RecPit

American presidential candidate, for you out-of-towners.

I was highly skeptical of the concept of Universal Basic Income. The current administration is doing the extreme polar opposite, working hard to take food stamps away from poor people.

I found this interview to be riveting, more compelling to watch than some high budget movies I've seen.

But it's also as long as a movie, nearly 2 hours, so besides a link to the interview I included an outline I did of it which only takes a few minutes to read.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cTsEzmF ... ture=share


3.5 M truck drivers in US, most common job in 29 states
avg trucker 49 y.o. high school ed, maybe ex military, $50k / yr
gov't retraining programs success rate between 0-15%
8% of Americans in STEM fields
5 most common jobs in US right now: administration and clerical work, retail and sales, food service and food prep, truck driving and transportation, manufacturing. These account for about half of American jobs.
About 32% of Americans graduate college
30% of malls closing in the next 10 years
Thomas Paine, Milton Friedman, MLK talked about UBI.
Value Added Tax on tech companies
Roosevelt Institute studied the 1K/ mo and said it would create 2 million new jobs and grow the economy by 8-10%
Bain: 20-30% of jobs automated by 2030; McKensie says 25%; Obama WH said 83% of jobs making less than $20/ hr will be automated by 2030; MIT says the same thing.
Savings from automating truck driving estimated at $168 billion
Life expectancy down over the last several years due to suicides and overdoses
Trucker Transition Czar whose job it is to manage transition for 3.5 million truckers
5 million jobs at truck stops, motels, diners, retail establishments relying on truckers for biz
Stores on main streets have closed, biz goes to Amazon whose fulfillment centers and warehouses are robots for as far as you can see.
cashiers
2-1/2 million call center workers making $14/ hr
back office workers, insurance brokers, radiology,., etc.
Suicides, drug addiction, anxiety, mental problems at all time highs now in US.
Getting married, starting a business, having a kid, moving for a new job, at all time lows.
Average retail worker is 39 year old woman with HS education making $11-12 / hr. 30% of these jobs will be gone in next 5 years and truckers jobs will be gone in 5-10 years.
Massive student loan debt caused by administrative bloat.
College grad underemployment rate 44% -- degree not a panacea.
94% of jobs being created right now are contractor, gig, or temp jobs with no path forward or benefits.
6% of US HS students in tech and vocational courses vs. 59% in Germany
Legalize pot and pardon all prisoners who are incarcerated for non-violent drug violations
Incentives drive doctors to prescribe drugs they otherwise probably wouldn't.
Believes Republicans won't stand in the way of their red state constituents getting their $1000/ mo. Freedom Dividend.
Would come down hard on countries that tamper with our democracy.
Have to start defending now, deep fakes are coming.
Thousands of local papers going out of business because of no classified ads.

Thanks for the outline. Strange times.

I'll need to read that more closely, but I must say that I'm opposed to the idea of VAT under any circumstances. It would likely increase our gear costs by 25-30%, judging by Europe. And VAT is added every time a product goes through another level of distribution.

I'll take regular sales tax, thank you very much.

Other than that, Yang has not impressed me as being a very effective candidate in terms of connecting with the public. He has almost no charisma and he impresses me as boring.

Warren has lots of good solutions too, but she has fire and charisma and communicates effectively with her audience.

I, however, am still for Beto.

At least Yang is trying to address the problem rather than regurgitating up more "progressive" talking points. My problem with his "Universal Basic Income" is that real estate interests will most likely gobble that money right up leaving us right back where we started.

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 2:09 am At least Yang is trying to address the problem rather than regurgitating up more "progressive" talking points. My problem with his "Universal Basic Income" is that real estate interests will most likely gobble that money right up leaving us right back where we started.

Not to mention the fact that his "Universal Basic Income" is totally inadequate for anybody who doesn't live in the boonies...

Hell, my rent is $2000/month!

I lost my flat in The City when they jacked my rent from $2000 to $6000. For a two bedroom (legal occupancy) apartment.

