Should higher earners pay a higher rate of tax?

[Pax]

Good man Pax, fair play to you, I hate using the search facility.

However, I think this thread was specifically questioning the SF proposal to introduce another tax rate, but good work all the same. Unfortunately I've been abandoned by some of my colleagues on this one, so any help is appreciated, especially the Swedish article.

Truth is I just quickly scanned this thread. The search can be a pain but not as much as repeating arguments made on the treads above for the umpteenth time.....

[rockofcashel]

My apologies for this delay in returning to your points Libero, I seem to be left to fight a rearguard action for SF on this one, so I'm doing the best that I can....

@ Rockofcashel...

You've been very busy here picking up on other peoples' posts and challenging their beliefs. That's the sort of thing that makes debate go round, and fair play to you for articulating your own beliefs.

Thank you, I'm always up for actual debate, rather than the majority of nonsense that you are expected to respond to here.

I hope you'll take a quick bit of time to answer my own question, and a supplemental...

Do Sinn Féin have any projections for the economic and revenue impact of their proposed tax changes? In other words, do they have any fiscal model to estimate the outcome of implementing their policy?

The difficulty in producing a fiscal model to fully examine the implementation of this policy is that the Irish Government do not, and never have, given Opposition parties full access to the budgetary figures for the Irish economy, in advance of Budget day, and in some cases never at all. Therefore you have to "fly blind" in some cases.

However, it is important that you paint a "broad picture" in terms of policy before offering a platform to the voter i.e. where you intend to raise income for either income re-distribution, or to increase public spending. This is the argument that we make against for example the FG/Lab alternative, who promise increases in spending but never make any attempt to outline how they might fund such increases. I believe that our approach is a more honest one.

If they do not, do you think that they will be taken seriously by anyone outside of their own party?

As I said, no party can produce an exact costed budgetary proposal without access to the Revenue statistics vital to doing so. In that case, we can only offer the broad picture.

Not to over-simplify the proposal, we can tell the electorate, that if on evaluation of the taxation figures in government, we see that the Revenue has a large amount of money available for collection from what we regard as "High-income earners", we will endevour to equalise income distribution by spreading the burden proportionately in favour of lower income earners, thereby increasing the total utility of the taxpayer.

I really don't mean to Shinner-bash, btw. I'd say the same about any party, including those who propose tax cuts. In my book, it's just hugely irresponsible to propose real changes to the fiscal policy of a state without having thought it through and without having done one's homework.

You can only work with the figures and projections that you have in hand. If you were never to take a chance, then you would never change government, as only government parties ever have access to all the relevant figures. Its a difficulty faced by any opposition.

It's not really an exaggeration to say that raising tax is the most profound interaction that a state can have with many of its ordinary citizens, and it goes without saying that the level of tax revenues is crucial for providing social services and redistribution and fostering progress in society. Those goals deserve better than 'back of the envelope' sums or calls for tax rises/cuts based on rhetoric alone.

trust me, we don't use back of the envelope accounting, unlike other parties, but base out projections on available figures, and best practice economic theory, using our own economic perspective to guide us.

[Pidge]

Good man Pax, fair play to you, I hate using the search facility.

However, I think this thread was specifically questioning the SF proposal to introduce another tax rate, but good work all the same. Unfortunately I've been abandoned by some of my colleagues on this one, so any help is appreciated, especially the Swedish article.

Truth is I just quickly scanned this thread. The search can be a pain but not as much as repeating arguments made on the treads above for the umpteenth time.....

That's true, but in fairness some of those threads went back to February. Considering that each party differs on tax policy,it always going to be a contentious issue.

[mjcoughlan]

Mark,

who are the "You people" that you refer to with this remark ?

a. members of Sinn Fein ?

b. supporters of Keynesian economics ?

c. anti-globalisation protestors ?

d. People with black hair and glasses ?

I was talking about people generally on the radical left.

It might surprise you to know, but any group in any debate consists of wide and varied disparate elements. Remember your hero describing us all as individuals ?

I find anyone who uses the term "you people" in general to be using it in and ignorant and condescending fashion, and you are guilty of it on more than one occasion.

I respectfully ask that in future you desist from using this terminology

And I respectfully say no to your request.

Exactly, it is only a theory. But, for the sake of empirical examination, can you show me an example of an economy which employed the Laffer curve, and

a. Encouraged economic growth

while

b. sustaining social welfare (in the macro sense)


If you can provide me with a decent working example, then I will consider the effects and ramifications of implementing this theory in an irish context. Until then, I have no option but to dismiss it. On the other hand, much of the type of taxation system which I propose has been employed sucessfully in countries like Norway and Sweden, which if I am correct, are held up as shining examples of economies to which Ireland should aspire.

Well unfortunately, unlike Norway, we don't have oil. I'm sure you know that the Heirtage Foundation publishes an annual Index of Economic Freedom which measures 161 countries against a list of 50 independent variables divided into 10 broad factors of economic freedom. And what is quite clear is that, by and large, those economies that are most free with low taxation and minimal state interference, have the highest GDP per capita.

Of course, there are certain anomalies. It helps that Norway has oil. In fact I did a report for the Freedom Institute on the economy of Norway which can be read on the link below, it's quite long:

http://www.freedominst.org/Norway.pdf

You're asking for examples. What do you want, some multiple regression analysis? Because I'm not going to do that for you. I think you'll find that a lot of factors contribute to growth, not just taxation. that is not to say tax isn't important. It is instrumental in attracting jobs to Ireland and in terms of incentives to work as well.

You do not comprehensively know what my party desire...

Nor do Sinn Fein people evidently.

[campbeca]

From FI link,

First inhabited as early as 10,000 BC by Palaeolithic hunters,




Dear God when you write something you don't do it by half measures

[mjcoughlan]

From FI link,

First inhabited as early as 10,000 BC by Palaeolithic hunters,




Dear God when you write something you don't do it by half measures

There's nothing wrong with a bit of ancient history.

[Pax]

From FI link,

First inhabited as early as 10,000 BC by Palaeolithic hunters,




Dear God when you write something you don't do it by half measures

More s.hite from MJ and the inept “think”-thank/billionaire's union the FI

I'm sure you know that the Heirtage Foundation publishes an annual Index of Economic Freedom which measures 161 countries against a list of 50 independent variables divided into 10 broad factors of economic freedom..

I mean to use the far right wingnut Heritage foundation! The very same think thank funded by the likes of the secretive ultra-right wing billionaire koch brothers!
http://www.sourcewatch.org/index.php?ti ... Foundation

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Heritage_foundation

“...Financial Support

Though it boasts considerable clout on Capitol Hill, the Heritage Foundation insists it doesn't "lobby." Like all other political advocacy groups, left and right, this allows Heritage to retain tax-exempt status as a "charity" under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. This status, in part, helped it collect $29.7 million in 2004 corporate and individual donations. Core funding comes from conservative foundations and individual donors: In 1995, 31 checks accounted for $8.5 million; another 123 donors supplied $2.6 million. The foundation receives comparatively little from corporations, which shy away from Heritage's activist approach to policy advocacy. Through direct mail fundraising, Heritage obtains millions more from small donors. Among Washington think tanks, Heritage is unique in obtaining a large, popular base of funding support.

In 1973, beer baron Joseph Coors contributed a quarter-million dollars to launch The Heritage Foundation. Since then, money has come from the founders of Amway Corp. and right-leaning foundations like the Bradley, Olin and Scaife foundations. Billionaire Richard Mellon Scaife and other wealthy philanthropists have been generous Heritage Foundation donors.
With a long history of receiving large donations from overseas, Heritage also continues to receive a minimum of several hundred thousand dollars from South Korea and Taiwan each year. U.S. News & World Report reported in 1989 that its South Korean ties included partnerships with Rev. Sun Myung Moon's messianic Unification Church.

In autumn of 1988, the South Korean National Assembly uncovered a document revealing that Korean intelligence gave $2.2 million to the Heritage Foundation on-the-sly during the early 1980s. Heritage has denied the allegation.

Heritage's latest annual report acknowledges a $400,000 grant from the Korean conglomerate Samsung. And another donor, the Korea Foundation, which conduits money from the South Korean government, has given Heritage almost $1 million in the past three years....”

http://www.ewg.org/reports/GeorgeWBush/ ... isors.html
George W. Bush's Anti-Environmental Advisors

“....Lynn Scarlett
Scarlett is the Executive Director of the Reason Public Policy Institute, a project of the Reason Foundation. The Reason Public Policy Insitute also favors "free market" solutions to environmental problems. Reason downplays the risks from global warming and opposes tighter standards for particulate air pollution.

