Most parents( since most parents are not members of the political class) would not be taxed or in this case charged a political class service fee unless they choose to do business with the poltical class or indirectly if they do business with those who do business with the political class--- In [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I can see low income families sending there children to bargin bin > schools worse thab public school just to get an extra buck in there > pocket. Programs that take then return tax are inherently flawed. > However, at the moment I can't think of a realisticly doable system > that works beter... > > --- In [email protected], "terry12622000" <cottondrop@> > wrote: > > > > The Ecoomist a few weeks ago gave some advice to US Democrats, put > on > > your thinking caps and get creative, don't stand on old school > > soundbites, instead of pushing the minum wage which often hurts > small > > business and the poor unemployed and the fact that many making > > miniumwage are not poor expand and extend the earned income > credit. I > > largely agree, with what the corporate income tax takes in around > 280 > > billion, that is enough to bring every non senior citizen above > the > > poverty level, end wage laws including overtime pay, end food > stamps > > and the Welfare Program, unemployment insurance, end non corporate > > business licence and fees, expand and increase the amount of the > > earned income credit. End direct support of public schools instead > if > > the per student spending is 8,500 dollars at least give the > parents > > a full 8,500 dollar per school age child voucher with no > regulations > > of schools or teachers, at most only test the child every year and > > require the parent to change schools if the child fails if the > > parents wants the voucher, give the parent an incentive to save > money > > for them and the government if the voucher is 8,500 for each child > > and the parent can find a school or homeschool for 2,500 let the > > parent keep half the savings or in this case 3,000 dollars, 6,000 > > dollars for the family with the typical 2 > > kids. > > Instead of directly supporting Public universities and > community > > colleges give a voucher instead, give the student an incentive to > cut > > cost let him keep half the savings.--- In > > [email protected], "uncoolrabbit" <uncoolrabbit@> wrote: > > > > > > There arebig buisnesstax breaks for example, wich are good in > the > > > sense that they help the economy as over taxing the buisness > would > > > slow economic growth. However at the same time these tax breaks > > > inherently benifit larger corperations as opposed to smaller > firms > > due > > > to the volume of production. This is a system that favors big > > > buisiness. So there is economic growth, that makes more jobs. We > > want > > > more jobs, but then our producing big buisnesses need to stay > > > competitive price wise, keeping production costs low by not > paying > > the > > > floor worker on a level of the CEO. So cheap labour is good for > > > economic growth also, however there is a cost of living. If > wages > > are > > > to low they is a problem with daily living expenses wich is no > > good, > > > but you can not solve it with mandating a minumum wage, this > only > > > serves to raise inflation and unemployment while slowing > economic > > > growth. How do you resolve this? By keeping in mind the level of > > > disposable income when taxing. > > > > > > Though they pay more of the total of goverment income, > individualy > > > they are not paying a larger percentage of there disposable > income. > > It > > > works to ways, companies need labourers to get things done and > > > labourers need companies to provide jobs. Taxing the labourer > puts > > a > > > strain on the labourer and causes problems ranging form > decreased > > > productivity to increased crime, slowing the economy. However if > > you > > > try to tax the buisnisess you again hit the economy and it will > be > > a > > > double blow again as they are interdependant. So how do you best > > work > > > to maintain a stable economy and move in the direction of a > > > libertarian society? > > > > > > You tax those who are profiting the most off the system, those > > > perosnal individuals with the largest disposable incomes, after > > all, > > > they are making those incomes from the system that is supported > by > > the > > > taxes. > > > > > > Further more, these are the individuals with the money and power > to > > > influence goverment's politicians. If you expect change in waste > > and > > > excessive goverment you will have to wait for that % of the top > > > earners to push closer to 100%. Only then will you see the > country > > > move in a Libertarian direction. > > > > > > > > > > MJ > > > > Do elaborate and provide example. > > > > > > > > Regard$, > > > > --MJ > > > > > > > > I sit on a man's back, choking him and making him carry me, and > > > > yet assure myself and others that I am very sorry for him and > wish > > > > to ease his lot by all possible means -- except by getting off > his > > > > back. -- Leo Tolstoy > > > > > > > > > >
ForumWebSiteAt http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Libertarian/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
