Weblog

Tuesday, 21 July 2009

  • Beware the Value-Added Tax Is On Its Way

    Congress and the new administration are now floating around the idea of creating a federal value added tax. A value added tax, also known as the VAT, is a nation sales tax. The United States is one of the few countries that does not have one. This is not the same thing as the retail sales tax that we are all accustomed to. In a VAT system the tax is built into all prices, rather than visibly tracked at the time of a purchase. It is a tax that consumers have to pay for at every step of the inventory process, from manufacturer to distributor to warehouse to retailer to customer. In contrast, a sales tax is a single retail tax consumers have to pay for only at the time they purchase an item, and as a result it is typically much lower in cost. The VAT will have an enormous affect on us because it will raise the cost of almost everything we buy, but many won't even realize it because the cost will be hidden in price of items. It's similar to a sales tax but different "because the consumer doesn't see the added cost, somewhat like the way that excise and other taxes are buried in the prices of gasoline, alcohol, cigarettes, etc." So in addition to the sales tax you normally pay (which continues to keep going up), you will also be forced to pay this federal tax and because it is hidden in the price of everything, you probably won't even know exactly how much extra you will be paying. Here are some key points taken from the Heritage Foundation explaining what the VAT will do.

    • Expand the cost of government. Countries with VATs have a much heavier total tax burden than those without VATs. Before the creation of VATs, the burden of taxation in Europe was not that much larger than it was in the United States. However, since the late 1960s, when countries in Europe began to adopt VATs, Europe’s aggregate tax burden has increased by about 50 % while the U.S. tax burden has remained relatively constant.
    • Inadvertently increase income tax rates. One of the main arguments for the VAT is that it is a less destructive way to raise revenue. This is theoretically true, but irrelevant. In the real world, the VAT has been used as an excuse to increase income taxes as a way to maintain “dis­tributional neutrality.” Indeed, income taxes in Europe today are higher than they were when VATs were implemented.
    • Slow economic growth and destroy jobs. A VAT undermines economic growth for 2 reasons. First, it reduces incentives to engage in productive behavior by driving a larger wedge between pre-tax income and post-tax consumption. Second, it facilitates larger gov­ernment and the concomitant transfer of resources from the productive sector of the economy to the public sector, diminishing economic efficiency.

    Our founding fathers did everything they could to make sure that the United States would never become like Europe but our government keeps trying to make our economy resemble the unproductive and sluggish socialistic economies of European countries. The tax will not help our economy because it will take money out of our pockets, decrease spending and hurt small businesses who greatly contribute to the revenue our government brings in. It is just a way to create an additional tax burden on the public to help the government continue its outrageous spending spree at our expense and our economies expense. The history of other countries has shown that once the VAT is here, it will be virtually impossible to get rid of so I encourage you to contact your local congressman and tell him/her that you do not want this tax.

    Heritage Foundation VAT Article

Sunday, 12 July 2009

  • Cap & Trade Will Hurt Our Environment More & Obliterate What's Left of Our Economy

    Most of us already know that Cap and Trade will hurt us all substantially by driving up the cost of our utilities, but there are a few other "hidden" things that Cap and Trade will do that some people may not be aware of.

    1. Cap and Trade will actually increase global carbon emissions in the long run because it will force some companies who cannot afford the high tariff to move to countries where there is no tariff and where the environmental laws are lax in comparison to our own
    (i.e. India and China). This alone will further contribute to the destruction of our environment. Greenpeace is even against Cap and Trade, and stated in June 2009 that "it is not science-based and benefits polluters."

    2. Politicians here in the states want to enforce Cap and Trade regulations on foreign countries such as China and India, but this is very unrealistic. China has just become an emerging market in the global economy and there is no chance that they will slow that down anytime soon by imposing these laws on their companies. India on the other hand, is an extremely impoverished country with a very low GDP and it would be ridiculous, foolish and unrealistic to believe that they will actually enforce Cap and Trade laws on their companies.

    3. If by some miracle, China and India agree to follow through on Cap and Trade, Airbus and European car companies will make tons of profit off of this because the European Union has not and will not follow suit. We are not connected to them financially and so they have no reason to ever do so. Coercion of one group of people ultimately just helps another group of people get ahead, at our expense and our environment's expense. Experts agree that Cap and Trade will only work if the entire international community embraces it,CapeTradeGraph and this clearly is not the case.

    4. Even if the impossible happens and the international community embraces Cap and Trade, the benefits will be minimal but the destruction it will leave on our economy will be significant. According to the Heritage Foundation, Cap and Trade at its best will only cause a "0.05 degree Celsius reduction in temperature by 2050 but would cost an average 844,000 jobs every year and a loss of $7.4 trillion in GDP through 2035. Click on the graph to the side to see this visually.

    Minimal, if not any, environmental benefits at the expense of our already suffering economy does not sound like a very bright idea to me. What do you think?

