out of the box thought on taxes

Of COURSE it is.

How else could King Obama, Fascist and Traitor, abuse the power of the IRS if the IRS didn't have a labyrinthine tax code that NOBODY understands to punish people daring to use their First Amendment freedoms in opposition to your King and Messiah?

It's way past time the "poor" start paying their fair share. They get the largest share of government benefits, so they should be paying the largest share of the taxes.

Can't get fairer than that, can you?

No, of course you can't.

 

What a STUPID comment that was.

EVERY business owner that rents his storefront counts as an expense the rent paid for the space. As an expense, rent then becomes part of the Cost of Goods Sold. You damn Marxists should stop playing foolish games with words and at least learn first semester accounting.

 

Sales taxes, as are corporate taxes, are ALWAYS shifted to the consumer, unless the business owner is stupid.

Even when the business owner is stupid, the sales taxes are paid by the consumer, it's just that the seller is improperly calculating his prices. Because he's stupid.

As was pointed out by a very intelligent person earlier in this thread, and do try to recall that this thread is about the global competitiveness of business, sales taxes affect the buyer in the taxed jurisdiction, corporate taxes affect the seller in all jurisdictions. It's the difference between dunking your left foot (of course) into a puddle, and falling in the ocean.

 

No, that's called, "you makin' $#!+ up." The land value tax is INDEPENDENT of the improvements and of any use or production taking place on the land. That is why it is not a cost of production. How many times, and how much more clearly, do these facts have to be stated for you before you will consent to know them?

Correct!

 

A few places do have LVT, but "we" don't. What we have is property taxes, which consist of two opposite taxes: a tax on improvement value, or what the improvements' owner contributes to the wealth of the community, and a tax on land value, or what the community contributes to the wealth of the landowner. The problem with comparing property tax with LVT is that the higher the property tax rate, the more of it falls on improvements, and the less that falls on land value.

It would be much higher.

The entire burden of a land value tax is borne by the landowner, as the value of his land disappears.

 

No. Whether LVT replacing property taxes would be a tax cut or tax increase depends on the current property tax rate and the improvement value ratio. It has nothing whatever to do with whether the land is being used.

"Keep it intact" = deprive others of the economic opportunity they would otherwise be at liberty to utilize. Right.

No, it's that we so extravagantly subsidize its idle ownership that millions of acres of highly useful land are held out of use for speculative gain, and the productive must pay for government twice in order that landowners can pocket one of the payments in return for nothing.

Most social and economic problems. Most relevantly to this thread, it would massively enhance the global competitiveness of American industry and labor by relieving the productive of having to pay for government twice. It would NOT solve problems like IP monopolies, the privilege-based monetary system (though it would liberate people from having to undertake decades of debt slavery in order to buy a house), or the evil and insane War on Drugs.

Bingo.

 

No, that is just you makin' stupid $#!+ up again. Google "tax incidence" and start reading. You are just embarrassing yourself by displaying your economic ignorance. First-year economics students learn that tax burdens are shifted according to the relevant elasticities of supply and demand.

Funny, I don't think the business owner is the stupid one here. Armor for Sleep, IIRC, already posted an explanation of why you are wrong.

No, that was not a "very intelligent person." It was an economic ignoramus. Like you.

No, it's the difference between having taken an introductory course in economics and not having taken one.

 

HK used to be better than it is now. Since the handover to China in 1997, corruption has increased a lot, and the government has shifted its focus from recovering land rent to selling leasehold privileges to rich cronies of the Beijing regime. HK real estate moguls have consequently become astronomically rich, while conditions for the poor have worsened.

 

Were you under an erroneous impression that that was relevant?

- - - Updated - - -

By the market.

 

You are mischaracterizing the legal effect of incorporation. Limited liability is determined strictly by the company's legal form, not by the number of owners. A single owner of a corporation is not liable for its actions, but multiple owners of a non-incorporated business are liable for its actions.

 

No, the "Mayor" is flat, outright wrong as a matter of objective fact.

<yawn> Objectively wrong again, as Japan's high corporate taxes during its boom years prove.

 

Oh, Jesus.

Can't you people ever figure out that the amazing growth of US industry in the 1950's had one, and only one, cause? The socialist countries of the world had created the most massive war ever, and destroyed their own ability to manufacture goods. Which countries were left that had massive industrial capability to provide global markets with goods? The United States and...the United States.

The United States made a fortune off rebuilding the disaster areas the socialists made of all their own countries. That what happens when it's a seller's market.

