the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
IMHO the REAL point of these sort of US manufacturing job losses is that, strategically speaking, corporate management committed to eliminating US manufacturing jobs years ago as a cost control / competitive defense measure (versus imported product). Thus we can expect to see an ever increasing number of news announcements like this one ... where corporate management has committed to spending money to 'consolidate' or 'merge' with domestic competitors, eliminate a number of jobs from both companies by consolidating duplicate functions, intermingle production needs, and then relocate production outside the USA and eliminate (unionized) US manufacturing jobs altogether.
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Melonie
http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...RbQ&refer=home
IMHO the REAL point of these sort of US manufacturing job losses is that, strategically speaking, corporate management committed to eliminating US manufacturing jobs years ago as a cost control / competitive defense measure (versus imported product)...
I read something related to this earlier today at the following link
http://buchanan.org/blog/?p=109
I'm not sure if his idea would work, but it's an interesting suggestion. There are other conservative writers I prefer to Patrick J. Buchanan, yet I still wonder if introducing a VAT into the U.S. would be a good idea...it would allow the use of the same tactics/strategies agaisnt those countries we currently compete with, ecoomically-speakking. And as in his article, I'm considering the EU to be a country in this scenario.
Unfortunately, I don't trust any new form of taxation or tax methodology being introduced into the U.S. And that's because I fully expect any new form of tax methodolgy to be horribly abused by politcians and bureaucrats in a very short period of time...of course, this simultaneously applies at the federal, state and local levels of government.
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
While I personally think that a Value Added Tax i.e. National Sales Tax in lieu of Income Tax would be a major step forward, there are at least three ticking time bombs involved in attempts to implement such a major change. Before spewing, let me quantify what we're talking about.
Instead of the present 'progressive percentage' system of income tax, where people earning $30k per year pay essentially no tax, where people earning $60k per year pay perhaps 15% tax, where people earning $90k per year pay perhaps 30% tax, and where 'rich' people utilize every legal method of tax minimization in order to also pay 15% tax or less (I think that John and Theresa Kerry's published tax return on $5 million calculated out to their paying a 12% tax rate), we're talking about throwing that entire income tax system overboard in favor of establishing say a 20% across the board national sales tax. The full proposal to a Value Added Tax would also replace corporate income taxes with the functional equivalent of a corporate sales tax in addition to the national sales tax. I'm basing this on
'Third Rail' issue #1 is that this tax proposal has a rather difficult effect on people who earn less than $30k per year ... they have to actually start paying taxes ! That tax is collected on the sale of any taxable item, and people who earn $30k or $90k or $5 million per year all pay the same dollar amount of tax on the same taxable item. However, the de-facto effect is that the price of every single item that is taxable goes up by 20% for everybody, regardless of income level !
'Third Rail' issue #2 is that, with a handful of exceptions like GWB, most politicians 'never met a tax that they didn't like'. Thus there is a big risk that the enactment of a national sales tax / value added tax would take place WITHOUT the income tax being abolished !
'Third Rail' issue #3 is that a national sales tax / value added tax effectively creates a double taxation scenario for Americans that have actually saved and invested money. They already paid income tax before being able to save / invest the money, and now they will have to pay a 20% national sales tax whenever they spend the money they saved / invested. This is particularly damaging where Roth IRA's are concerned. However, it is one way to reduce the costs of Social Security benefits by 20% across the board (by instituting a 20% tax on virtually everything that Social Security recipients spend money on thus sucking that money right back into the gov't's pocket)
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
I don't like a VAT. I think it basically punishes those who can't afford the punishment and only mildly affects (as usual) those with higher incomes.
I might be somewhat more open to a VAT that excludes basic necessities like food and shelter. The poor people who barely get by now shouldn't be taxed to death (literally) while others skate through practically unaffected. TX for example, doesn't charge sales tax on regular food items. I think that's a great idea.
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
^^^ where the national sales tax is concerned, there is a method to make food and clothing exempt from the tax. However, where the value added tax is concerned, the 'manufacturer's portion' of foodstuff and clothing companies cannot be exempt (violation of international trade agreements), meaning that these prices would be 10% higher perhaps (instead of 20% higher).
It is of course entirely possible for the gov't to decide to 'help' poor people by other means under a VAT system. However, doing so is much more 'visible' from a political standpoint, and much better documented from an accounting standpoint, than the 'tweaking' of income tax rates, tax credits etc. such that 'poor' people essentially pay no income taxes ... which is essentially a 'stealth' gov't benefit that doesn't have to be accounted for from a cost standpoint.
In general, the VAT does force poor people to spend more money via higher prices. The Vat tends to benefit middle-class people because the overall VAT tax rate is usually lower than the progressive income tax rates they are currently paying. The VAT is more or less neutral for the 'rich', because they have the means of avoiding the major effects via geograpy (i.e. purchasing major items outside the country ... the ever famous Mercedes-Benz / Maybach / Ferrari factory delivery + european vacation plan) or by accountant's maneuvering (i.e. having their shell company lease their private jet instead of outright buying it and paying VAT !).
PS you have to wonder what's going on with the economy when Ford, Chrysler and GM are struggling to sell 'cheap' cars, but the highest percentage gainer in terms of worldwide auto brands is Maybach - with the starting price of the 'stripped down' model being US$305,000 !
~
~
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
Quote:
Originally Posted by PhaedrusZ
I'm not sure if his idea would work, but it's an interesting suggestion. There are other conservative writers I prefer to Patrick J. Buchanan...
I knew the world was becoming a screwy place when I found myself agreeing with Pat Buchanan more and more.
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
^^^ I wonder if Pat Buchanan drives a Maybach ? Fellow conservative mouthpiece Rush Limbaugh does.
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
VAT (or any national consumption tax) would be great, since what we have now is a punitive and regressive tax with regard to investment and savings.
The reason it won't come up sooner rather than later is because so many Americans believe they're defined by what they can buy and own. Self-delusion run rampant.
Re: the Hits just keep on comin' - part 12 ?
Quote:
VAT (or any national consumption tax) would be great, since what we have now is a punitive and regressive tax with regard to investment and savings.
Be careful what you wish for ! If Americans actually started saving and investing rather than spending every dollar they earn plus every dollar they can borrow, a worldwide economic depression would probably soon follow !!!