LawTalkers  

Go Back   LawTalkers > General Discussion > Politics

» Site Navigation
 > FAQ
» Online Users: 302
0 members and 302 guests
No Members online
Most users ever online was 4,499, 10-26-2015 at 08:55 AM.
 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Prev Previous Post   Next Post Next
Old 10-19-2004, 02:34 PM   #11
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy
Registered User
 
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Government Yard in Trenchtown
Posts: 20,182
Pot to kettle: You're black!

Quote:
Originally posted by taxwonk
In most other industrialized countries, businesses and individuals bear a higher tax burden. That's in part because they have federally funded retirement benefits. It's also because these states have much higher welfare benefits. So in essence, whether you look at funding or payment out, broad-based or universal benefits result in a higher tax burden.
But in most countries, you don't limit the funding of retirement benefits to the wage base, effectively adding that cost to the cost of goods. And to the extent expenses like retirements costs are added to the cost of goods through the VAT, there is a refund on export (virtually all VATs are refundable on exported goods). This puts us at a competitive disadvantage.

I think reform based on leveling the competitive playing field could be something both Rs and Ds could agree on, and they could fix a regressive tax while they are at it.
Greedy,Greedy,Greedy is offline  
 


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Powered by vBadvanced CMPS v3.0.1

All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:30 PM.