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 17th, 2019, 7:29 pm
It would likely increase our gear costs by 25-30%, judging by Europe.

You didn't even skim the outline, let alone watch the interview. I would be more concerned about an army of heavily armed former military truck drivers who have suddenly become permanently unemployed.

I'll take regular sales tax, thank you very much.

Utterly regressive.

Republicans and libertarians love the idea of paying for everything through sales taxes because that puts the tax burden on the middle class and the poor.

I think it’s crucially important to argues about whether Yang will end up with 2% of the total Primary vote or just 1%.

Have fun.

nobby wrote: ↑August 20th, 2019, 7:12 am

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 17th, 2019, 7:29 pm
It would likely increase our gear costs by 25-30%, judging by Europe.

You didn't even skim the outline, let alone watch the interview.

Actually I did skim the outline, not that I really needed too. Due to the fact that there's nearly nothing on TV most of the time I spend far more time that I want to think about listening to MSNBC and occasional other news outlets, and I've already heard Yang propounding his ideas at some length.

Due to the time zone thing we actually get the "big guns" evening lineup on MSNBC at least twice here in California, so I rarely miss anything, even if I do skip the first iteration of Lawrence O'Donnell. so I can catch Deep Space Nine. I record Chris Mathews' "Hardball" in the afternoon so I can watch it later, during one of the THREE broadcasts of Brian Williams. Sometimes I even record Ari Melber although he's a bit of a hiphop obsessed wuss.

I would be more concerned about an army of heavily armed former military truck drivers who have suddenly become permanently unemployed.

Now you're just being paranoid. I'm MUCH more concerned about Neo-Nazi paramilitary militias.

Incidentally, I drink with truck drivers nearly every day. They're not all the way you think they are.

I'll take regular sales tax, thank you very much.

Utterly regressive.

Republicans and libertarians love the idea of paying for everything through sales taxes because that puts the tax burden on the middle class and the poor.

So does VAT. You don't think those middlemen who have to pay VAT at each level of distribution don't pass the expense on? That's like Rump claiming that tariffs aren't ultimately paid by the US consumer. Or that Mexico will pay for "The Wall". In fact, it's the same damn thing except for the minor details - a hidden, multistage tax that the consumer ends up paying for through the nose!

The really pernicious thing about VAT is the multistage nature. The factory sells the product to the distributor and has to charge VAT. The distributor pays the VAT, tacks the charge on to the price along with his profit, and sells the product to the retailer. The retailer pays the second VAT, tacks THAT on to the selling price along with his profit, and sells the product to the consumer, adding another stage of VAT. The consumer buy the product and pays the last stage of VAT which is visible, along with the two previous stages of VAT which are "hidden". But ultimately it's the consumer who gets screwed for three, progressively greater stages of taxation.

With sales tax there are no stages of hidden tax before the retail stage. You don't pay sales tax when you buy wholesale to resell.

The middle class and the poor get the burden either way, but the burden is MUCH greater with VAT than with a straight, honest sales tax.

Actually, Republicans and strict libertarians generally do their best to avoid ANY taxes of any sort (being the irresponsible, greedy bastards they are), but I'm quite sure they could find ways to dodge VAT anyway. And even if they didn't, the increased burden on the public makes it not worthwhile.

VAT is one of the primary reasons that everything costs more in Europe.

weedywet wrote: ↑August 20th, 2019, 5:42 pm I think it’s crucially important to argues about whether Yang will end up with 2% of the total Primary vote or just 1%.

Have fun.

Yang has 2% in the polls which means he will be in the September debates.

I don't expect him to win the nomination -- I want him to defend his plans to the best of his ability and see how that goes.

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 20th, 2019, 10:05 pm
With sales tax there are no stages of hidden tax before the retail stage. You don't pay sales tax when you buy wholesale to resell.

Yep, and I'd write equipment costs off on my taxes.

But the drastic sales tax increases usually proposed by libertarians and conservatives would create a large black market.
Because the middle class and poor can't take a big tax increase to benefit the wealthy.

As opposed to, say, increasing the income tax for the top 1% who can obviously easily afford it.

