VAT on the way?

Status
Not open for further replies.
The goverment can do anything for much more money than it should cost. Its all part of being a bureaucracy. An example is my school district where there is a Superintendent, two Principals (grammer and middle school), two assistant Principals, a curriculum coordinator and a business administrator. All of this for approx. 700 kids. When I went to school almost all of these jobs were handled by a nun. We had nearly 40 kids to a classroom (vs. half that where I now live). Is it any wonder why we pay an average of nearly $10,000 a year property tax.
I work for the goverment so I know how GROSSLY INEFFICIENT the bureacracy can be.

PS: I belong to a union and you'd be surprised how I feel about them.
 
Quote:
The guy in America who loses his job is probably still [censored] either way though.



Well, that's the focus of our little discussion. The displaced worker (looking upward with begging anticipation for Pablo to "tinkle down" upon him with all the wealth and employment that he's creating) ..and how he's still supposed to pay the same bills for maintaining the society that sees fit to send his job offshore.
 
Sounds like somebody's getting rich.
21.gif
 
I'm always open to rational opposing points of view.

Now I'm all for paying an idiot idiot's wages ..but all that are being devalued and idled aren't idiots. Those of distinction aren't that distinctive in the differences between themselves and those who are displaced.

We had good filters at one time in our society. We did have a good education system at one time. There was a reason why there was a certain demeanor (and even appearance in many cases) to an airline pilot or an FBI agent..naval commanders ..etc.. They were all filtered through a similar process. It allowed you a hierarchy of suitability for given positions where intelligence was in abundance for the job required. Cops ..civil servants ..lots of stuff all went to the best. Then it was pointed out that being the best wasn't required to do the job and that higher intelligence didn't make a good "whatever" ..just a smarter one.

If everyone was a Pablo or a Julian ..which one will be under Tempest's boot for the right to shine the former copy machine salesman's shoes ..and meanwhile pay for the privilege by mowing the lawn at the militia's main outpost??
 
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
If you get the upper earners ..the most influential ..to bear proportional burden for the sustenance that they extract from the society ..then, AND ONLY then, do they have a vested interest in the health and costs of the society.



You have a seriously narrow-minded and distorted view of how society works. Most upper earners are not the predators that you loathe. There are some predators, but most are working for the benefit of society.
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
If you get the upper earners ..the most influential ..to bear proportional burden for the sustenance that they extract from the society ..then, AND ONLY then, do they have a vested interest in the health and costs of the society.



You have a seriously narrow-minded and distorted view of how society works. Most upper earners are not the predators that you loathe. There are some predators, but most are working for the benefit of society.


Bingo.
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Most upper earners are not the predators that you loathe. There are some predators, but most are working for the benefit of society.
By choice?
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
If you get the upper earners ..the most influential ..to bear proportional burden for the sustenance that they extract from the society ..then, AND ONLY then, do they have a vested interest in the health and costs of the society.



You have a seriously narrow-minded and distorted view of how society works. Most upper earners are not the predators that you loathe. There are some predators, but most are working for the benefit of society.


If that's the case, then we should be on an advancing curve, correct?

That is, if Pablo or ..let's say Dr. Haas are really producers of merit ..and advantaging them in avoiding costs really benefits the society ..then why are my costs going up ..my services decaying ..and my wealth shrinking??

Since we're not on this advancing curve, and are in fact on a decaying curve ..in decline, then these advantaged, WHETHER THEY VIEW IT THAT WAY OR NOT, are elevated and exempted from the gross overall effects to the society ..THAT THEY ARE BENEFITING FROM.

Help me by NOT saying "well without these essential producers, it would be worse".

..and that brings the society, en mass, back to Vick Morrow as the boss in the big house telling the kid, "Hey, kid, it's either me (and gesturing to 3 hungry inmates named Ajax) ..or them three.

So, we'll allow some to take advantage of sanctuaries and exclusions while the society as a whole, tanks.

What makes you so special other than the devaluation hasn't reached you YET???


Here are the essentials that you miss:

I don't care how much you MAKE. I do care how much you pay into the environment that you draw that wealth from.

This is common sense. It's a totally balanced equation.

Now it's also common (as in shall we say, lower life ..or low life) human nature to expect to have your cake and eat it too.
 
Originally Posted By: labman
It can't be that simple in a large manufacturing company. What about inventory? Are you going to allow a company to write off capital expenses like other expenses or depreciate them? Your wife has to depreciate her office equipment doesn't she?


It IS pretty simple.

