thats offset by any barriers such as tariffs or regulation. his policy is a reversal of generations of change across the world.

 

[beorhthelm]

Whoah there. Who said anything about raising tariffs? Under a Ron Paul presidency there might be an import tax, but it would be considerably lower than the current tariffs. The point about using some forms of import tax to raise revenues is that Ron Paul would not abolish import taxes, they do exist already. I would imagine, overall, they would be considerably lower given Ron Pauls view that taxes should be as low as possible.

i think you need to do some maths, find out what the US budget was in 2000 (his aim to return spending to that level) and how much income tax is today. then work out the short fall of removing the later from the former. this will be the amount he needs to raise through import duties - i can assure you it will be more than current tariffs.

 

[dingodan]

the US Constitution. there are others and ours says nothing about the subject. it is partially philosophical, more simple economical one (out of necessity), but you still dont answer why you are obsessed with such a US-centric issue.



to make US production cost the same they need to impose very high tariffs. those high tariffs restrict imports and countries dont like paying a tariff, so impose one themself. so while it is mutually beneficial to trade, thats offset by any barriers such as tariffs or regulation. his policy is a reversal of generations of change across the world.

There are tariffs today. You think we have free trade? I was making the point that a policy of import taxes could stimulate domestic production, but having thought about it, it is not very likely that Ron Paul would raise any taxes anywhere. So current tariffs would go down. They just would not go away completely, like the income tax.

I see the question of an income tax as a massive moral question. Alas, we disagree.

 

[dingodan]

i think you need to do some maths, find out what the US budget was in 2000 (his aim to return spending to that level) and how much income tax is today. then work out the short fall of removing the later from the former. this will be the amount he needs to raise through import duties - i can assure you it will be more than current tariffs.

You have made a slight error, but I totally understand it.

You are assuming that income tax revenues are used to pay for the budget. They are not. Debt and inflation are used to pay for the budget.

 

[beorhthelm]

You have made a slight error, but I totally understand it.

You are assuming that income tax revenues are used to pay for the budget. They are not. Debt and inflation are used to pay for the budget.

i see your education from the University of Youtube is showing through. what is the debt from, if not from the overspend of the budget. the current debt is still there either way, so you'd have to pay that down first even if one managed to balance the annual budget. how long then until this income tax cut can take effect? we are in the same boat here and we see exactly the implications, yet we arent even contmplating the cutting of taxes - indeed we increased VAT to assist (i think he is pro excise duties too). he might well have alot of support but his economic policy is fantasy. like i say he'll be a great US president for the rest of the world.

anyway, you've managed to drag this into policy, i just want to know why you care so much about his policies that wont effect you.

 

[beorhthelm]

...his economic policy is fantasy

just to qualify this, i mean in the current situation. maybe at another point in the economic cycle, with less debts, it could be done with time.