Quote from: Supposn on December 26, 2013, 08:18:52 AM
Solar, tax rates are determined by the governments' legislators and they are not determined by the method of taxation.

Respectfully, Supposn

I'll bet you don't even realize what you just said, do you?
That the thief sets the price in the amount of confiscation.

The only difference in what you just stated, is the ability of govt to know just how much you can bare.
Under a flat tax system, the govt is only allowed what our representatives allow, under a VAT, the govt sets the amount based on ones means of production.

As TL stated earlier, a VAT is a way for the representatives to avoid blame.

Quote from: TowardLiberty on December 26, 2013, 08:21:31 AM
I'd like to see Supposn do a brief sketch of his view of the economic relationships in the a market society.

Now that's funny!

Only leftists want a lack of transparency when it comes to taxes. That whole "consent of the governed" thingy doesn't really seem to be their focus.

Quote from: TowardLiberty on December 26, 2013, 08:21:31 AM
I'd like to see Supposn do a brief sketch of his view of the economic relationships in the a market society.

You really should ask him, I'd love to hear his take on free mkt capitalism.
Entertaining if nothing else.
Though, believe his theory is that business is their to support govt, not the other way around.

Quote from: TowardLiberty on December 26, 2013, 08:21:31 AM
I'd like to see Supposn do a brief sketch of his view of the economic relationships in the a market society.

Toward Liberty, I'm a populist.

Unlike many pseudo conservatives, I'm actually a consistently strong proponent of independent competitive enterprises; I recognize that the best interests of individual persons and entities may diverge from that of our aggregate society; I'm unwilling to acquiesce to tyrannical mob majorities or to powerful minorities.

I'm to some extent more chauvinistic and much less than altruistic.  I'm opposed to trading off the interests of my nation's working poor for the benefit of other nations unable or unwilling to better compensate their own laborers.

I have greater confidence in explicitly written laws rather than opinions of what may very well be the wisest of judges.  We are not as logical' as we claim or wish ourselves to be.  It's not unusual for us to believe that which is to our own advantage is equally to our nations' best advantages.  I do not support our legal system of judges and jury panels because they are infallible, but rather because we haven't developed any superior methods.

These conflicting concepts and conditions are equally valid.  They are similar to boundaries of sports fields within which there are no certain outcomes but only differences to be reconciled.

Respectfully, Supposn

What pseudo conservatives are you referring to?

If you are unwilling to acquiesce to tyrannical mob majorities and powerful minorities then why don't you tell us about the ills of identity politics and organized labor?

What does your chauvanism have to do with a VAT tax or are you drifting at this point?

If we are all unwise then wouldn't that also include the people who write the laws? Just sayin.

And speaking of drifting, why did you bring up sports as part of your statement on being a conservative while supporting moral relativism.

Not meaning to be mean, but do you have ADD?

Quote from: Supposn on December 26, 2013, 07:17:43 PM
Toward Liberty, I'm a populist.

Unlike many pseudo conservatives, I'm actually a consistently strong proponent of independent competitive enterprises; I recognize that the best interests of individual persons and entities may diverge from that of our aggregate society; I'm unwilling to acquiesce to tyrannical mob majorities or to powerful minorities.

I'm to some extent more chauvinistic and much less than altruistic.  I'm opposed to trading off the interests of my nation's working poor for the benefit of other nations unable or unwilling to better compensate their own laborers.

I have greater confidence in explicitly written laws rather than opinions of what may very well be the wisest of judges.  We are not as logical' as we claim or wish ourselves to be.  It's not unusual for us to believe that which is to our own advantage is equally to our nations' best advantages.  I do not support our legal system of judges and jury panels because they are infallible, but rather because we haven't developed any superior methods.

These conflicting concepts and conditions are equally valid.  They are similar to boundaries of sports fields within which there are no certain outcomes but only differences to be reconciled.

Respectfully, Supposn

Right but what about the relationships in the economy?

What theory do you subscribe to when it comes to the explanation of interest, rent and wages? Of prices? Of capital and growth? Of business cycles?

This is what I am asking about.

Quote from: TowardLiberty on December 27, 2013, 08:04:57 AM
Right but what about the relationships in the economy?

What theory do you subscribe to when it comes to the explanation of interest, rent and wages? Of prices? Of capital and growth? Of business cycles?

This is what I am asking about.

I'm guessing Keynesian... 

Quote from: Solar on December 27, 2013, 08:15:54 AM
I'm guessing Keynesian... 

If anything at all.

The vast majority of us never bother with such questions!

Quote from: TowardLiberty on December 27, 2013, 08:20:29 AM
If anything at all.

