So this caller was talking about energy and ethanol, and the energy equivalence of electricity to fuel, and the Fischer-Tropsch process host is saying that it doesn't matter... I didn't catch enough but needless to say he feels that 'sunbeams' and 'windmill tipping' can't make a difference. He feels that natural gas needs to be diverted from electricity to transportation, and nuclear power used to make up the electricity shortfall... (at least we agree on that part) But I say sunlight can bridge the gap faster & cheaper!
Then the caller says: "What do you think about the FairTax?' And naturally the host of a money show with a tax consultancy bashes it... Big surprise! What annoyed me was that he bashed the FairTax with bad data. In the immortal words of Jarjar Binks "How Rude."
It seems that even certain radio hosts that claim to be helping the public can be misinformed when it suites them to be. No big surprise, I've been listening to the man for quite a while, he tends to get impatient with callers...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Brinker also said "We should be drilling in ANWR now. President Clinton vetoed the ANWR drilling passed by congress in the mid-1990's. If President Clinton had signed that bill, today, we would be producing about 1 million barrels a day out of the ANWR preserve. Thank you, Mr. Clinton."
For more, see Honeybee's excellent summary at Summary: Bob Brinker's Moneytalk June 7, 2008
I am interested. What did he get wrong about the fair tax? I didn't listen yesterday but for a few minutes.
I can't quote him exactly, but the werdz "Red Herring" were included in his derogatory description of th FairTax.
I think the basic issue that pricked my ears was the inclusive/exclusive 23%/30% frequently used by opponents that choose to incite opposition through innumeracy.
Of all the reasons to oppose the FairTax the opposition by tax workers is the most irritating. These folks see the FairTax as an attack on their livelihood, and fail to grasp the greater economic benefits. Furthermore, if they used their skill to increase productivity rather that avoid penalties, wouldn't everyone benefit?
If manufacturers can benefit from techniques like JIT, Kaizen, and Kanban, couldn't the back office benefit from having those skills applied there?
All I can say is that I wish he'd give it a fair evaluation, instead of a knee-jerk dismissal.
------------
Even though I'm all for Solar Power I agree with drilling ANWR. We also have many domestic (lower 48) wells drilled for gas that were capped when they hit oil.
I'm also very much pro-nuke, my only issue is it takes so darn long to build a nuke... like realizing you're hungry, deciding you want fruit salad, and planting an apple tree.
Through growth and the DG model, STS can deliver enough CSP in 5-years to offset 1/2 million barrels per day; with first power delivered in as little as 9 months.
how about those of us who don't want to the the % of our income that goes to pay the federal government go up! Pretty much anyone under 200,000 and over the poverty level would see a rise in the percentage of income that would go to federal government. Check the CBO numbers on % of income paid to federal govern. if you don't beleive it.
Jim, you've bought into the lie that your 'income' is what is important. What you do with the income is what effects your life.
Let's look at any point below $200k to prove the fallacy of the statement.
Up to the poverty line, the person gets their income plus the prebate offsetting all taxes so the effective rate is less than zero!
As consumption increases beyond the necessities, then they start to pay some taxes, but, in proportion to their total consumption or income the rate is still very low (just moving off zero).
We can assume the propensity to consume (PC) = 1.0 or is equal to the income or earnings at this level.
As income rises there are 2 possibilities, PC stays = 1.0 or it starts to fall i.e the person saves a little $$$.
If the PC = 1.0 then the tax burden will increase, reaching 1/2 the inclusive tax rate (23%) or a 'whopping' 11.5% when the income reaches 2x the poverty level. A little research will show that this is still far less than the current tax burden under the Income tax, the Soc Sec & Medicare withholding scheme we have.
If the PC drops please recall the savings are not taxed. They grow earning income tax free. See the chapter titled "The Miracle of Compound Interest" in any econ 101 text book for more on this.
So even a low earner has some ability to control his individual tax burden!
Note: I said *ability*... stop being a bleeding heart liberal and trying to control everyones lives for their own good!
AS for the CBO numbers, they are big numbers aren't they, they are also ignorant #'s. When folks are confronted with the day to day challenges of survival you'd be amazes how fast & accurately they can control currency in their own self interest.
Will bad decisions be made? Yes, do welfare mothers buy booze under the current system? Yes they do. Will they under the FairTax? Yup. That's not the issue.
There are almost as many good reasons to adopt the FairTax as there are ridiculous regulations under the current tax scheme... 60,000 pages at last glance.
If you put politics and emotion, and the status quo aside, any intelligent person *must* conclude that the FairTax is far superior to the current mess we have.
Post a Comment