Three out of every eight Americans are unemployed

No, you should file it under the RW Propaganda Mislead Me Again Department, and then you should wonder why you even listen to such highly inaccurate and distorted sources like "The Washington Examiner"

There is a huge difference between people who are unemployed and people who are not employed. RW propaganda feeds on people who do not know the difference like yourself.

 

Makes no difference how you wish to twist everything, FACT IS...my first car was $150 and my first home was $17K...

 

Tax breaks distort the economy. Even "good" tax breaks.

And every tax credit or deduction means the govt is playing social engineer, or taking in too much revenue.

 

No, it encourages people to take money and give it to people OTHER than the gov't.

Do you even understand tax deductions? I don't think you do.

 

Then you are for removing the mortgage interest deduction on our federal taxes which is supposed to encourage home ownership?

 

So what?

 

Yes.

When the govt uses the tax code to perform social engineering or to manipulate the economy, it warps the economy in unexpected and detrimental ways. The housing bubble was largely due to the govt "encouraging" people to own a house.

Ideally, the govt should only tax for what it needs to operate (in the same manner as a not-for-profit) and people should make financial decisions based upon their own finacial situation, not what the govt thinks they should do.

 

And please don't exclude the underemployed. I am one. I went from $60,000/yr to $8,000/yr. Positively devasting. But I'll admit some of the blame if I can get some help (in the guilt).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wQ5BFivMwxU

 

Your defense, apparently, is twofold: (1) Impute evil motives to those with whom you disagree (why, they want to "[m]islead" others with mere "[p]ropaganda"; and (2) belittle those with whom you disagree (they just "do not know"--i.e. they are, well, unenlightened).

Your approach is not very edifying.

More importantly, it is not very convincing...

 

You mean the in reality, only 3 million or so who were previously uninsured? (It was cute of them to try to claim that people "switching" to the ACA as well as those on their parents plans were a part of a "group" of uninsured Americans. That's quite the propaganda! Almost enough to make me yawn, almost lol.)

Actually, if we had it our way, these derivatives would be eliminated. Same with Stocks and 401(Ks). The only capital should be financial capital that's at hand and accessible. Not the junk that could possibly wipe out retirement earnings and plunge the economy again.

Link to the estimate? Because I can give you a link to what it'd actually take to pay off the NATL. Debt and a full taxation on the use of electronics is NOT going to come anywhere close.

http://finance.yahoo.com/blogs/just-explain-it/just-explain-long-payoff-u-debt-145729149.html

And do you want to know the reaction to the transaction tax? A reduction of consumer spending. Why would the average American spend a significant part of his income, only to be taxed for market participation? Between this and your electronics tax plan(You do realize food and lightning are a part of electronics right?), America would move swiftly into Cuba-territory in no time

Simple, a Nationalization of the U.S Economy. Presently, my little town of Yeadon runs a very neat and balanced budget(if I do say so myself) but there's something that artificially inflates our expenses: Our contribution to sewage drainage. The sewage costs are grossly expensive, and these are only a portion of the expenses. The costs are actually divided in the Pennsylvania State. But what if the State itself could cover the cost? What if the country itself would nationalize the cost obligation from our sewage's?

Massive savings, not only in Pennsylvania but likely across the country. And these savings would enable the U.S States to continue their own economic development. The Fed. Government, despite its gross spending and entitlement programs, has done absolutely nothing for the U.S states.

 

No, my point is why you rely on a garbage source for your information that intentionally and deliberately deceives you -- like I've just established the Washingtontimes has done once again -- don't be surprised when you have garbage for knowledge.

 

The 3million is only people who bought private health insurance through the government exchange. If you include everyone else, like those allowed to stay on their parents plane, it is about 26million.

There is some derivatives that are actually reduce risk, like the ones airlines use to hedge their fuel costs, or that banks use to hedge their lending risk, but there are many that increase risk, like those leveraged on interest rates. It would not be that difficult to outlaw the bad ones and keep the ones that work.

There was a study done some years ago by a few economists from NYU and Columbia and elsewhere who had access to data from the largest electronic transaction exchanges. They calculated that a tax of 0.0002% on all electronic transactions would completely eliminate the need for all other taxes, fully fund every level of government and generate a surplus that would eliminate all government debt within ten years. The tax could be collected by the exchange and immediately transferred to the government's account.

More simply, a tax of 2 cents on every $100 spent with a credit or debit card or stock trade or any other transfer of money electronically would replace every income, sales, property, excise, and every other tax at every level of government in the entire US and eliminate all government debt within a decade while providing a hefty surplus for things like fixing up our rapidly deteriorating infrastructure. It would also eliminate the entire tax collection and tax avoidance infrastructure, saving businesses and individuals $Billions a year in tax compliance expenses.

It was widely reported at the time. The Wall Street Journal published and editorial against it, claiming that the imposition of a $20,000 tax on a $1,000,000,000 bank transfer was so onerous the entire US economy would grind to a halt.

I think that the average consumer would be overjoyed and spend like a maniac because their paychecks would have zero deductions and the transaction tax would be invisible in their day to day lives. They would not have to save up to pay their property taxes or any other tax. Prices would go down as companies tax compliance costs go to zero.

I don't believe that would be necessary.