Posted on 02/20/2006 3:30:35 PM PST by Bigun
I'll venture a guess that I am as well read on the subject as anyone on your side and EVERY microeconomics textbook I have ever seen says that ALL costs must be both accounted for and recovered if one wishes to stay in business for very long!You got a microeconomics textbook that says corporate income taxes are a cost? What's the name of it.
Of course you have! It is plainly there for ANYONE who WANTS to see it!Yup. It plainly there for anyone who wants to see it.
"I have always maintained that taxes raise prices by NO MORE than the ACTUAL TAX and compliance cost PAID!"
It's the underlined part that you've "always maintained" - and incorrectly so. As I've said, it's a waste of time trying to educate you on the proces involved since you're either totally stupid or so completely locked into your anti-FairTax agenda that you can admit nothing else. Or perhaps it's your hyperactive ego rattling around.
And many months ago on these threads we repeatedly hashed your preposterous nonsense about actual taxes being everything and cascading of them not existing (as you pretend). I told you then that was insubstantial piffle and not true ... and that's still the case today despite the fact it would kill you to admit it. Since educating you didn't "take" then there's no reason to believe it would now.
In any event the post #323 shows the mechanism of cascading embedded taxes quite nicely - but you have to both read and understand it. There's some considerable question that you can do more than one of those at the same time (if that). You're also making incorrect claims about Nightie's example and I notice you won't even admit he shows about a 15% leeway for price decreases wven without correcting for his purposeful distortions - sort of like honor among thieves I guess.
It's nice to know that you don't think income taxes cost anything, Nightie. I'm sure that taxpaying businesses will be glad to hear that and will not worry about paying them anymore.
You've helped all of us business taxpayers SO much ... how can we ever repay you???
I'll venture a guess that I am as well read on the subject as anyone on your side and EVERY microeconomics textbook I have ever seen says that ALL costs must be both accounted for and recovered if one wishes to stay in business for very long!Then you should have no problem itemizing or at least identifying those "hidden taxes that aren't really taxes but are used to unnecessarily raise prices to consumers"...pigdog can't.
You are of like mind, self-proclaimed well read on the subject, why don't you give it a try?
It's nice to know that you don't think income taxes cost anything, Nightie. I'm sure that taxpaying businesses will be glad to hear that and will not worry about paying them anymore. You've helped all of us business taxpayers SO much ... how can we ever repay you???If you were as learned in microeconomics as you claim, you would know what a "cost" was to a business and that income taxes don't qualify as a "cost." What textbooks have you been reading?
You've now tacked on compliance costs after arguing they were basically nonexistentLike I said, I guess you haven't been reading too closely. In this thread alone, I've included compliance costs in Posts #538, #542, #550, #551, #563, #564, #570, #571, and #579; and if you'd been paying attention, you'd also have noted that I've included compliance costs in my estimates since 2001 when we first discussed this.
Pay attention. You're already failing the class; no need to make it any worse.
So you keep avoiding the question: In your "quite nice" example, there MUST be a way to figure out HOW MUCH of the final price is "hidden tax" and NOT ACTUAL TAX PAID, or ACTUAL BUSINESS COST, or ACTUAL PROFIT! So how much IS it?
As far as anyone with ANY analytical skills can tell, the answer is ZERO.
Why, Nightie ... where have I ever claimed to be knowledgeable in economics, micro or otherwise.
That's something that you and Dimp-Dimp and Looey and Rightie (along with a few others) like to pretend.
I'm just a country boy.
Why, Nightie ... where have I ever claimed to be knowledgeable in economics, micro or otherwise.Good, because you aren't.
I'm just a country boy.Just because you're a country boy doesn't mean you have to stay ignorant. Go buy a book or something.
You can claim whatever you like since it's a free country, but indeed you haven't been including compliance costs as you claim since 1923 (or whatever the year was) but I'll not bother to dig out the data to shopw you to be the liar you've already proven yourself to be.
Sorry Dimp-Dimp, but you get an F- also along with Nightie since the answer is not zero at all for hidden taxes ... the answer is you don't understand the example which clearly shows them. If you reflect upon #323 enough you may begin to realize that (then again, with your track record; probably not). We've been all through this nonsense of yours many times before on other threads and you STILL refuse to understand it. Instead, you merely make irrational statements about what you think the example shows according to your own bias aagainst the FairTax.