I feel like the real "deep state" is the Federal Reserve!

nobby wrote: ↑August 22nd, 2019, 3:39 am

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 20th, 2019, 10:05 pm
With sales tax there are no stages of hidden tax before the retail stage. You don't pay sales tax when you buy wholesale to resell.

Yep, and I'd write equipment costs off on my taxes.

But the drastic sales tax increases usually proposed by libertarians and conservatives would create a large black market.
Because the middle class and poor can't take a big tax increase to benefit the wealthy.

As opposed to, say, increasing the income tax for the top 1% who can obviously easily afford it.

IIRC, sales taxes generally are used for schools and programs for the poor, at least out here in CA. Maybe it's different in NY - you guys are all crooks, anyway....

Incidentally, there is no sales tax on groceries out here - only on hot/prepared food.

We need to make the rich pay their fair share of income taxes. If you make 95% of the money you should pay 95% of the income tax! Corporations, too!

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 20th, 2019, 10:05 pmSo does VAT. You don't think those middlemen who have to pay VAT at each level of distribution don't pass the expense on? That's like Rump claiming that tariffs aren't ultimately paid by the US consumer. Or that Mexico will pay for "The Wall". In fact, it's the same damn thing except for the minor details - a hidden, multistage tax that the consumer ends up paying for through the nose!

The really pernicious thing about VAT is the multistage nature. The factory sells the product to the distributor and has to charge VAT. The distributor pays the VAT, tacks the charge on to the price along with his profit, and sells the product to the retailer. The retailer pays the second VAT, tacks THAT on to the selling price along with his profit, and sells the product to the consumer, adding another stage of VAT. The consumer buy the product and pays the last stage of VAT which is visible, along with the two previous stages of VAT which are "hidden". But ultimately it's the consumer who gets screwed for three, progressively greater stages of taxation.

With sales tax there are no stages of hidden tax before the retail stage. You don't pay sales tax when you buy wholesale to resell.

The middle class and the poor get the burden either way, but the burden is MUCH greater with VAT than with a straight, honest sales tax.

Actually, Republicans and strict libertarians generally do their best to avoid ANY taxes of any sort (being the irresponsible, greedy bastards they are), but I'm quite sure they could find ways to dodge VAT anyway. And even if they didn't, the increased burden on the public makes it not worthwhile.

VAT is one of the primary reasons that everything costs more in Europe.

Actually, there are no multiple stages of VAT, as businesses reclaim the VAT on business purchases. They can do that quarterly in the UK, but I don't know about the rest of Europe.

Having a single sales/value added tax seems like a sensible idea though. How do online retailers in the US deal with thousands of different rates, sometimes varying town by town? I would presume that more tax would be recouped if there was a single, uniform tax at the point of sale.

VAT isn't the reason everything is more expensive in Europe. If we were to institute US style sales taxes, the rate of taxation on goods and services wouldn't suddenly plummet. We have higher wages at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum, a greater proportion of the population is middle class, and culturally we have an expectation of government spending that allows for more taxation.

Rev. Juda$ Sleaze wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 11:20 am Having a single sales/value added tax seems like a sensible idea though. How do online retailers in the US deal with thousands of different rates, sometimes varying town by town?

I don't know if things have changed recently, but for years you would only pay sales tax for an online purchase if the seller was in your own state. To me, that seems unsustainable; I think it might have changed. I think you may have to pay the state taxes of the seller's state.

I would presume that more tax would be recouped if there was a single, uniform tax at the point of sale.

Sales taxes in the US are state and local; they are used to pay for state and local services. Services and incomes aren't equal in different regions. There's nothing you can do to recoup more revenue through sales taxes because people are already paying what the market will bear. A dangerously large number of people here are living paycheck-to-paycheck, unable to save enough for retirement.

Basically, you can't divert state and local sales taxes from the state and local economy and you can't add a national sales tax on top of them.

