Thursday, May 13, 2010

The Gods of Taxation

The real problem with the federal government comes from two sources; one consists of how much it spends, the other stands as the distortion of the economy coming from its tax structure. Read this short article on tax expenditures. Read it carefully, then ask several questions of yourself: how much does it cost in lost tax revenues; how well does Accountability operate within the tax expenditure system; how much is Government debt the result of tax expenditures, and not actual fiscal expenditures; how are tax expenditures tested for program effectiveness; and is the stability of business within the areas served challenged by possible loss of such benefits? How much confusion is introduced into the market system by such a subsidized program? Can any market price in these subsidized areas mark the actual Cost of Production and Distribution? Finding Answers to these questions might shed some light on tax expenditures, but no one–especially the beneficiaries from such tax expenditures–are actively looking for any answer; they knowing a loss of personal Income will follow.

Read this Post from Tyler Cowen fully–meaning to follow the links. Almost everyone would support tax reform, if it did not cost them personal income. The beneficiaries of current tax policies feel that their tax burdens are already too high, and elimination of their tax benefits would worsen their own violation. They can sorrow for the more afflicted, though stop way short of it costing themselves any Cash. Friedman is correct in assuming there is a relative benefit quite distinct from the absolute is all this hype, where the mandatory position remains protection of their own benefit position without erosion.

It is especially important to read this link. A real difficulty finds introduction in the assumption that relative and absolute will not operate in conjunction. The normal person is a compilation of absolutes and relatives; their weight and power determined by their personal impact upon the individual, and their desire for change. Effects upon their personal position will almost always reflect a relative decision, while ideology is almost always absolute; with everything in between falling somewhere that is personally pleasing. There is almost never any analytical decision process, and waffling is common within the center. It becomes truly difficult to alter tax policy due to the relative power of the benefitted, and even harder to gain admission that the relative position erodes the absolute position taken by most people on economic equality. Such individuals are too guilty to admit their retreat from the absolute, and too cowardly to admit that this evasion is due to their own personal Greed. lgl

No comments: