New View

How to define the Lies one hears every day? Tom Redburn attempts an effort, but it falls far short of excitement. The Republican position on Taxes is idiotic, but the Democratic position on Spending is equally short-sighted and stupid. The first fact Readers should assimilate consists of the idea that the Economy will not expand more rapidly if Taxes are cut; We will actually be hard-pressed to keep the economy from withering under the bombardment of higher Energy Costs and Ageing Population, things which could be valuably improved with higher taxation. Economic performance is not impeded by efficient taxation. The second fact states that We could not afford a third Bush-style administration term; We are in the enviable position of either raising Taxes, or becoming a Third-World economy. Do Some imagine I am becoming hysterical? The current Mortgage Crisis has cost Our Neighbors about a Trillion dollars, We owe them at least an equal amount, and they are not in a Mood to lend more–check the climate control conference. Fact Three states simply that Tax Cuts cannot be funded, because We have no one to borrow the necessary Cash from, who is in any manner willing to provide it.

Here is a sample of the current American Thought on Carbon emissions. It seems very convoluted with interminable counter-proposals, not just in the article, but throughout the Political matrix. The complexity remains the Fault of the No-Taxes mentality. I will attempt to straighten out the Mess somewhat–and probably only generate more confusion. Americans consume too much, and this Consumption remained geared towards heavy Energy use. Production worldwide has made no transition; using Energy-intensive Production methods to produce Products which require heavy Energy use; American still consume more of these type Products than Anyone else, the real Threat being foreign adoption of American consumption practices. Economics will explain that the only effective means to reduce Consumption still remains Taxation; to the point, extreme Consumption practices will not be reduced until such time as they are taxed (this Statement does mean I am in favor of any type of Sales Tax nationally).

What is needed is a Taxation on specific types of Product, but universal throughout the World economy. The United States should lead the effort to gain Treaty acceptance of a Global tax system on Product. The agreed Taxation, like Our Income Tax, should be graduated based upon the average level of Income within each Country. Developed Countries would admittedly pay the highest taxation, and low Average Income Countries would pay only a minimal Tax; the beauty of the system, though, is the fact that each Country would maintain its own Tax collections, and use the tax revenues to defray the Costs of their own Government and Development. The real bone of contention will come with the next element: which is establishment of Tax rates for each type of Product–actually a multiple rate of three levels. I envision Americans paying 12% for their Agricultural products, 8% for Construction materials, 40% taxation on Electronics, and 40% tax on Vehicles; all based upon the flow of Energy consumption through its lifetime of creation and usage. Middle-Income Countries like China would pay 6%, 6%, 25%, and 30% in taxes in the various sectors. The real Gain here is the Statement that the Tax has to be collected, even for Exports. Placement on Exports give an Advantage to lower-Income Countries, who can export at lower Price because the Tax is lower, while insistent that Developed Nations of high Income must stay technically efficient to remain competitive on the World market. lgl