You buy inputs to your business, and 1/11 of that cost is GST (unless you are a restaurant or somesuch), and your sales, you add 10% GST.

Every three months (or month for bigger businesses), you reconcile the GST that you paid on all inputs for that period, the GST that you collected, and send a cheque in for the difference.

Inventory and capital are still depreciated, at the cost minus the GST
 
Originally Posted By: Pablo
Costs? The waste and stupid spending are still there as well.

Taxing success has it's limitations. It usually limits success. But I know you think success is evil or at least if there is "success" there must be cheating............


How is a GST a tax on success ?

It's a tax on consumption.

Business gets to claim every cent of GST that they've paid, and pay only the margin between their input costs and sales.

Every manufactured item in the country has the same percentage tax, so it doesn't discriminate, especially not on the "successful".
 
GST is an abuse on small business. We already have a state sales tax. If we get a national one as well, who do you think does the grunt work?

But when I was responding to Gary I was referring to taxes in general. I do agree, sales taxes are a bit less onerous than income taxes, especially scaled (read: stepped) income tax.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
If that's the case, then we should be on an advancing curve, correct?


Yes, except now there are two billion other mostly younger people in the world working harder and cheaper to pull the rug out from under us.
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
If that's the case, then we should be on an advancing curve, correct?


Yes, except now there are two billion other mostly younger people in the world working harder and cheaper to pull the rug out from under us.


...but they aren't in North American and getting North American wages and whining about paying North American social costs. They are being employed with North American money that is sent there since North American workers are too expensive.

Unfortunately, the North American workers who selflessly sacrificed their jobs to these needy and ambitious foreigners (they took a vote and said "send them my job, I don't deserve it") ..are still expected to pick up the same costs as before.
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Originally Posted By: eljefino
But, it displaces nearly $1000/ month in health care insurance for the typical family.

What is this based on?


I just checked my online benefits, every 2 weeks I pay $142 and change and my employer pays $320. Not including dental.

Quote:
Quote:
Picture your typical insurance company putzing around, denying claims, raising peoples' blood pressure with their antics. They move paper around but at the end of the day... was that sick person treated? Was a child educated? Was a ditch dug? Can we as a society point to that and say an improvement was made on our patch of land?

Yeah, because gigantic government bureaucracies are masters of efficiency when it comes to paperwork...



Medicare pays 98% of every dollar that comes in, out for patient care. If "efficient" means sometimes they pay for an esoteric test that we all knew was negative... yes, they are not efficient. Was that test "fraud"? Well maybe... of low value... but if it came back positive the doctor would have been glad it was performed!

An insurance company denying something only to have it come back later is foolish. Say they kick a sick man out and he wiggles back in through "assigned risk"... theoretically that ins co is a "winner" because their actuaries say that guy has to go... but as a society we have to carry that guy. Guess what? He's back! Was that efficient?

I pay a lot of money to "the man"-- whether it's an insurance company or the tax man... I loathe them about equally... but feel society would fix a few issues if there was ONE health plan that everyone from BHO on down had to suffer.
 
That's my biggest problem with our former treasurer.

He claims that he cut the income tax rate down to the business tax rate for the majority of Australians. It's true, my average tax rate is 30% just like business.

However, I'm taxed on turnover (income), while business is taxed on what's left (profit).

I'd be more than willing to pay more tax, on what's left at the end of the year, LOL.
 
Originally Posted By: oilyriser
Most upper earners are not the predators that you loathe. There are some predators, but most are working for the benefit of society.
Quid pro quo?
grin2.gif
I'm not of the opinion that anyone is altruistic. I'd expect anyone in a position of power to leverage it to their fullest advantage (which might have some rather complicated implications). If people or groups with authority aren't malevolently predatory, my first guess is that's because they're presented with no reasonable choice to do otherwise. Restraint isn't a bad thing as long as you're not talking about me.
grin2.gif


Originally Posted By: Gary Allan
We had good filters at one time in our society. We did have a good education system at one time. There was a reason why there was a certain demeanor (and even appearance in many cases) to an airline pilot or an FBI agent..naval commanders ..etc.. They were all filtered through a similar process. It allowed you a hierarchy of suitability for given positions where intelligence was in abundance for the job required.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
$101 trillion
2 3
Replies
44
Views
11K
ConfederateTyrant
dave1251
  • Locked
Exxon Mobil
Replies
19
Views
16K
MolaKule
D
  • Locked
Cost of Illegal Immigration
Replies
2
Views
812
Al
A
  • Locked
unsustainable spending
Replies
9
Views
880
Drew99GT
Back
Top Bottom