But times change, the other countries weren't going to remain prostrate forever, even though the Commies did their best to make it so. But even with the help of the socialists to keep their nation's economies down, by the 1970's, three decades after the war, the free nations of the world had recovered to the point of being able to compete with the US again.

Yeah, and that's just bull(*)(*)(*)(*). Why would companies decide to move operations offshore? Because taxes and regulation and goonista demands for wages exceeding the value the goonionistas added to the company drove them offshore.

Jeez, enough already, you people need to discover reality if you're going to discuss economics and not look like Low Information Voter tape-recorder drones.

 

It was objectively correct, as David Ricardo demonstrated 200 years ago.

Ah, the amusing spectacle of the bookkeeper who thinks that makes him an economist...

How much would it cost your business owner to sell those goods if he tried to do so from a location out in the countryside where he didn't have to pay any land rent?

GET IT??

Wrong again.

<yawn> How many legs does a sheep have if an accountant calls the tail a leg?

 

Yeah, the Mayor must be wrong because Roy L responded to a quote the Mayor didn't make.

[/quote]

More ignorance from the left.

The page just dropped out, and the Mayor isn't going to repost that there were other influences funding the Japanese boom of the 1980's, such as the fact that GM sucks, and the Japanese pursuit of QUALITY drove them to market products unequaled in the world. The US wasn't making VCRs, Japan was. Japan cornered the Walkman market. Japan got a lock on the US car markets. Japan makes TV's, the US doesn't. TV's made by countries that weren't Japan sucked in the 1980's.

Stop being ignorant. This THREAD is about the effect of CORPORATE TAXES as a SINGLE PARAMETER on the global competitiveness of corporate entities, and ONLY about the effect of those taxes.

The influence of quality is clearly not a matter for debate, except in Liberal La-La Lands, since goonions can't produce quality products....just ask GM.

 

They should be calling a sheep tail a liberal, since the sheep herder has to move the thing out of the way to get the sheep to breed.

Can't get anything useful done with the liberals in the way.

That being said, it's more productive for the Mayor to take two huskies out to take a dump than to continue feeding you.

However, given the nature of dog-poo laws, the Mayor will be bringing stuff back to feed you.

laterz...

 

The Ignoramus agreed with an objectively wrong quote.

It is you who constantly demonstrate your ignorance of first-year economics.

Funny how a country with high corporate taxes (and low CEO salaries) managed to do all that when the Ignoramus claims it couldn't possibly have done so.

As they say in Japan, "It's mirror time!"

No, it is not. It is about what taxes would best improve US industry's global competitiveness. geofree, Armor for Sleep and I have already explained why that tax is a land value tax and no other.

All major Japanese car makers have been unionized since the 1960s. The Ignoramus strikes again.

 

A transaction tax, preferably global, that would replace all other taxes.
You want to level the playing field?
There is no other way to do it.

 

indago: "How is the value of the land determined in either case?"

Is this "the market" that you were indicating?

 

The best would be a tax on companies who outsource jobs. Tax all companies that import products that can be made into the US at 50%.

Then, tax companies that have their factories in the US at only 25%.

And then tax foreign companies that move to the US at 30%.

Also, outlaw the importation of sweatshop products into the US.

And, while we're at it, tax US stores, such as Walmart, that import the vast majority of their goods from China much more than ones that use US made good.

Make it so a company would be losing millions by outsourcing.

This would help bring back the the American manufacturing industry, which would help America compete in the global economy.

 

The government likely wants to pay less than market, the company wants more. A competent appraiser can tell which value is actually closer to the market. Sometimes there can be a valuation problem due to speculators' interest in proposed/expected/desired zoning changes or infrastructure projects, but that would wash out in the LVT system, as they wouldn't be able to grab any publicly created land value for themselves anyway. Value would then be current use value under current zoning, with current infrastructure in place, etc.

 

Read the thread. I, geofree and Armor for Sleep have already proved there is.

 

haha, who said level the playing field? We want an American edge!

 

Is the point of all this to make Americans in efficient industries subsidize workers that want jobs but do not like the price the market has set for low skill assembly line work? Why not pay people to dig ditches and then just fill in the hole with tax money needed to protect the business? Why go through the farce?

Every import must be paid by an export later. No one sends us free stuff.

 

Roy: I come to this site to learn from everyone and some of your ideas are differrent so I have tryed to figure this out, thanks I have a headache now.

 

Ya all those pescky rules and regulation like min. wages, building safety, fire safety, hours worked, locking people in.