And, of course, sales taxes are always regressive, period.

nobby wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 2:18 pmSales taxes in the US are state and local; they are used to pay for state and local services. Services and incomes aren't equal in different regions. There's nothing you can do to recoup more revenue through sales taxes because people are already paying what the market will bear. A dangerously large number of people here are living paycheck-to-paycheck, unable to save enough for retirement.

In the UK we have "council tax" for local council services. It is a tax based on the value of the property you live in, whether rented or owned. It has problems of its own.

Rev. Juda$ Sleaze wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 2:31 pm

nobby wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 2:18 pmSales taxes in the US are state and local; they are used to pay for state and local services. Services and incomes aren't equal in different regions. There's nothing you can do to recoup more revenue through sales taxes because people are already paying what the market will bear. A dangerously large number of people here are living paycheck-to-paycheck, unable to save enough for retirement.

In the UK we have "council tax" for local council services. It is a tax based on the value of the property you live in, whether rented or owned. It has problems of its own.

We call, those "property taxes" here. Those are also regressive. They vary widely depending on your region. Where I live, we pay among the highest property taxes in the nation. Our property taxes are so high that when Trump capped property tax deductions (at $10,000/ yr) in order to give huge tax cuts to the extremely wealthy, our already onerous property taxes went up.

Rev. Juda$ Sleaze wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 11:20 am

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 20th, 2019, 10:05 pmSo does VAT. You don't think those middlemen who have to pay VAT at each level of distribution don't pass the expense on? That's like Rump claiming that tariffs aren't ultimately paid by the US consumer. Or that Mexico will pay for "The Wall". In fact, it's the same damn thing except for the minor details - a hidden, multistage tax that the consumer ends up paying for through the nose!

The really pernicious thing about VAT is the multistage nature. The factory sells the product to the distributor and has to charge VAT. The distributor pays the VAT, tacks the charge on to the price along with his profit, and sells the product to the retailer. The retailer pays the second VAT, tacks THAT on to the selling price along with his profit, and sells the product to the consumer, adding another stage of VAT. The consumer buy the product and pays the last stage of VAT which is visible, along with the two previous stages of VAT which are "hidden". But ultimately it's the consumer who gets screwed for three, progressively greater stages of taxation.

With sales tax there are no stages of hidden tax before the retail stage. You don't pay sales tax when you buy wholesale to resell.

The middle class and the poor get the burden either way, but the burden is MUCH greater with VAT than with a straight, honest sales tax.

Actually, Republicans and strict libertarians generally do their best to avoid ANY taxes of any sort (being the irresponsible, greedy bastards they are), but I'm quite sure they could find ways to dodge VAT anyway. And even if they didn't, the increased burden on the public makes it not worthwhile.

VAT is one of the primary reasons that everything costs more in Europe.

Actually, there are no multiple stages of VAT, as businesses reclaim the VAT on business purchases. They can do that quarterly in the UK, but I don't know about the rest of Europe.

And when they "reclaim the VAT" how much of that gets kicked back to the customer, who actually paid for it?

I would guess ZERO.

"Trickle down" economics doesn't work. Companies treat such kickbacks as a windfall and use it for their own purposes - it never gets back to the customer.

Having a single sales/value added tax seems like a sensible idea though. How do online retailers in the US deal with thousands of different rates, sometimes varying town by town? I would presume that more tax would be recouped if there was a single, uniform tax at the point of sale.

VAT isn't the reason everything is more expensive in Europe. If we were to institute US style sales taxes, the rate of taxation on goods and services wouldn't suddenly plummet. We have higher wages at the lower end of the socioeconomic spectrum, a greater proportion of the population is middle class, and culturally we have an expectation of government spending that allows for more taxation.

And yet, things ARE more expensive in Europe.

A single sales tax might appear sensible to people who don't understand the function of sales tax in the US, but would actually be unworkable. The reason for this is that sales tax is used to fund state and local projects/programs, not national ones. When Rump cuts support for schools nationally what keeps California from sinking to the level of Oklahoma is the state sales tax. When the Republicans and "Republicrats" of the real estate lobby pushed through Prop 13 which cut property taxes to the bone, effectively defunding much support for schools, sales tax took up much of the slack When a local school district wants to fund a new program they put an increase in the municipal sales tax on the ballot. A universal tax would eliminate local control and local/state allocation of funds. That would be a major hit against states that have advanced programs funded by sales tax.