David H. Koch of Koch Industries, a massive oil company, sits on the board of the Reason Foundation and is also a funder. Koch Industries is currently under two unrelated investigations by the EPA for environmental violations in Minnesota and the southwest, and has paid millions in environmental fines for other violations of the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts. The Reason Institute, like the Pacific Research Institute, is a member of the Heritage Foundation's State Policy Network.

Scarlett was a senior fellow at the Foundation for Research on Economics and the Environment (FREE), the Montana-based organization that was exposed last year by The Washington Post for holding anti-environmental junkets for federal judges at a Montana dude ranch. FREE is bankrolled by polluting interests that fund litigation before the federal bench.
The Reason Foundation has received funding from the Farm Bureau, Amoco, Arco, Chevron, Coors, David H. Koch Foundation, Eli Lilly, Exxon, Ford Motors, Olin Foundation, Lynde and Harry Bradley Foundation, Mobil, Pfizer, Philip Morris, Sarah Scaife Foundation, Texaco, Unocal, and Xerox.
....”

[rockofcashel]

Mark,

who are the "You people" that you refer to with this remark ?

a. members of Sinn Fein ?

b. supporters of Keynesian economics ?

c. anti-globalisation protestors ?

d. People with black hair and glasses ?

I was talking about people generally on the radical left.

Interesting, I wouldn't have thought Keynesians were considered "radical" left, but I suppose that depends from how far right you come from.

It might surprise you to know, but any group in any debate consists of wide and varied disparate elements. Remember your hero describing us all as individuals ?

I find anyone who uses the term "you people" in general to be using it in and ignorant and condescending fashion, and you are guilty of it on more than one occasion.

I respectfully ask that in future you desist from using this terminology

And I respectfully say no to your request.

Then you will understand, given your encouragement of freedom of thought and expression, that I shall consider you now and into the future, as immature and ignorant.

Exactly, it is only a theory. But, for the sake of empirical examination, can you show me an example of an economy which employed the Laffer curve, and

a. Encouraged economic growth

while

b. sustaining social welfare (in the macro sense)


If you can provide me with a decent working example, then I will consider the effects and ramifications of implementing this theory in an irish context. Until then, I have no option but to dismiss it. On the other hand, much of the type of taxation system which I propose has been employed sucessfully in countries like Norway and Sweden, which if I am correct, are held up as shining examples of economies to which Ireland should aspire.

Well unfortunately, unlike Norway, we don't have oil.

We have a ************************load of natural gas (and most likely oil) off the West Coast, but thats another argument.

I'm sure you know that the Heirtage Foundation publishes an annual Index of Economic Freedom which measures 161 countries against a list of 50 independent variables divided into 10 broad factors of economic freedom. And what is quite clear is that, by and large, those economies that are most free with low taxation and minimal state interference, have the highest GDP per capita.

1. Who are these countries which have low taxation and minimal state interference ?

2. Surely you are not now going to claim that having a high GDP per capita is a good way of measuring the welfare of a nations inhabitants Mark ?

Do you place any value on housework ?

Do you place any value on environmental protection ?

Do you place any value on literacy ? or health ?

How do you factor in the "Black Economy" into your GDP measurements ?

Is Gross national income a better measure of Irish economic performance given the high level of re-patriation of profits from the Irish economy into the host countries of the proliferation of multi-national corporations ?

Have you ever heard of the Gini Index, or the HDI index ?

Do you consider these better measures of a countries economic performance and welfare than "blunt" GDP masurements ?

Of course, there are certain anomalies. It helps that Norway has oil.

How much oil does Sweden have Mark ? or Finland ?

In fact I did a report for the Freedom Institute on the economy of Norway which can be read on the link below, it's quite long:

http://www.freedominst.org/Norway.pdf

I'll read it, thank you.

You're asking for examples. What do you want, some multiple regression analysis? Because I'm not going to do that for you.

Nope. All I want is an example of an economy, any economy which thrives or has thrived by implementing a flat tax ( a la the Laffer Curve) and by decreasing government intervention.

Just one Mark ? Any ?

I think you'll find that a lot of factors contribute to growth, not just taxation.

Thanks for the tip. I'd never have thought of anything else.

that is not to say tax isn't important. It is instrumental in attracting jobs to Ireland and in terms of incentives to work as well.

Peurto Rico offers low tax incentives for pharmacuetical companies also Mark. Why haven't all the pharmacuetical companies that came to Ireland gone there ?

