tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post3046179471766921074..comments2024-02-27T14:44:07.868+01:00Comments on Greedy goblin: The right definition of the leechGevlonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comBlogger9125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-61086594327534475922012-09-26T18:52:24.655+02:002012-09-26T18:52:24.655+02:00The problem with government projects that you are ...The problem with government projects that you are overlooking is that they do not award those projects the same way a private company would bid them out on the market. Government will award those contracts to the whoever gave them the most campaign funds, or whoever spends the most on lobbying. Government lacks the necessary oversight that a board of directors provides for a private company. Voters are supposed to perform this role for government, but this ceased to be possible a long time ago, because of the size and complexity of governments today. The only solution is to privatize those parts of government that can be privatized, and maintain the smallest government possible that can still manage defense, and an efficient legal system. Alex Cresswellhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/18374588011962325750noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-34677968761067352252012-09-25T22:33:26.511+02:002012-09-25T22:33:26.511+02:00You neglect the diminishing marginal utility of mo...You neglect the diminishing marginal utility of money again. If the utility of sufficiently large amounts of money is logarithmic in the quantity of money (logarithm is one function with a negative second derivative, there are others), then taxing people according to a constant fraction of their utility leads to a progressive tax curve. Using a logarithm leads to a STEEPLY progressive tax curve.<br /><br />Currently, the united states has a regressive tax curve in practice. The wealthiest individuals pay less per dollar of income, due to their assiduous pursuing of tax loopholes. For example, Romney recently payed 13% of his income - almost everybody else paid more (in percentage) than that:<br /><br />http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:US_effective_tax_rates.png<br /><br />The point is, there are different way to say "flat" - a per-capita tax ($5000 per head), would be "a dollar is a dollar flat". A constant percentage tax, which would be "a percent is a percent flat". A constant fraction of utility which would be "a util is a util flat". Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04906677773615232966noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-18315194051338313652012-09-25T18:08:29.375+02:002012-09-25T18:08:29.375+02:00For the first time in a long time, I think I actua...For the first time in a long time, I think I actually agree with you on something on Fixed Costs spending.<br /><br />I'm not actually a fan of Flat Tax idealogy. You are right, not fair, but honestly I don't want to make up the difference lost by the Feds not getting a full 35% from the rich. I'm upset that I pay 25% as it is. To make a flat tax you would essentially take the 15% which is the vast majority of the population and increase their rate extremely high. Though technically fair, I don't see this happening.<br /><br />I think the problem overall with Fixed Cost Spending for the government is the only real budget they get to perform that in, is the Defense budget. Which at $700B is only 20% of the spending. And that's only reducing.<br /><br />You have over $1T and over 40% of our spending going into Mandatory and Discretionary spending. Which is practically unregulated or restricted in spending. The true drain on the spending budget.<br /><br />With fixed costs spending, as you say, you can directly see immediate effects of job increase, infastructure, and economy. But that part of our spending is only a small part of the costs going out.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-78742546839295482562012-09-25T16:36:55.163+02:002012-09-25T16:36:55.163+02:00Do you realize that by your definition the 10k sub...Do you realize that by your definition the 10k sub-tank dps guy is NOT leeching?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-67082102671897970052012-09-25T16:25:41.886+02:002012-09-25T16:25:41.886+02:00How can you call FW still an exploit, while you...How can you call FW still an exploit, while you're profiting from it yourself?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-39313655295053497822012-09-25T14:16:50.510+02:002012-09-25T14:16:50.510+02:00@Kelindia: no, variable costs must be paid by ever...@Kelindia: no, variable costs must be paid by everyone, so the strong do not carry the weak. Those who don't, are leeches and their group isn't liked too much.Gevlonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07072766785893313616noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-61697601860488816442012-09-25T13:51:58.235+02:002012-09-25T13:51:58.235+02:00So what you're advocating is for fixed costs t...So what you're advocating is for fixed costs to be payed by the strong and for variable costs to be paid on a "what they can carry" type model?<br /><br />Then what you're advocating for is for the government to increased fixed costed spending, ie tax the rich, to create jobs in the middle class who will pay into non targeted variable expenses, that will benefit everyone, while being able to pay their own targeted variable expenses?<br /><br />Essentially the leeches won't have to pay fixed costs but will receive their benefits and will only be expected to pay their targeted variable costs while receiving the benefit of non targeted variable costs supported by the middle class and rich?<br /><br />Is this how your post is suppose to be read?Kelindianoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-7896234125022597352012-09-25T13:47:28.747+02:002012-09-25T13:47:28.747+02:00'by creating a huge fixed-cost project of defe...'by creating a huge fixed-cost project of defeating Hitler'<br />Getting paid by the Brits for equipment and goods probably helped. By the way what year did the US enter the war? It has taken Britain 60years to pay of the war loan to American. <br /><br />http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/4757181.stm<br />'Britain had spent a great deal of money at the beginning of the war, under the US cash-and-carry scheme, which saw straight payments for material. There was also trading of territory for equipment on terms that have attracted much criticism in the years since. By 1941, Britain was in a parlous financial state and Lend-Lease was eventually introduced.' <br /><br /><br /><br />Bobbinsnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-1461700565722278823.post-47220969334491089982012-09-25T07:35:57.121+02:002012-09-25T07:35:57.121+02:00Money collected via Federal income tax is paid int...Money collected via Federal income tax is paid into the general treasury and can be used to pay for the expenditures of the government, so defense, entitlements, infrastructure, worker's pensions, etc. Once collected, the money can be spent mostly without restriction.<br /><br />Payroll taxes (or FICA withholdings to be more specific) are not paid into the general treasury. They are paid into a separate pool of money that can't be spent on anything except paying Social Security. As or now, and continuing for some short period of time, SS payments are less than the collections from payroll taxes.<br /><br />Any surplus collections are used to purchase T-bills. That is, they turn into additional debt that must be paid from future collections from Federal income taxes.<br /><br />So yes, people who pay payroll taxes are still leeching. The money collected from them is due them back (via SS payments) and any funds used to pay anything else must be repaid (principal plus interest) from general treasury funds, i.e. must be collected from the group that pays income tax.<br /><br />So to loop back to your analogy, you need to have the government contractually obligated to pay all the citizens an annuity, where the annuity payment is larger than the amount paid by the group that doesn't pay income tax.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com