Historically, sales tax has only been charged on local sales, which has made it easy to keep track of and has encouraged interstate commerce. However over the last several years the increase in internet traffic has caused alterations in the laws so that sales tax is starting to be collected on many sales across state lines, which increases the revenues for states.

How to deal with the morass of different sales tax rates in different places? Well,nowadays we have these newfangled things called "computers" that keep track more or less automatically..... And it increases employment for programmers in...... India!

Prop 13 is a California law. John is in California. (I'm trying to clarify this for the non-Americans)

What John is describing can be thought of as a "water mattress effect" --

If revenues go down in one place they have to rise in another unless you cut services.

So California's state sales tax is 50% higher than here in NY to compensate for the cuts in property taxes.

I don't want to get too far into the weeds, but politicians have to look for ways to generate revenues; all of them except for income taxes are regressive.

Vice taxes: Politicians can tax alcohol, but a large part of their constituencies drink, and presumably that number is only increasing as more people are driven to drink

Glad I don't smoke cigarettes, though, and not just for my health. This is where tyranny of the majority kicks in:

The state excise tax rate is $4.35 per package of 20 cigarettes. The New York City local excise tax is $1.50 per package of 20 cigarettes, bringing the combined tax rate for a package of 20 cigarettes purchased in New York City to $5.85.

There are also increases in various fees, tolls and fares.

Traffic violations is a great way.

About a year ago I rolled through a stop sign at a trap set by the Suffuck Police.

My registration had recently expired

In the months I was waiting for the court date I lost the ticket. So I called the village where I was stopped and the county court and neither could find any information. It was in the interest of the county to keep this info secret so they could say I missed the court date and hit me with surcharges. Paranoid, you say?

So a couple of weeks ago I get this thing in the mail telling me I had to show up at the cashier's office at the court or get my license suspended.

$800 for a stop sign and an expired registration.

I figure this is a carefully calculated price point, just below the point that someone would hire a lawyer and fight it in court. I can't recall the last time I got a ticket for a moving violation prior to this but I know this isn't merely adjusted for inflation.

This is regressive because when I see that number I'm

When fellow Long Islander Robert Mercer sees the same number he's

nobby wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:44 pm Prop 13 is a California law. John is in California. (I'm trying to clarify this for the non-Americans)

What John is describing can be thought of as a "water mattress effect" --

If revenues go down in one place they have to rise in another unless you cut services.

So California's state sales tax is 50% higher than here in NY to compensate for the cuts in property taxes.

I don't want to get too far into the weeds, but politicians have to look for ways to generate revenues; all of them except for income taxes are regressive.

Vice taxes: Politicians can tax alcohol, but a large part of their constituencies drink, and presumably that number is only increasing as more people are driven to drink

Glad I don't smoke cigarettes, though, and not just for my health. This is where tyranny of the majority kicks in:

The state excise tax rate is $4.35 per package of 20 cigarettes. The New York City local excise tax is $1.50 per package of 20 cigarettes, bringing the combined tax rate for a package of 20 cigarettes purchased in New York City to $5.85.

There are also increases in various fees, tolls and fares.

Traffic violations is a great way.

About a year ago I rolled through a stop sign at a trap set by the Suffuck Police.

My registration had recently expired

In the months I was waiting for the court date I lost the ticket. So I called the village where I was stopped and the county court and neither could find any information. It was in the interest of the county to keep this info secret so they could say I missed the court date and hit me with surcharges. Paranoid, you say?

So a couple of weeks ago I get this thing in the mail telling me I had to show up at the cashier's office at the court or get my license suspended.

$800 for a stop sign and an expired registration.

I figure this is a carefully calculated price point, just below the point that someone would hire a lawyer and fight it in court. I can't recall the last time I got a ticket for a moving violation prior to this but I know this isn't merely adjusted for inflation.

