Replies

One country over the past 20 years or so has moved from a Socialistic/Communistic bent towards capitalism. At the start of the process, the gov’t controlled a little over a third of the economy in terms of it share of GDP. Taxes were confiscatory, both on personal and corporate income. Economic growth, in real terms, was negative.

Today in that country, personal and corporate income tax rates are 15%, the gov’t share of GNP has fallen to 22% and continues to decrease. Private investment has exploded and economic growth reversed and is now over 4%. The country: Chile.

What do you think would happen in the US if corporate and personal income taxes would be flat at 15%? There would be a stampede of foreign investment, particularly from the Pacific Rim, to the US, unemployment would drop like a stone, growth would increase and I’ll even bet that tax receipts would actually increase, easing pressure on the Federal debt.

So why don’t we do that? Because the average person would see this as a break for business and the rich, and that’s how the MSM would paint it. Never mind that a rising tide lifts all boats, or that even if your share of the economic pie remains fixed at, say, 10%, if the pie doubles your income doubles, the illiterate voter in this country would kill it because the rich are still rich. True, but they are what drives this economy via investment.

The MSM romanticizes the poor and denigrates the rich, yet: How many of you were hired by a poor person? Alas, there are more stupid people than smart people and, even worse, they get to vote.

Gee now............... Lower taxes help boost ONE little industry............. What if.... They tried it FOR EVERYBODY?? What could happen THEN??

Currently, 38 of the 50 States of the Union offer film incentives (read: subsidies). So I ask, conversely: What would happen if all 50 States were to likewise offer the same level of such incentives? Say: 10%? Then, States would pay through the nose, but there would be no net effect (except taxpayer pain), since all of the States would be paying, but filmmakers would continue filming where it made most sense (from the point of view of narrative).

Regards,