Welcome to ECCIE, become a part of the fastest growing adult community. Take a minute & sign up!

Welcome to ECCIE - Sign up today!

Become a part of one of the fastest growing adult communities online. We have something for you, whether you’re a male member seeking out new friends or a new lady on the scene looking to take advantage of our many opportunities to network, make new friends, or connect with people. Join today & take part in lively discussions, take advantage of all the great features that attract hundreds of new daily members!

Go Premium

Go Back   ECCIE Worldwide > General Interest > The Sandbox - National
test
The Sandbox - National The Sandbox is a collection of off-topic discussions. Humorous threads, Sports talk, and a wide variety of other topics can be found here.

Most Favorited Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Most Liked Images
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
  • Thumb
Top Reviewers
cockalatte 649
MoneyManMatt 490
Still Looking 399
samcruz 399
Jon Bon 398
Harley Diablo 377
honest_abe 362
DFW_Ladies_Man 313
Chung Tran 288
lupegarland 287
nicemusic 285
Starscream66 281
You&Me 281
George Spelvin 270
sharkman29 256
Top Posters
DallasRain70818
biomed163570
Yssup Rider61189
gman4453322
LexusLover51038
offshoredrilling48782
WTF48267
pyramider46370
bambino43090
The_Waco_Kid37343
CryptKicker37227
Mokoa36497
Chung Tran36100
Still Looking35944
Mojojo33117

Reply
 
Thread Tools
Old 11-24-2012, 04:55 PM   #16
steamyromance
Premium Access
 
Join Date: Aug 27, 2011
Location: san antonio
Posts: 151
Encounters: 12
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexTushHog View Post
Almost evey carbon tax proposal has a anti-regressive rebate provision that has some payments to taxpayers in the lower two quintiles. Those proposals make it less regressive or progressive. See: http://www.cbo.gov/publication/43713

However a carbon tax will certainly not be the primary means for reversing income disparities. That will have to come in the form of taxing capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income, inheritance taxes, or am outright tax on assets above as certain level.
From my experience as a one time lower income individual I couldn't afford to hire a tax accountant let alone worry about keeping up with receipts etc. so i am concerned the average mid to lower income folks would be at an unfair position. I don't have a link for proof but i have seen tracking numbers that correlate higher fuel cost with less spending by consumers on everyday goods, throw a price hike on everything and and i think it will kill alot of business.
A slow gradual change seems a more prudent approach if the long term goal is to do away with the energy we have in abundance to other alternative sources.
I am also wondering why the US will be unfairly punished or taxed and the rest of the modernized world can go on polluting the planet.
Cheap energy has helped propel the US for many decades, creating in essence the middle class, but my hunch is the overall cost of goods along with taxes and the decrease of income will continue to do more harm than good.
steamyromance is offline   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 06:52 PM   #17
Texas Contrarian
Lifetime Premium Access
 
Join Date: Mar 29, 2009
Location: Texas Hill Country
Posts: 3,341
Default Interesting Topic; Just Scattershooting a Few Observations

Quote:
Originally Posted by steamyromance View Post
...You missed the point i was trying to make. The idea is that higher gas taxes will help the economy, if its not to much trouble maybe you can explain this to me...
There's no quick and easy way to answer that question. First of all, higher taxes on anything do not "help" the economy, except with respect to the obvious fact that we need to collect enough revenue to fund the level of government services deemed desirable, and we need to do so in the least damaging way. In other words, preference should be given to taxes that do the least possible harm to prospects for healthy economic growth, and produce the minimum level possible of economy-damaging distortions. Economists speak of something called "deadweight loss" when discussing things such as taxes, subsidies, price controls, externalities, etc. Needless to say, you want to minimize deadweight loss.

To that end, many hold the opinion that consumption taxes are less distortive than payroll taxes, since they do less to disincentivize employment and production. It's also often been argued that higher gasoline taxes would have the further benefit of exerting downward pressure on aggregate demand for oil, and therefore would reduce our dependence on imports. That's no small matter, since we spend about 2% of GDP importing oil which is promptly burned up. One doesn't have to be a professional economist to figure out that that's not a very good situation! Our huge balance-of-payments deficit is one of the most serious structural problems affecting our economy, and imported oil represents a large portion of it.

A higher gasoline tax is not an idea supported only by liberals. Long-time Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, a well-known conservative, has been writing about the benefits of such a tax for almost as long as I can remember. He notes that it should be offset by reduced payroll taxes (or some other subsidy), so that households in the bottom half of the income distribution would not be penalized.

Quote:
Originally Posted by steamyromance View Post
...I am also wondering why the US will be unfairly punished or taxed and the rest of the modernized world can go on polluting the planet...
Actually, most of the world's wealthier nations tax gasoline at far higher rates than we do. Gasoline taxes in the neighborhood of $4/gallon are typical in higher-income European countries, for instance. I mean $4/gallon tax, not a $4 price at the pump. No wonder they drive all those fuel-sipping cars!

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexTushHog View Post
...However a carbon tax will certainly not be the primary means for reversing income disparities. That will have to come in the form of taxing capital gains and qualified dividends as ordinary income, inheritance taxes, or am outright tax on assets above as certain level.
Actually, large increases in the tax rates on capital gains and qualified dividends would do very little to redress the huge rise in income disparity over the last several decades. Despite many media reports suggesting otherwise, the extent to which revenue collected from wealthy taxpayers is currently less than would be the case under the tax code and rate structure of the late 1970s, for instance, is miniscule in comparison to the size of our deficit. Please note that it's also miniscule in comparison to the aggregate dollar value of tax cuts for lower income groups over the last thirty years.