The vast majority of us never bother with such questions!

Yep, especially when economics is pretty much a straight forward principle, to vary at all, is govt intrusion.

Quote from: TowardLiberty on December 27, 2013, 08:20:29 AM
If anything at all.

The vast majority of us never bother with such questions!

Actually asking yourself if you are Keynsian or Austrian is a pretty simple question and it's discussed in the media and political circles. I know kids in their early 20s who can state their position clearly. Why can't you do the same?

If I had spent pages upon pages of pontificating and telling other people how to think relative to economics, then I would be a little ashamed to admit I was ignorant of such a basic point.

Quote from: Dan on December 26, 2013, 08:08:34 PM
...What does your chauvanism have to do with a VAT tax or are you drifting at this point? ...

Dan, you're correct; I'm drifting off the topic.
But so many of the replies to this thread are not germane to general sales tax administration.  I finally replied to towardLiberty's post which made an inquiry that has been implied by other members' posts addressed  to me.

Even the topic itself, a comparison of VAT to prior enacted methods of administrating general sales taxes is less an economic subject and more of a financial accounting discussion.  The pertinent economic point is tax revenues based upon the monetary values of persons' eventual purchases and trades rather than what's the determinations of persons' and other entities' net incomes.
.
VAT was rather recently introduced.  Since its first enactment (other than possibly within the USA), I do not believe any government has chosen other than VAT when enacting a new sales tax.  Some governments have gone to the expense and inconvenience of transforming their prior sales taxes to a VAT method of administration and I'm unaware of any government changing their opinion and transforming from VAT to any other method of general sales tax.  That's not random coincidence but a clearly due to those governments' legislators acceptance of VAT's superiority to all other methods available.

The choice between Vat and other sales tax methods is among the very few political determinations where the differences of all individual  factors are not simply an aggregate  net advantage to one side rather than the other but almost ALL, if not ALL individual factors are of  advantage to that same side of aggregate net advantage.  That's what I meant when I wrote that the comparison of Vat to other sales tax methods is a completely one sided.

Respectfully, Supposn

Quote from: Supposn on December 27, 2013, 11:07:10 PM
Dan, you're correct; I'm drifting off the topic.
But so many of the replies to this thread are not germane to general sales tax administration.  I finally replied to towardLiberty's post which made an inquiry that has been implied by other members' posts addressed  to me.

Even the topic itself, a comparison of VAT to prior enacted methods of administrating general sales taxes is less an economic subject and more of a financial accounting discussion.  The pertinent economic point is tax revenues based upon the monetary values of persons' eventual purchases and trades rather than what's the determinations of persons' and other entities' net incomes.
.
VAT was rather recently introduced.  Since its first enactment (other than possibly within the USA), I do not believe any government has chosen other than VAT when enacting a new sales tax.  Some governments have gone to the expense and inconvenience of transforming their prior sales taxes to a VAT method of administration and I'm unaware of any government changing their opinion and transforming from VAT to any other method of general sales tax.  That's not random coincidence but a clearly due to those governments' legislators acceptance of VAT's superiority to all other methods available.

The choice between Vat and other sales tax methods is among the very few political determinations where the differences of all individual  factors are not simply an aggregate  net advantage to one side rather than the other but almost ALL, if not ALL individual factors are of  advantage to that same side of aggregate net advantage.  That's what I meant when I wrote that the comparison of Vat to other sales tax methods is a completely one sided.

Respectfully, Supposn

Have you tried thinking?  It may help you understand some things more.

There are many factors for recommending general sales taxes.  In ALL of their generally administered methods, they are pure or almost pure flat taxes, much simpler than income taxes and (I believe more than income taxes), levied in relative proportion to individuals' actual incomes.  To whatever extent it's politically and economically feasible, I advocate shifting our federal tax basis from net incomes to a general sales tax.

Income taxes by far our nation's major federal tax revenue source. If we enact major transformations of our major tax revenue sources, it should be done simultaneously but not in an imprudent single step.  I hope and believe U.S. Congress will not be imprudent.

I do not believe that complete replacement of income taxes with a sales tax would be the optimum tax policy.  At some incremental transformation step the sales tax will approach an unacceptable rate and further transformation will be interrupted (f not permanently halted).

If I'm incorrect, income taxes will be entirely eliminated.  I of course believe myself to be correct.  I also believe that if we replaced any portion of federal income tax revenues with a well administered sales tax, it would be to our economic benefit.  I'm confident if an originally enacted federal sales tax is not a VAT, in the future it would be transformed to VAT; Vat's superiority will not be denied.

Respectfully, Supposn