That seems to imply just on the numbers alone that the tax would need to be close to 100%
Increasing it much beyond 20% would punish poorer people who disproportionally spend money on goods compared to their income
you can eliminate the 200 million tax returns by having the taxation service work it out automatically from payroll
That seems to imply just on the numbers alone that the tax would need to be close to 100%That obviously cannot be true. Taxation cannot be 100% of anyone's economy. So there's something wrong with the numbers.
My 17% figure comes from a detailed analysis a while back. I wish I still had the paperwork but have looked several times and cannot find it. But it was well detailed and I came way convinced that it was within range. Let's say 20% for some margin. That's the federal sales tax rate, to which state and local sales taxes would be added. Here that would total 26%. ALL other taxes are eliminated.
As to the "rich": Yes, investment dollars aren't taxed. But investment dollars, by definition, are poured back into the economy which generates economic activity that "lifts all boats". When rich people indulge themselves and buy something that is for their personal use, those dollars are taxed just like everyone else's. Fancy car = more tax. Private plane = more tax. Et cetera.
You're presuming everyone is an employee, and further presuming that all employees are "above the table" with proper reporting to the government. Neither of those things is true.
As to the "rich": Yes, investment dollars aren't taxed. But investment dollars, by definition, are poured back into the economy which generates economic activity that "lifts all boats". When rich people indulge themselves and buy something that is for their personal use, those dollars are taxed just like everyone else's. Fancy car = more tax. Private plane = more tax. Et cetera.Trickle down economics, you should know better.
That's true up to a point, though 'what the market will bear' depends on the price of competing products as much as any other factor.
If you're making a thing that people deem necessary (ie. there's relatively little elasticity in the price-demand relationship), then if your competitors all put up their prices 20%, so can you.
It's why price fixing cartels are illegal, of course, but if its not you that's increasing the price but instead it's a tax being applied, the end customer is still worse off.
Manipulating the market is of course a "Bad Thing" (TM) under our system. Nevertheless, the world is shades of grey and we know it goes on, to a greater or lesser extent.
We don't have a choice about paying tax, the only influence we have is an election every few years - if all the parties are in favour of raising taxes, we have zero influence in reality.
If you look at periods when the top rates of tax were very high. especially in the US, the tax regulations expanded into massive documents. Any smart super rich people had bought an exclusion in there to ensure what they actually paid was reasonably low.
As to the "rich": Yes, investment dollars aren't taxed. But investment dollars, by definition, are poured back into the economy which generates economic activity that "lifts all boats". When rich people indulge themselves and buy something that is for their personal use, those dollars are taxed just like everyone else's. Fancy car = more tax. Private plane = more tax. Et cetera.
Trickle down economics, you should know better.
Canadian miners say Ottawa’s plan to spend $3.8 billion to boost domestic production of lithium, copper and other strategic minerals should help propel the country’s efforts to become a key part of the global electric vehicle supply chain
That is very good news indeed. Wish the USA would take the opportunity to benefit from more of its own domestic resources instead of hoping the far east will continue their exports.
As to the "rich": Yes, investment dollars aren't taxed. But investment dollars, by definition, are poured back into the economy which generates economic activity that "lifts all boats". When rich people indulge themselves and buy something that is for their personal use, those dollars are taxed just like everyone else's. Fancy car = more tax. Private plane = more tax. Et cetera.I am sure rich people see that "fancy" car as necessary in their business.
Trickle down economics, you should know better. Trickle down economics has been debunked but some people keep acting as if it never was. They think that if they do that, (pretend nothing has changed) many people will never realize that it has been. Maybe they are right, but I doubt it.
That's rubbish. Trickle down economics is pretty much . A rich man in the US said that having obscenely rich people not paying their taxes is counterproductive. His argument was a very wealthy person might only buy two pairs of jeans a year... not many more. Total sales of jeans = 2 per year. But if some of his wealth was shared between 2,000 poor people by redistributing wealth using taxation, to the point the poor people have some level of disposable income, they might each buy two pairs a jeans per year. Total sales per jeans per year = 4,000. You can see how the economy overall is benefiting from sharing wealth more. It is simplistic, but in essence it is true.
In any case, Chipageddon is a different argument. It is effecting everyone, but much more so the poorer people than the filthy rich and ultra-greedy.
Some good news on the mining front, I think.QuoteCanadian miners say Ottawa’s plan to spend $3.8 billion to boost domestic production of lithium, copper and other strategic minerals should help propel the country’s efforts to become a key part of the global electric vehicle supply chainhttps://financialpost.com/commodities/mining/canadian-miners-cheer-ottawas-critical-minerals-budget-plan
Mining appears the same as semiconductors - nothing is expanding until the government grants, tax credits appear and only then do corporations take interest. Without incentives, these MBA's are content to sit on their laurels.
Rare-earth mining is extremely toxic, you need a leaching pond with chemicals to seperate the metals. china's domination is due to lax environmental regs.
And we still use large amounts of cobalt for those batteries until something better comes up.
Take a look at how and where cobalt is currently mined.
"What the market will bear" is the appropriate phrase for a monopolistic market. [...]
[...]
Am I correct in thinking that some players in the electronics industry are using it [Chipageddon] as a PRETEXT to extract extortionate prices and waits out of people that have no basis in fact as the rationale?
For example, when there is a gasoline shortage - in a free market, the price would shoot up and the volume of fuel sold would go down to cope with the new reality of a shortage. In the real world, the fuel companies get accused of price gouging and politicians threaten them with consequences for their greed....
I am finding myself PIC hopping at the moment.
I used PIC16f753 as that was cheapest for a while.
Then out of stock.
So moved to PIC16f1823 for a while.
Then out of stock
So moved onto PIC16F1623.
But bought a few of those to keep me going for a while.
The SMD PIC32's are a no go as all out of stock.