PDA

View Full Version : Taxes expand to meet the population's ability to pay



*T*
07-26-09, 07:10 AM
I propose that:
Taxes will always expand to meet the population's ability to pay them. The real argument is to get them spent less wastefully.

I will call this Nero's law as something Nero3 said gave me this idea.

aaron
07-26-09, 01:12 PM
I feel like there is a battle between the government taking the population's money and the oligarchy. If taxes go up there is less money for banksters & other large corporate interests. If the banksters take too much, there is not much left for the government. Up until recently, the corporations have been winning. Now the government is striking back. The people get screwed.

Banksters: I TARP YOU!
Gov: I dis-bonus you!
Banksters: I pay back the loans, keep my money, and keep your money too!
Government: We raise you a 1 trillion dollar mandatory health plan!!! BOO-YAHHH
Banksters: We shall rain down a lobbying campaign to end all campaigns. We own you!

While people keep making less money, paying higher taxes, and getting less of everything in life.

Jim Nickerson
07-26-09, 01:29 PM
I propose that:
Taxes will always expand to meet the population's ability to pay them. The real argument is to get them spent less wastefully.

I will call this Nero's law as something Nero3 said gave me this idea.

About 35 years ago I was attending a course on financial planning for dentists. As I recall it was there the guy presenting the program said, "One's expenditures will always rise to meet one's income." This suggests the sentiment of "Nero's law" is probably not of such recent arrival.

GRG55
07-26-09, 03:06 PM
I feel like there is a battle between the government taking the population's money and the oligarchy. If taxes go up there is less money for banksters & other large corporate interests. If the banksters take too much, there is not much left for the government. Up until recently, the corporations have been winning. Now the government is striking back. The people get screwed.



Nah. The too big to fail [TBTF] financials will get it from the government if they can't get it directly...


CIT gets no bailout...no problem because TBTF will take the business - but only for the best credits.
Commercial real estate implodes and takes down the regional banks...no problem because the taxpayers absorb the losses from closing the banks and TBTF scoops the viable portion of the business.
TARP paid back in full...no problem because TBTF knows it can continue to take unlimited risk (http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/07/citi-trader-who-made-100-million-last.html) and the risk-bearing is asymmetric - they are assured to be bailed out again if necessary.
When you get your money for essentially free it should not be difficult to put everyone else out of business and continue to rake in unimaginable rewards. ZIRP actually stands for Zero I-bank Risk Policy...:rolleyes:

Goldman Sachs is the Standard Oil of our time. But somehow I doubt that Matt Taibbi will play the role of a modern day Ida Tarbell...

*T*
07-27-09, 04:36 AM
About 35 years ago I was attending a course on financial planning for dentists. As I recall it was there the guy presenting the program said, "One's expenditures will always rise to meet one's income." This suggests the sentiment of "Nero's law" is probably not of such recent arrival.

Indeed, I was thinking of Parkinson's law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Parkinson's_Law) at the time.