Let's increase the funding for Medicare and Social Security with a transaction tax?

[Skink]

Why rely on a payroll tax in a time a shrinking payrplls?

[MADem]

1. That's VAT--VAT is BAD. It makes everything, from shoelaces to power boats, absurdly expensive. nt

[applegrove]

9. We have a vat in canada and it pays for our universal health care and all.

You don't pay taxes on rent or food. If you send your kids to the mall with $100 then you pay 5 or 6% tax on that. If you get a haircut you spend tax on that. If you are poor you get a tax refund 2 times a year. It works great and people who are spending their disposable income on non necessities are paying taxes. The rich more because they buy more expensive stuff (like when they eat out).

[MADem]

11. Which is why Canadians come across the border in droves to gas up and go to WALMART.

Then they pop back over with their four hundred bucks a day worth of stuff, or whatever it is these days. There's also that tax on PREPARED foods--which screws the poor. A rich person doesn't even notice it, it is such a small percentage of their income, but to the poor, that adds up. And lots of poor people aren't living in situations where they have the time or facilities to cook from scratch.

VAT is ghastly. It's why a four hundred dollar refrigerator costs eight hundred dollars in UK.

It's why a 300 dollar TV costs six hundred dollars in UK.

These prices are crazy because VAT is not just what YOU pay--it's what is added on to the cost of the item at every stage of production. All along the supply chain, VAT is being paid. That's why there are such massive price differences between VAT and non-VAT nations.

I've been to and lived in VAT countries. The cost of consumer goods is way out of line with anything resembling sanity. Because of VAT, stuff "falls off the truck" all the time. I read about more truck hijackings in Europe than I ever did in the states--it was like the wild west over there, everything from dishwashers to cigarettes.

VAT is not a good way to pay for any public programs. It is a regressive tax that screws the poorest most. Governments love it, because they get people used to it, and after a while they think it's normal. But VAT on consumer goods does not stick it to the rich half as much as it does the poor. EVERYONE needs basic goods to survive in modern society, like refrigerators, stoves, TVs, home heating equipment, clothing, etc....but the percentage of income that VAT bites from the poor is way more than it bites from the rich.

I like progressive taxes, and VAT is the opposite of progressive.

[doc03]

2. Oh they are going one better than that, talk is they are going to

extend the payroll tax cut for employees and employers this time. So rather than increasing funding they are decreasing it. That actually ties debt to SS now, thus giving them the excuse to cut SS.

[doc03]

3. Would that be a transaction tax for securities and

comedies trades or do mean all transactions? If mean a tax on securities and commodities I agree 1000%. If you mean a VAT tax I disagree.

[Skink]

4. market trades is what I thought a transaction tax was.

[ozone_man]

7. Yes, that's what I thought you meant.

I think it's a great idea. My question would be whether to apply it toward SS, medicare or the general budget. I think SS is best funded by the payroll tax, and Obama dangerously screwed things up by cutting it, forcing it into the general budget. So, it becomes clear to me that he cares little for it. One more non-progressive stake in the ground for him.

[MADem]

13. I'm with you. Securities, si, consumer goods, no! nt

[Cool Logic]

5. The logic is sound; however, it would be a futile effort unless...

the Unified Budget Act were repealed first.

The problem is that money is power; or alternately, a means to acquire power. Thus, when politicians, whose sole objective is to acquire power, have the ability to spend, they will.

If our government had been managed by people actually cared about the People, they would have evaluated and adjusted to the factor of Boomer demographics. But the People's Representatives didn't care about that. The only thing they were concerned with was how to enhance their own goddamn power.

American workers invested a $2.6 Trillion (surplus) in the SSTF. The SSTF trustees took this cash and gave it to Congress in exchange for Treasury Bonds. Congress took the money and spent it. However, Congress did not combine these activities with the general fund and treated it as an off-balance sheet liability. Now, American workers must ante up another $2.6 Trillion, so "service" this liability.

It will require about $2.6 trillion to clean up this accounting scandal whether or not reform occurs. Furthermore, this amount will continue to climb until Congress repeals the Unified Budget Act and creates that "lock-box" we used to hear about.

Whatever happened to that damn lock-box anyway. No one talks about it anymore.

[doc03]

6. Well they made fun of Al Gore and his lock box n/t

[Cool Logic]

8. Indeed they did...and now that Enron's former lobbyist works for the Federal Reserve...

the laughter continues to resonate...

We saw the effect of off-balance-sheet accounting on Enron's employee retirement plan. Why anyone would support the fedgov's policy of employing the same accounting practices is beyond my realm of comprehension.

All to often I read or hear news of someone being swindled. Most of the schemes employed are so simplistic and obvious in nature, that it is beyond my realm of comprehension how someone could have fallen for it.

There is nothing funny about the American People being swindled by their Representatives.

[exboyfil]

15. You can't have a "lockbox" without fiscal discipline

The only deficit the general budget should have run was the one to Social Security. It would have made servicing this debt now an easier exercise.

Another option as you go out to borrow further money from the general public is to state that the SSTF bonds have first priority in payment - I wonder what that would do to our interest rate for new debt?

Does anyone want to get some shovels and did up the SOBs who voted for the 1983 SS law? Was the question ever asked - what happens when SSTF goes to start collecting?

[Cool Logic]

16. "Does anyone want to get some shovels..."

Good idea...however, I would prefer to use mine to to bury some more of those SOBs.

Regrettably, very few people agree with me, for +90% of our Senate and House members were re-elected while all of this was occurring.

As and aside: The same goes for those who voted to authorize the wars that are contributing so heavily to our budget woes.

[Cleita]

10. FICA is regressive enough. We don't need a sales tax

on top of it making the poor shoulder even more of the burden.

[TransitJohn]

12. Transaction tax not on consumer goods but on financial transactions in the 'markets'

really hit those high frequency bastards hard for the wealth they extract from the American people.

[MADem]

14. I think many would get behind that--it's just VAT that isn't a winner. nt