Replies

I agree somewhat with what you are saying. However, it reminds me of the interest rates. That is, a small move in interest rates can, collectively, cause either an increase or decrease in home sales. I think the same is true here. Everyone isn't going to move in lockstep, but people who were "on the edge" of making spending decisions could do so in sufficient numbers to have quite an impact on our economy. This could, in turn, create the snowball effect.

Also, people who "wish they had control" of their taxes but have accepted that there is nothing they can do would suddenly find themselves in a position where they can drastically reduce taxes by doing things like make their own meals at home, buy a more fuel efficient car, drive less, etc. It is a "control" thing.

Everybody does not have to do it, but for it to have a dramatic impact, only a small percentage of the population would need to act for it to have a dramatic effect on our overall economy.

Also, people who "wish they had control" of their taxes but have accepted that there is nothing they can do would suddenly find themselves in a position where they can drastically reduce taxes by doing things like make their own meals at home, buy a more fuel efficient car, drive less, etc. It is a "control" thing.

In my case it would probably be the total opposite. With more "disposable" income available to us, I could stop cooking our meals at home 28 out of 30 days a month and be able to eat out a bit more. We already drive fuel efficient vehicles.

I much prefer having the control over my spending, and my taxes. Right now I must control spending because I have no control over the taxes.

Everybody does not have to do it, but for it to have a dramatic impact, only a small percentage of the population would need to act for it to have a dramatic effect on our overall economy.

And the opposite also works........a small percentage like my family that would increase spending would also have a dramatic effect in a positive manner, on the overall economy.

Tha law of unintended consequences always rules, so you could be correct. On the other hand, an offsetting investment binge on the part of the wealthy who no longer have to waste time and energy hiding their incomes could inhibit the effect that concerns you.

Additionally, think of what would happen when the current workforce that is totally devoted to sheltering income (I've heard as much as 33% although I don't know how accurate that is) start doing productive work instead.

It could revolutionize every economic model we have.

Shalom.