    Greenpeace Opposes Cap-and-Trade

Thursday, 02 July 2009

  • 4 Simple Reasons Why Politicians Are Destroying Our Economy

    Capitalism in the US is struggling because it's not being practiced correctly. This is largely due to the oppressive economic legislation that politicians have put into place. This legislation has made our economy Socialistic in nature, resembling the sluggish and unproductive Socialistic economies of countries like France. The reason is 4 fold:

    1. Government assistance and bailouts to companies that failed because they did not provide consumers with what they wanted. Companies that don't provide consumers with what they want normally go out of business long before they ever reach the bankruptcy level. However, because of government assistance (which was happening long before the recent bailouts) these toxic companies have been able to stay afloat until they reach the bankruptcy level. This is also known as "corporate welfare."

    2. Labor unions that have increased production costs for companies which has forced many of them to move their production to foreign countries in order to save money. Companies that have stayed in the US have been forced to increase their prices because of the labor unions, and consequently have trouble competing with companies from other countries who have much lower prices because they do not have labor unions.
    3. The tax and regulation barriers that the government has put in place that hurt businesses in order to limit the competition of large corporations. This includes high taxes on small businesses, high property and capital gains taxes, and the many strict business regulations that have been created to limit the competition of large corporations but have made it more difficult for small businesses to survive and for ordinary people to start their own business and obtain wealth by working for themselves.
    4. Government interference in the free market, for example The Bill Clinton "Fair and Affordable Housing Initiative" that gave trillions of dollars to mortgage companies who were willing to give home loans to risky people. Had it not been for this bill, this one single act of government interference, these risky people would have never received home loans and therefore would have never defaulted on their mortgages and the crash of the housing market would have never occurred (please refer to the article below titled "Who Really Caused the Bad Economy").


    If politicians would get out of the way and let the free market take care of it's self, then Capitalism would be able to flourish like it hasn't been able to for sometime now. The legislation that the they have put into place has turned our free market economy into a Socialistic one. This is why our economy is failing and becoming like France's. China on the other hand does not have this kind of restrictive legislation in place and as a result Capitalism is working there and working very well. They now have a surplus that is estimated to be around $3 trillion. So the question is, do you really want our economy to become like France's when China's economy is becoming like the way our's used to be? You make the call.

Friday, 26 June 2009

  • Does China Now Own the United States?

    According to a recent article in Newsweek, the United States is now currently $11 trillion in debt and $3.3 trillion of that is owned by foreign countries. 53 foreign countries now own the debt of the US and out of all of these countries, who do you think is the largest share holder? If you guessed China, then you would be correct. China comes in first on the list, owning $767.9 billion and Japan comes in second owning $686.7 billion of our national debt (Newsweek, 2009). Saudi Arabia, Iran, Iraq, Algeria and Russia now also own part of the United States, just to name a few.

    Debt Pie Chart

    Despite this, the national debt keeps on growing. Every second it increases by $1 million dollars. Since 2007 it has increased by $3.71 billion per day, but since President Obama took office only 5 months ago the national debt has grown a staggering $137.27 billion per day. The new universal healthcare system that the Obama administration wants to implement is projected to put the US $1.2 trillion more in debt over the next 10 years, but will still leave 37 million people uninsured. Many believe that this number will actually end up being closer to $5 trillion after all of the smoke has cleared. Bush started the problem and Obama has now exacerbated it beyond repair (Newsweek, 2009).

    So what exactly does it mean when countries like China own our debt? Well, when you take out a car loan to buy a car, the lender that gave you the loan puts a lean on your car until you are able pay off the loan, which basically means that the lender owns part of your car until you pay them back. So essentially, these foreign nations now own part of the US. But it gets even worse. China has recently expressed uneasiness and anger to the Secretary of Treasury Timothy Geithner because they have not seen a return on their investment and are starting to believe that the US will not be able to pay them back. They do not want to loan us anymore money, and they now want us to start paying them back right away. And there are also other disastrous ramifications that will occur if the national debt continues to grow at the alarming rate that it is. Inflation will increase because the Federal Reserve is dangerously printing money to pay off the debt, thus the value of the dollar is growing smaller and smaller. It’s also possible that the US could become bankrupt at some point in time which will make the dollar bill, your property, your life savings and everything else worth absolutely nothing (The Economist, 2009). Most people are forced to live within a budget, so why shouldn't our government be forced to operate by the same principle? Clearly the spending spree in Washington needs to stop, but unfortunately the new administration shows no sign that this will actually happen anytime soon.

Thursday, 18 June 2009

  • Why are the Rich Staying Rich While Everyone Else is Getting Poorer? You Need To Know the Truth

    I'm warning you ahead of time that this article is blunt, but it is from my perspective as an economist and is also the perspective of The Economist and Forbes.com. Do not comment unless you have read the entire article. Comments will be deleted at my discretion.