This is regressive because when I see that number I'm

When fellow Long Islander Robert Mercer sees the same number he's

Jeez, Nobby, that reminds me of the parking situation in San Francisco, where there are 1/3 fewer legal parking spaces than there are registered vehicles and little housing comes with parking. It can easily cost $500 or more a month to rent a parking space to keep a vehicle in and that does no good if you have to drive somewhere. If you get caught parking in a bus stop it was over $250 when I left The City 3 years ago - who knows what it is now. If your car gets towed it can be $1000 to get it out.

Parking tickets are viewed as a lucrative source of revenue for The City.

BTW, by your figures, cigarettes are cheap in NYC. I don't smoke, but I believe it's pushing 10 bucks a pack here.

The situation you describe in San Francisco sounds similar to NYC.

I don't live in the city. If I did, I'd use mass transit. But when I worked there (van, commercial plates) if your vehicle was parked on Queens Blvd beyond 4:00 PM it was towed to an impound lot. And that's just the tip of the iceberg.

https://nypost.com/2014/04/28/misleadin ... n-tickets/

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:11 pmAnd when they "reclaim the VAT" how much of that gets kicked back to the customer, who actually paid for it?

I would guess ZERO.

"Trickle down" economics doesn't work. Companies treat such kickbacks as a windfall and use it for their own purposes - it never gets back to the customer.

Actually, in my experience businesses basically ignore VAT in the same way as they ignore any other deductible, so I don't think it has much impact on final costs. I just skimmed an IMF study of Mexican cities that introduced VAT, and the increase in consumer prices was negligible compared to the rest of the country.

Having a single sales/value added tax seems like a sensible idea though. How do online retailers in the US deal with thousands of different rates, sometimes varying town by town? I would presume that more tax would be recouped if there was a single, uniform tax at the point of sale.

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:11 pmAnd yet, things ARE more expensive in Europe.

Yes, for the reasons I outlined, not because of VAT.

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:11 pmA single sales tax might appear sensible to people who don't understand the function of sales tax in the US, but would actually be unworkable. The reason for this is that sales tax is used to fund state and local projects/programs, not national ones. When Rump cuts support for schools nationally what keeps California from sinking to the level of Oklahoma is the state sales tax. When the Republicans and "Republicrats" of the real estate lobby pushed through Prop 13 which cut property taxes to the bone, effectively defunding much support for schools, sales tax took up much of the slack When a local school district wants to fund a new program they put an increase in the municipal sales tax on the ballot. A universal tax would eliminate local control and local/state allocation of funds. That would be a major hit against states that have advanced programs funded by sales tax.

Historically, sales tax has only been charged on local sales, which has made it easy to keep track of and has encouraged interstate commerce. However over the last several years the increase in internet traffic has caused alterations in the laws so that sales tax is starting to be collected on many sales across state lines, which increases the revenues for states.

How to deal with the morass of different sales tax rates in different places? Well,nowadays we have these newfangled things called "computers" that keep track more or less automatically..... And it increases employment for programmers in...... India!

Indeed, states wanting more progressive redistribution is a problem, but I just read a quick guide to e-commerce in the US, and the computer does not do it all for you. It looks like a nightmare. It is obviously a system set up for physical purchases, and not suited to e-commerce.

I would hazard a guess that the byzantine sales tax system in the US pushes online sellers to e-commerce platforms that can work out all the tax for them, and take a cut on sales.

Rev. Juda$ Sleaze wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 9:00 am Indeed, states wanting more progressive redistribution is a problem, but I just read a quick guide to e-commerce in the US, and the computer does not do it all for you. It looks like a nightmare.

Got a link? I've bought and sold online and it's dead easy.

It is obviously a system set up for physical purchases, and not suited to e-commerce.

Indeed. I'm pretty sure the system of state and local taxes was in place before cash registers required electricity.

I would hazard a guess that the byzantine sales tax system in the US pushes online sellers to e-commerce platforms that can work out all the tax for them, and take a cut on sales.