And it's worth remembering that there's a strong inverse correlation between net capital gains realizations and the top statutory capital gains tax rate. That does not mean that cutting the capital gains tax rate generally increases revenue, and vice versa (as some politicians and ideologues disingenuously claim). But it does mean that when rates are pushed to high levels, much if not most of the anticipated additional revenue pulls a disappearing act.

History is very clear on that.
Texas Contrarian is online now   Quote
Old 11-24-2012, 11:48 PM   #18
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainMidnight View Post
A higher gasoline tax is not an idea supported only by liberals. Long-time Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer, a well-known conservative, has been writing about the benefits of such a tax for almost as long as I can remember.

Actually, most of the world's wealthier nations tax gasoline at far higher rates than we do. Gasoline taxes in the neighborhood of $4/gallon are typical in higher-income European countries, for instance. I mean $4/gallon tax, not a $4 price at the pump. No wonder they drive all those fuel-sipping cars!
#1, folks in regions of the country who have mass transportation available to them for commutes to work and functions "in the city" are not as concerned about what they pay at the pump and many "in the city" don't even have automobiles.... some don't even know how to drive (or no driver's license).

#2: using "the world's wealthier nations" as a standard or "goal" for this country will require a comparision of the dependency in this country for individual vehicle transportation and the delivery of commodies over much farther distances on much more frequest intervals ... there again one must look at the availability of mass transportation systems in those countries and life-style differences for decades.

Right or wrong ... this country, as a whole, has a lousy mass transportation system ... and there was a justification for the Federal fuel tax and it was not to modify behavior or increase general revenues for entitlement programs.

All the hogwash of "deductions" to offset the actual cost will not prevent a reduction in personal and business activity, and has the potential of expediting the anticipated inflation from the mounting debt through increased interest rates and rising costs.
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 01:09 AM   #19
oden
Valued Poster
 
oden's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 4, 2010
Location: San Antonio
Posts: 830
Default

Carbon taxes are just a way to subsidize "green energy" which does not do anything but put money in certain companies pockets but will not change anything until we run out of carbon based energy. At that point the free market will adjust to the most cost efficient method. To take money from working people who can't afford to act as investment bankers and make them fund Government picked companies is nothing more than misguided cronyism.

Buy and and invest in what the hell you want to and don't try to tell me what to do; or go set up your own dictatorship in some Latin American country!
oden is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 04:16 AM   #20
TexTushHog
Professional Tush Hog.
 
TexTushHog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 27, 2009
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 8,964
Encounters: 7
Default

With regard to the question of other countries, we would obviously continue though the international process to push for greenhouse gas emission reductions from other industrialized countries. In point of fact, most of those countries are already ahead of us in that they 1) ratified, and 2) are complying with (for Article I nations) the Kyoto Protocols. Indeed, the US actually doing something about climate change would do a great deal to get International negotiations back on track after the failure of the last round in Copenhagen (COP 15) in 2009.
TexTushHog is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 07:07 AM   #21
LexusLover
Valued Poster
 
LexusLover's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 16, 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 51,038
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TexTushHog View Post
With regard to the question of other countries, we would obviously continue though the international process to push for greenhouse gas emission reductions from other industrialized countries. In point of fact, most of those countries are already ahead of us in that they 1) ratified, and 2) are complying with (for Article I nations) the Kyoto Protocols. Indeed, the US actually doing something about climate change would do a great deal to get International negotiations back on track after the failure of the last round in Copenhagen (COP 15) in 2009.
That has little to do with any vehicle fuel tax affecting consumers in the U.S.

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf
LexusLover is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 09:18 AM   #22
pyramider
El Hombre de la Mancha
 
pyramider's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 30, 2009
Location: State of Confusion
Posts: 46,370
Encounters: 10
Default

No one has mentioned the bank transaction tax of 1% per transaction. Did it get repealed or is it going into effect Jan 1, 2013?
pyramider is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 05:47 PM   #23
steamyromance
Premium Access
 
Join Date: Aug 27, 2011
Location: san antonio
Posts: 151
Encounters: 12
Default

Capital gains tax going to 24% FROM 15% The new tax on dividends going to 43% from 15% , a 3% tax on the sale of your home, bank transaction tax, higher gas tax, health care cost going through the roof ( someone PLEASE tell me why Obama didnt go for tort reform ) health insurance going up up up.
Im not sure how all of this helps the middle class can someone please explain that to me ?
So i am not to bright , but this is the way i see it. The rich guy owns the big trucking company, his fuel cost go up. his insurance cost go up, his tax rate goes up, he passes those cost to the grocery store he has a contract with for their hauling, so MY grocery bill rises, so what in the hell do i do just eat less? And thats when i can afford to buy gas to get to the store!
Fuckin peanut butter and beans are my new favorite food groups! So at the end of the day i go from middle class to what, poor?
Do you guys see my point, go ahead and make the wealthy pay up but where in the hell do you think they get the money ?
steamyromance is offline   Quote
Old 11-25-2012, 05:48 PM   #24
TexTushHog
Professional Tush Hog.
 
TexTushHog's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 27, 2009
Location: Here and there.
Posts: 8,964
Encounters: 7
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by LexusLover View Post
That has little to do with any vehicle fuel tax affecting consumers in the U.S.

http://unfccc.int/resource/docs/convkp/kpeng.pdf
It responds to those who say that if we have carbon limiting policies such as a gas tax, other countries will continue to produce greenhouse gasses in an unregulated manner.
TexTushHog is offline   Quote
Reply



AMPReviews.net
Find Ladies
Hot Women

Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright © 2009 - 2016, ECCIE Worldwide, All Rights Reserved