You do not comprehensively know what my party desire...

Nor do Sinn Fein people evidently.[/quote]

I do. Debate with me. I'm sure there are parts of SF policy which I am not as familiar with as other posters from the party. If you wish to discuss those policy platforms, I will direct you to them.

Until then Mark, stick to debate rather than insult. And please answer the questions put to you.

[rockofcashel]

From FI link,

First inhabited as early as 10,000 BC by Palaeolithic hunters,




Dear God when you write something you don't do it by half measures

There's nothing wrong with a bit of ancient history.

I thought the earth was first inhabited around 6,000 BC when Adam and Eve did the dirty deed in Iraq Mark, or have you stopped reading the Bible ?

Or is it the FI your talking about ?

You want to mind though, you could get a belt of a crozier for statments like that. One more link on the cilice for you tonight.

[mjcoughlan]

1. Who are these countries which have low taxation and minimal state interference ?

The most up to date figures I have relate to 2000 because I haven't bought the Index since then. But in 2000 the world's freest economies were (the freest is number 1, second freest in number 2 and so on):

1. Hong Kong - GDP/Head $25,257
2. Singapore - GDP/Head $28,460
3. New Zealand - GDP/Head $ 17,210
4. Bahrain - GDP/Head $16,140
4. Luxembourg - GDP/Head $30,140
4. USA - GDP/Head $29,010
7. Ireland - GDP/Head $20,710
8. Australia - GDP/Head $20,210
8. Switzerland - GDP/Head $25,240
8. UK - GDP/Head $20,273

The least free economies were (least free is at the top of the list):
1. North Korea - GDP/Head $1,000
2. Iraq - GDP/Head $2,700
3. Libya - GDP/Head $7,900
4. Somalia - GDP/Head $600
5. Cuba - GDP/Head $1,700
6. Congo - GDP/Head $710
7. Laos - GDP/Head $1,300
8. Iran - GDP/Head $5,300
9. Angola - GDP/Head $1,030
10. Uzbekistan - GDP/Head $2,500

2. Surely you are not now going to claim that having a high GDP per capita is a good way of measuring the welfare of a nations inhabitants Mark ?

GDP per capita is a suitable measure of the standard of living in an economy. It is the most widely used measure. There isn't yet a perfect measure for standard of living. Most economists would tend to use GDP per capita or GNP per capita.

Do you place any value on housework ?

There certainly is value in housework but it is not seen as an economic activity.

Do you place any value on environmental protection ?

So long as it does not come at the expense of the economy, which it doesn't have to. In fact, there is conflicting evidence there as regards ethical investing. Some people say investors can earn higher returns if they choose to invest in ethical and environmentally sound companies, others say it makes no difference. I think what will happen as consumers become more concerned about the environment, there will be opportunities there for companies to exploit that concern and profit from it.

Do you place any value on literacy ? or health ?

Of course I do. It is in an economy that encourages wealth generation above wealth redistribution where resources can more easily be made available for health and education. Particularly in a country that has a vibrant private sector which can come to the aid of the state in the provision of these services.

How do you factor in the "Black Economy" into your GDP measurements ?

Black market activity, due to it's nature, is not recorded in GDP because it is illegal activity and really ought not to be tolerated by any government.

Is Gross national income a better measure of Irish economic performance given the high level of re-patriation of profits from the Irish economy into the host countries of the proliferation of multi-national corporations ?

I would say so.

Have you ever heard of the Gini Index, or the HDI index ?

Yes, I have. And it should never be the aim of economic policy to strive for perfect equality. It isn't going to happen in an economy that places an emphasis on incentives.

Nope. All I want is an example of an economy, any economy which thrives or has thrived by implementing a flat tax ( a la the Laffer Curve) and by decreasing government intervention.

Just one Mark ? Any ?

A lot of the countries emerging from the former Soviet bloc are pursuing market reforms together with establishing a flat rate income tax. Estonia is one country which is notable in this regard because it is among the economic leaders in the former COMECON region. Although it is still an economy in transition from socialism to market capitalism, it has made excellent progress. In 2004, GDP growth was at 4.7%, unemployment is falling albeit relatively slowly and inflation is quite low as well at 1.3%.

Peurto Rico offers low tax incentives for pharmacuetical companies also Mark. Why haven't all the pharmacuetical companies that came to Ireland gone there ?

Maybe we have a more highly skilled workforce?