I don't know of any e-commerce platforms that don't take a cut of the sales. Ebay may be forced by the gov't to use a bot to calculate taxes because the gov't doesn't have the resources to flag individual sellers. But it's easy to add sales tax as an individual seller; I've done it many times for non- e-commerce.
It's simple from a seller's perspective. A cave man could do it. Even a person who takes weeks to get his plugins working could do it
You only have to understand your own (seller's) state.

My current understanding is:

There are 2 types of sales tax: local and state

You only pay both on

a) something you buy at a brick-and-mortar store or that is delivered from a local store.

b) services like utilities, cell phone, ISP, etc.

So My Sprint bill has local and state taxes and (5) surcharges and (2) add'l local taxes.

Verizon charges state and local taxes twice on one bill. The second one is called "NY State and Local Tax Surcharges" Then Federal Excise Tax and (8) add'l "Governmental Fees and Surcharges".

Reading between the lines, it seems that the gov't has to make up for revenues lost through the internet by taxing the fuck out of internet access.

This seems like regressive taxation squared because now, instead of paying sales tax for things you buy you pay virtual sales tax for things you don't.

I just went online to check out prices on exercise bikes. No sales taxes of any kind.

Amazon, however I think has to charge sales taxes because there's a good chance they have a physical presence in the buyer's state to insure fast delivery.

Rev. Juda$ Sleaze wrote: ↑August 25th, 2019, 9:00 am

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:11 pmAnd when they "reclaim the VAT" how much of that gets kicked back to the customer, who actually paid for it?

I would guess ZERO.

"Trickle down" economics doesn't work. Companies treat such kickbacks as a windfall and use it for their own purposes - it never gets back to the customer.

Actually, in my experience businesses basically ignore VAT in the same way as they ignore any other deductible, so I don't think it has much impact on final costs. I just skimmed an IMF study of Mexican cities that introduced VAT, and the increase in consumer prices was negligible compared to the rest of the country.

Having a single sales/value added tax seems like a sensible idea though. How do online retailers in the US deal with thousands of different rates, sometimes varying town by town? I would presume that more tax would be recouped if there was a single, uniform tax at the point of sale.

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:11 pmAnd yet, things ARE more expensive in Europe.

Yes, for the reasons I outlined, not because of VAT.

John Eppstein wrote: ↑August 24th, 2019, 7:11 pmA single sales tax might appear sensible to people who don't understand the function of sales tax in the US, but would actually be unworkable. The reason for this is that sales tax is used to fund state and local projects/programs, not national ones. When Rump cuts support for schools nationally what keeps California from sinking to the level of Oklahoma is the state sales tax. When the Republicans and "Republicrats" of the real estate lobby pushed through Prop 13 which cut property taxes to the bone, effectively defunding much support for schools, sales tax took up much of the slack When a local school district wants to fund a new program they put an increase in the municipal sales tax on the ballot. A universal tax would eliminate local control and local/state allocation of funds. That would be a major hit against states that have advanced programs funded by sales tax.

Historically, sales tax has only been charged on local sales, which has made it easy to keep track of and has encouraged interstate commerce. However over the last several years the increase in internet traffic has caused alterations in the laws so that sales tax is starting to be collected on many sales across state lines, which increases the revenues for states.

How to deal with the morass of different sales tax rates in different places? Well,nowadays we have these newfangled things called "computers" that keep track more or less automatically..... And it increases employment for programmers in...... India!

Indeed, states wanting more progressive redistribution is a problem, but I just read a quick guide to e-commerce in the US, and the computer does not do it all for you. It looks like a nightmare. It is obviously a system set up for physical purchases, and not suited to e-commerce.

I would hazard a guess that the byzantine sales tax system in the US pushes online sellers to e-commerce platforms that can work out all the tax for them, and take a cut on sales.

"Quick guides" are a great source of sweeping over simplifications and other forms of misinformation. They're generally not worth the paper they're no longer printed on.

