HOW MUCH WOULD EVERYONE ?
If we took the total tax revenues, and distributed them equally to all american citizens, then how much would each of us receive? Or, think of it the opposite way: assuming that all of us paid equal taxes, how much would each of us pay per year (man, woman, non-working elderly, working, able to work but not working, youth and child?
$10,000.
Source date (UTC): 2015-01-15 02:36:00 UTC
Stieglitz is up to his usual tricks again. Immoral men. Promoting immoral economics. Correctly stating that the euro needs to end, or that the euro must support transfers as does America.
But America is coming apart over theses transfers.
I have merged morality, philosophy, law and science.
I have corrected Austrian economics.
But to displace immoral economics with moral economics is a job that will require imposition of prohibitions on immoral and unethical law and policy.
It matters far less what people speak if we can punish actions.
Source date (UTC): 2015-01-11 12:29:00 UTC
TAXES FOR THE COMMONS
I have no problem paying for commons – when they’re in fact commons. I have a big problem with paying extortionary rents. And I have an even larger problem with paying for damage to the commons that we have built over millennia. People have no problem paying taxes that they agree with and many problems paying for taxes that they don’t agree with. The solution of course is to let people pay for what they agree with and not for what they don’t agree with. Representatives are for sale. Remove the agent from the principle agent problem. (Conversely I have an equally large problem with free riders on the commons.)
I think I’m going to put together a web application with a budget model of the US Government and your extant taxes, and we’ll see how people would vote their money.
That is a wonderful social science experiment. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2014-12-15 07:05:00 UTC
CONSUMER CAPITALISM? OR IS IT CONSUMER CREDIT-ISM?
Why do we refer to it as capitalism when that era ended half a century ago and call it credit-ism instead.
Ukrainians are poor because they lack credit. Capitalism is a different class problem altogether. And by historical standards we don’t really have any capitalists any longer – inly people with enough trust to accumulate a lot if credit.
It was easy to amass a little capital and produce consumer goods.
It was a lot harder to distribute credit to all.
Consumer credit-ism is how we operate – capitalism died with the end of the conversion of people from the farm.
Source date (UTC): 2014-11-08 09:44:00 UTC
GENDER CONTRACT?
—-“I have a great idea : control your impulses to gossip, rent-seek like a vampire, and impose socialism upon us, and I’ll control my impulses to beat, rape, murder, and steal? OK? …… Oh. Wait. I ALREADY DO THAT. So what are you waiting for? Hold up your part of the bargain.”—-
Source date (UTC): 2014-10-30 12:30:00 UTC
THE FEMALE EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY = THE POSTMODERN STRATEGY
1) Attract Attention (promise sex, affection, subsidy/rent or attention)
2) Rally.
3) Shame.
4) Gossip (load and frame)
5) Overload (persistence)
6) Change to outright lying. (shift)
It works. It works if you don’t use violence and truth to suppress it.
Source date (UTC): 2014-10-30 11:16:00 UTC
MOVING THE GOAL POSTS
—“The left is always moving the goalposts. If you point out that the welfare state (compassion + bureaucracy + taxes + regulation) generates sloth, parasitism, irresponsibility, etc, you might get the answer that “you, too, would be slothful, etc. if you had to face what the average poor person faces everyday”. In other words, the old model of poor people as poor people with middle-class values/sensibilities is gone. Apparently, capitalism is a game of economic musical chairs in which millions of (once) poor folks make it into the lower or middle-class but somehow a vast underclass gets left without jobs, thereby triggering the underclass traits we all know and love.”–
Source date (UTC): 2014-10-28 16:03:00 UTC
Inequality?
Again: 1) feminism and single motherhood along racial lines generates theft from those with good discipline and who create a single household cost, to those with poor discipline and who generate two household costs. The “fair answer” then is to ignore all marriage corporation in taxation, everyone file individual taxes, and halve the income and double the deductions of married cohabiting people, so that married people who co-habitate are not unfairly taxed. If we did that, then taxes would have to be adjusted higher on everyone now that money was not stolen from efficient families to expensive single mothers.
2) companies left the states because we are no longer the exclusive members of the wealth club, able to export products to others. And did so because overpaid labor in the postwar period tried to further increase their take. So rather than lose other markets or lose this market to others, Americans had no choice but to move production to companies with new markets.
I left for that reason. Plus government employees are predatory members of the lower classes. And I am sick of living in fear of them.
3) Education never was able to compensate for racial differences in ability and preference, and cannot now compensate for both biological differences and cultural differences as well.
Educators are overpaid given the statistical relationship between teacher compensation and other graduates with same iq, especially given that teachers do not marginally improve in performance after the first six months of employment.
Our children are largely taught indoctrination and falsehoods and we can prove that by testing against other cultures.
So we can no longer produce employment asymmetrically from the rest of the world.
If we examine voting history we see that without women voters, none of these policies would have been possible to pass. So this state of affairs is due to feminists and socialists.
Source date (UTC): 2014-10-26 04:02:00 UTC
PROPERTARIAN REASONING ON TOO BIG TO FAIL
I won’t go into it here because it’s late, I am tired and it’s loud here. But if I follow Propertarian reasoning, then no bank is insulated from too big to fail without warranty of every individual committing to a price.
The only way to create large banks immune to perverse incentives and dependence upon impossible calculations, is to professionalize banking, require insurance, and eliminate all immunity.
This would dramatically increase the number and quality of bankers and flatten the income distribution in federations of banks.
More details are required to grok this if you are knowledgable about banking (finance).
But my point is that you cannot fix too big to fail any other way.
Source date (UTC): 2014-10-11 16:11:00 UTC
Economic Rents create lost opportunities for exchange. A cost. They grant a privilege whose results are incalculable (unavailable because profit and loss are externalized) and therefore unmeasurable (comparable with other investments) and invisible (they are forgotten and never rise again), instead of creating a calculable, measurable, investment and return for the polity.
Unfortunately, democracy – majority rule – forces us to create these lost opportunities to exchange rents and privileges which are incalculable.
Furthermore, the pooling of taxes into general funds, rather than charging fees for services, for the payments of debts, and collecting returns on investments, create opportunities for rents. It is this system of rents that we systemically MUST construct under democracy. Democracy does not let us do otherwise.
Worse, it is this system of rents, that allows the predatory and parasitic rent-seeking bureaucracy to exist, and expand like a cancer uncontrollably.
Conversely, if we enforced (a) a universal requirement for operational calculability, (b)universal standing for the prosecution of rent seeking, (c) and the negotiation of contracts, rather than the competition for rents in order to obtain power necessary to issue laws (commands), then it is impossible to seek rents. And even if rents are somehow obtained, impossible to hold them.
Yet enforcing (a)(b)(c) does not require that we abandon the construction of commons. Only that we abandon the rentiers. So while it was necessary to centralize rents in order to extinguish family, guild and tribal rents, it is now equally necessary to ban rents permanently.
All that is required is contracts instead of laws, universal standing, and operational calculability.