Good for you Dimp-Dimp. It helps others realize how paniced you are about the FairTax becoming law. It apparently destroys your nice little action with the present tax system and you're quite willing to warp and misstate anything to try to keep it. You've shown yourself to prefer the present system while trying to pretend otherwise (and you Squirrels generally do), so I'm sure most readers will recognize your bias no matter how you try to hide it.
Me - I'm a FairTax supporter and don't hide the fact since I know that such a tax system will greatly help this country and most of the taxpayers in it. You - you don't seem to care about the lack of benefits to the country OR its taxpayers by retaining the present system since you've not presented any viable alternative.
pigdog does not like to be called tinkerbell, so he cries to the moderators....LOL. For someone who uses derogatory names against everyone that is just too damn funny.
Oh we understand it perfectly. You think 98% of the cost of goods are profit. You think that less than 2% the cost of goods is labor and material. You think your example shows cascading, when all it shows is your fairytale belief that business make way to much profit and under the fairytax all businesses magically reduce their obscene profits. Your view really is not much different than Marx in your view that business rip off people.
A book??? Hasn't helped you any, I note!
- No clue about the examplesYou've NEVER been able to answer ANY question put to you (there must be 50 of them in this thread alone.) All you ever do is close your eyes, tap your heals together three times, and chant "The hidden taxes are there ... the hidden taxes are there ... the hidden taxes are there ..."
- No clue about the math
- No clue about how business works
- No clue about economics
- No clue about what I've said
- No clue about what even YOU'VE said
- No clue about how big those "cascading embedded hidden business income tax costs" might be (Hint: ZERO)
Unfortunately, unlike Dorothy who had a similarly fantastic experience in her dreams ...
... YOU never wake up.
"... cries to the moderators??? ...". Have I ever complained once to you - like you do all the time (in your present post for example) and have done about several FairTax proponents?
... and you should read with more discernment. Post #323 is carefully explained as no sort of "real world" example at all (us country boys leave that to insouciant economist wannabes like Nightie and Dimp-Dimp and you).
It has always claimed to be an example of the cascading embedded tax mechanism - which it is. It is explained in that post also so that most can grasp the example.
I'm sorry you can't grasp what #323 says ... but not TOO sorry. Your continual misleading explanations of what you think it is merely illustrate your lack of knowledge.
An example which illustrates a "mechanism" that nets ZERO change in the price structure due to anything called "cascading." Disagree?? then show us HOW MUCH cascading affects the price!
So far, 1.5% of of the price is ACTUAL COST and 98.5% of the price is ACTUAL PROFIT ... let's see, that's totals 100% of the price ... ACTUAL TAXES come out of ACTUAL PROFITS and represent 34.4% of ACTUAL PROFITS and 33.88% of the price.
WHERE is any "hidden tax" -- you know, that "hidden tax" that is not actual tax? (Hint: there is none)
WHERE is any "cascading" -- you know, that "cascading" that makes the price go up MORE than that actual tax does? (Hint: there is none)
I've explained that to you before Dimp-Dimp - several times in fact. You merely refuse to understand it and instead insist that there is no tax cascading. If you weren't so vehemently anti-FairTax you could use the example to understand what's involved instead of misstating it to suit your own purposes.
Keep in mind Dimp-Dimp that originally you Squirrels were arguing that taxes did not appear in prices at all and that elimating them would not lower prices; then later you modified this to say that their removal would "not noticeably" (or words to that effect) lower prices; and you're now beginning to morph into "just a few percentage points" of price lowering; and perhaps eventually "by the amount of taxes removed".
What is one to think with such a constantly-shifting position? Obviously the rational understanding would be that you are not to be believed, and I think that's where you guys have placed yourselves by your irrational and always-changing arguments.
Since I've been over this ground with you several times in the past it's not worth my trouble to continue revisiting it since I know you're not searching for elucidation but only some way to discredit anything you can about the FairTax and its economic effects. The so-called "hints" you give merely illustrate your lack of understanding and your desire to misstate things.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.