Unifying sales tax (or replacing it with VAT) would gut essential programs in states all across the country. It would require massive reorganization of many essential programs including schools, roads (not all US roads are maintained by the Feds, only the interstate highway system), law enforcement, and many other services, It would make all these services vulnerable to savaging by an autocratic government, such as the one we're currently stuck with. It would breed even more massive corruption in Washington than we already have.

Incidentally, private sellers in the US (who don't do sales as a formal business) are not subject to sales tax.

Given the notorious "efficiency" (yes, I'm being facetious) of Mexican government, I don't think how they handle things is no model for how any other government should function.

Yes, people making a small business out of online sales are pushed towards the big sites like Ebay and Reverb, but it's not sales tax that's doing it. It's the increased market visibility they get by using a large, conglomerated marketplace.

I think if you're a private seller on Ebay, state sales tax is automatically added if you sell to a buyer in your own state.

Because Ebay takes a chunk out of each sale and Ebay is not a private seller.

This doesn't apply to yard sales, but it's hard to sell stuff without a highly visible platform. Several years ago I bought an Ampeg B-15 from a guy 4 blocks away from me. But I wouldn't have known about it but for Ebay, and I'm pretty sure I paid state sales tax on it.

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 2:09 am At least Yang is trying to address the problem rather than regurgitating up more "progressive" talking points. My problem with his "Universal Basic Income" is that real estate interests will most likely gobble that money right up leaving us right back where we started.

Bingo.

So far I don't disagree with the tarrifs if they can bring jobs back. As someone who has been way below the poverty line in the last decade, the price of a toothbrush or batteries or a microwave going up even 25% wouldn't really have phased me. Hell, make $1000/month from a minimum wage job? That's a lot of money. Until you pay rent!

I can't see how tariffs could bring jobs back. Sending the work abroad only delayed automation. As that begins, shipping becomes the greatest expense which will lead to local assembly becoming SOP. A few new jobs would be created but nothing that would stop the bleeding.

The elephant in the womb is unregulated real estate.

upstairs wrote: ↑August 28th, 2019, 5:01 am

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑August 19th, 2019, 2:09 am At least Yang is trying to address the problem rather than regurgitating up more "progressive" talking points. My problem with his "Universal Basic Income" is that real estate interests will most likely gobble that money right up leaving us right back where we started.

Bingo.

So far I don't disagree with the tarrifs if they can bring jobs back. As someone who has been way below the poverty line in the last decade, the price of a toothbrush or batteries or a microwave going up even 25% wouldn't really have phased me. Hell, make $1000/month from a minimum wage job? That's a lot of money. Until you pay rent!

Tariffs never "bring jobs back". All they do is increase inflation and lose us markets. Since tariffs lose us markets they actually decrease employment, not increase it. You might talk to our farmers about that. Crops are rotting in the fields because we can't sell them thanks to Rump's insane policies.

To bring jobs back you need a solid manufacturing base to employ people, something that the USA no longer has - we've been shipping those jobs overseas for decades now.

The truth is that US industry doesn't give a damn about American jobs. What they want is cheap labor and cheap manufacturing, and we handed all that off to Asia a long time ago. Once you give that away you really can't get it back.

Bob Olhsson wrote: ↑August 28th, 2019, 1:35 pm I can't see how tariffs could bring jobs back. Sending the work abroad only delayed automation. As that begins, shipping becomes the greatest expense which will lead to local assembly becoming SOP. A few new jobs would be created but nothing that would stop the bleeding.

The elephant in the womb is unregulated real estate.

Which is why I hate Feinstein and her whole cabal of real estate developers and Wall Street sharks.

Some of you may have bothered to listen to my song "Progress USA" elsewhere on this site. Aside from the verse about the music biz that song is mostly about how Feinstein and her gang have destroyed San Francisco and how words can mean opposite things in the mouths of different people - such as the hypocrisy of the phony Bay Area "Progressives". I've voted for Feinstein when the only alternative would be a Republican, but every time I've had to hold my nose in the booth and wash the taste out of my mouth afterwards, preferably with a good shot of Scotch.