    Did you know that 90% of all the jobs that were created in the past 10 years, were created by small businesses. Fourty-five percent of all the current employment in the US can also be attributed to small businesses, and you won't believe this.....98% of all the jobs in the private sector can be accredited to small businesses, not large corporations (Newsweek, 2009). That’s amazing if you ask me. President Obama even said in March 2009, that "If small businesses fail, we all fail.” He says he wants small businesses to succeeded, but he wants to increase taxes on people making over $200K a year and what he fails to understand is that 99% of small business owners fill their taxes as individuals in order to save money for their businesses. It might seem like these individuals are making over $200k, but they have to pay their employees and their overhead fees and whatever profit is left they typically recycle back into their business. These aren’t wealthy people. They’re hard working middle class people and the more money they save, the more employees they are able to hire, which means fewer people will be out of work and the better off our economy will be.

    Obama says that he only wants to increase taxes for "the rich" but the truth is the rich never pay taxes anyway because their accountants find loop holes in the system, or they stash their cash in foreign accounts. The billionaire Warren Buffet even admitted that he never pays tax. So when Obama says that he wants to increase tax on "the rich," the truth is their taxes will not increase because they don't pay tax. He will be increasing tax on small businesses who are the back bone of this economy. And because small business owners have been stuck with the bulk of the tax burden in this country, they are never able to hire more people. Instead they have to lay off people or they eventually go out of business. Plus it's becoming more difficult for ordinary people to start their own business because of the ever increasing tax and regulation barriers on businesses that the government has created in order to limit the competition of large corporations. Thus, people become stuck at dead end jobs working for someone else and are never able to obtain their own wealth by working for themselves. Furthermore, when there is a lack of small businesses in a community, the local schools suffer because schools survive off of the tax money that local businesses generate. So you might think that Obama's tax increases won't affect you but they will because when you increases tax on small businesses at a time when they are already struggling to survive, they go out of business and local communities suffer, schools suffer, unemployment goes up and the price of food, rent, utilities and everything else goes up as well. The economy gets worse, rich people stay rich and everyone else gets poorer.

    If the president would instead enforce a low flat tax for all (i.e. 10% of everyone's 
    Flat-tax income), then rich people would finally stop stashing their cash in foreign accounts and the government would be able to bring in huge amounts of revenue without hurting the majority. It would also remove some of the barriers that have been put up for people who want to start a business, making it more possible for them to obtain wealth by working for themselves. This was recently done in Slovakia, and the wealthy there couldn't find loop holes in the tax code anymore because it became so simple, and most of them actually wanted to pay the tax because they thought it was fair. Sales tax and all hidden taxes were abolished and remarkably, the poor didn't end up paying anymore then they had already been paying but their standard of living went up because the price of food an everything else went down (The Economist, 2005). When President John F. Kennedy enacted across-the-board tax reductions, including dropping the top tax rate, the economy boomed in the 60's (Forbes, 2005). Obama is right that "If small businesses fail, we all fail," but unfortunately his tax increases on them at a time when they are already struggling to survive, will be the very reason why they fail in the first place.

    Forbes Flat Tax Article
    Harvard Business School Flat Tax Article

Public_Enlightenment

  • Visit Public_Enlightenment's Xanga Site
    • Name: Public_Enlightenment
    • Gender: Female
    • Member Since: 5/23/2009

Archives

Don't worry - your calendar is here… to see it in action just click "Save" above and refresh the page.

About Me

  • I'm an economist trying to inform people about issues that they may not be aware of, from an economist's point of view. Some issues are not as simple as they might seem.

Groups

[no groups]

Pulse

Chatboard (9)

  • jassmine
    Glad to hear that. Your articles are welcome too. Judi
  • TUTUTKAMEN
    That is a great site I am still wandering around it. Trying to define myself. So far no known definition!!!! Crap I say!!!!!
  • TUTUTKAMEN
    @Public_Enlightenment - Every one is aspiring. I am aspiring to be an angel.
  • Public_Enlightenment
    @TUTUTKAMEN - No offense taken Eric. Thank you for the compliment. I see from your message that you have an interest in what Economists do at work. Here's a link to site you can check out for more information. -Carmen http://www.bls.gov/oco/ocos055.htm
  • TUTUTKAMEN
    @Public_Enlightenment - I apologize I meant no anything. I was merely attempting to communicate. I truly admire you and wish to realize and know you more. We appear to have similar views on the state of affairs our nation is in. I find this fascinating therefore my simple comments. I am no expert.
  • Public_Enlightenment
    @TUTUTKAMEN - I'm not an aspiring economist. I actually am an economist. I work for a financial company.
  • TUTUTKAMEN
    You are interesting for an aspiring economist. Good fortune to you My Dear. TuT
  • xxx__InsolentSoldier
    Mmhmm....these are all such under-estimated facts that our people need to get the picture of. *frowns* It's so hard... but overall, i love your site.
  • raised_bywolves
    You have a very interesting site!