m8 owners: what's your annual income?

[Olsen]

At that point, of course, it is no longer a flat tax.

Certes, I have no great problem with the kind of flat tax you describe, provided the threshold is set high enough; but that is how income tax was first introduced in the UK (to pay for the Napoleonic Wars, as I recall), and the threshold has fallen steadily in real terms.

Cheers,

R/

Far more important than wether a tax profile is flat or not is that the voting public are informed about the profiles that the different parties will promote when in parliament. Most voters have no clue.

 

[gdi]

At that point, of course, it is no longer a flat tax.

Certes, I have no great problem with the kind of flat tax you describe, provided the threshold is set high enough; but that is how income tax was first introduced in the UK (to pay for the Napoleonic Wars, as I recall), and the threshold has fallen steadily in real terms.

Cheers,

R/

Yes, the Forbes scheme would be a bit of a perversion to the usual flat tax definition in that the make up of the household would influence the threshold level. But it could result in much the same outcome - everyone, no matter how good their accountancy or legal team, could be expected to pay the rate on a taxable income diminished by far fewer exemptions. Other plans I have seen have a single deduction level for all taxpayers regardless of circumstance - generally considered a true flat tax.

Personally, I think the most philosophically (economic philosophy, that is) fair way is to have a national sales tax rather than an income based tax. Reward behaviors like working and saving, while making consumption of produicts and services a privilege that must be paid for.

Unfortunately, given the vast sums of money my country has become addicted to, and the public reaction to the rise in costs of everything it would require, makes it a non-starter. But I can see the possibility of the hooks being set deeper by adding a sales tax in addition to income tax - similar to your example in Britain.

 

[gdi]

Why do americans pay "income tax" when it is not legally required and anti-constitutional?

There is plenty of information on why - try Google. To get you started there is the 16th Amendment, the case law ruling that it is required, and the current addresses of many who held your believe....

 

[Olsen]

Yes, the Forbes scheme would be a bit of a perversion to the usual flat tax definition in that the make up of the household would influence the threshold level. But it could result in much the same outcome - everyone, no matter how good their accountancy or legal team, could be expected to pay the rate on a taxable income diminished by far fewer exemptions. Other plans I have seen have a single deduction level for all taxpayers regardless of circumstance - generally considered a true flat tax.

Personally, I think the most philosophically (economic philosophy, that is) fair way is to have a national sales tax rather than an income based tax. Reward behaviors like working and saving, while making consumption of produicts and services a privilege that must be paid for.

Unfortunately, given the vast sums of money my country has become addicted to, and the public reaction to the rise in costs of everything it would require, makes it a non-starter. But I can see the possibility of the hooks being set deeper by adding a sales tax in addition to income tax - similar to your example in Britain.

I pay 42% income tax, 20% sales tax and in addition to special taxes on cars (50%), sigarettes (70%), alcohol (40%), electricity etc. I have little problems with that as long as I feel I get a good public service in return. Like free health care for all, lavish public pension, law and order, etc. - a wellfare state, practically. I have no problems with that.

If most of my tax money had to be used to paying interest on debt - rather a huge restaurant bill from a party I have not attended, which is the situation many countries, I would have found it a lot more problematic.

Sinking the nation into debt is a way of preventing a nation to maintain or build up a wellfare state. Typical examples are Argentina and Israel - and to a growing extent; USA. Also: The Swedish conservatives made a good try some 18 years ago with the result that the Swedish tax payers must entertain a 'federal' debt of 1350 billion SEK, to the cost of 25% of their health care bill. Now they are back in office...

 

[Olsen]

with the G7 countries not willing to help Paulson in bailing out bad banks, the crude oil prices soaring again and the info on that the US government will go ahead with bailing out the US financial industry on the expense of ordinary US tax payers, will inevitably lead to that the US$ to fall again. There is a lot of speculation over here in Europe on how deep it will fall.

My advice: For Americans thinking of buying a new M8.2 - buy now!

Those Americans thinking of buying a M8 2.hand; there will be ample volumes of 2.hand M8s for sale in the coming months. This because the bail out plan will cost each US house hold about the cost of two new M8 per year.

 

[gdi]

My advice: For Americans thinking of buying a new M8.2 - buy now!

I think the higher priority is to spend my falling dollars with Berlitz, learning Norwegian !

 

[Olsen]

I think the higher priority is to spend my falling dollars with Berlitz, learning Norwegian !

That could be smart. I say to all young people in USA, regardless if they are Americans and not; 'get out of there'. Predicting that a large bill will have to be paid by 'ordinary' people in USA, I said this more than a year ago. - I had not foreseen the 'credit quake' (which is now branded as). I was just refering to the 9 trillion debt,- not the 12 (or 13..?) trillion it is going to be with the bad bank bail out.

 

[Olsen]

We sit here in Europe and watch the hearings of Ben Bernanke at Capitol Hill, - and caught him in a lie. He was asked if he could describe what effect it would have on future gross domestic product of USA if Congress did not bailed out the banks with 700 billion $. Bernanke answered by refering to historic paralells, he is good at that, showing to Japan that had 10 years of falling GDP. He then mention 'scandinavia' as an example that has had a falling GDP.

The problem is... Scandinavia has had a good growth of GDP all the way since the last bank crisis. A growth typical of Europe, - while not as hefty as in USA - but it was not based onborrowed money. 'Scandinavia', Sweden, Norway & Finland have had a healthy growth of GDP since - WWII really. So what is Bernanke bull....ing about...?

 

[blw]

All good points and good questions Olsen....I'm listening to NPR every day with keen interest. I'd love to know just how bad they think things will be if we just let these jokers hang by the rope they tied around their necks years ago. If you're interested, check out NPR.org and search for Ron Paul. The third link on there is 11 minutes he had on there yesterday and a good 9 minutes of it let's anyone willing to listen know where the problem really originated- 1913 and the creation of the Federal Reserve.

He's probably rightly earned a reputation as a "kook" in American politics; but when he talks about fiscal issues over here, it most always makes massive sense to me- a self professed money luddite.

 

[Olsen]

All good points and good questions Olsen....I'm listening to NPR every day with keen interest. I'd love to know just how bad they think things will be if we just let these jokers hang by the rope they tied around their necks years ago. If you're interested, check out NPR.org and search for Ron Paul. The third link on there is 11 minutes he had on there yesterday and a good 9 minutes of it let's anyone willing to listen know where the problem really originated- 1913 and the creation of the Federal Reserve.

He's probably rightly earned a reputation as a "kook" in American politics; but when he talks about fiscal issues over here, it most always makes massive sense to me- a self professed money luddite.

Please send the complete link to NRP. I have problems finding it. Over here we watch Bloomberg CNBC, BBC, Sky and Aljazeera, - of which the latter stands out as the most reliable. By far.

 

[Olsen]

A very interesting discussion on the US bail out on Ajazeera right now. a British banker/economist concludes on 'what is the cause to the crisis', that 'too many Americans earns all too little'. Talking of medium wages of certain segments of US population/workers. And that this segment of US tax payers are going to be very hard hit if the bail out package turns out to really costing 700 billion - and so on. 'So why not direct the bail out to them?', he argued. 'If the crisis is going to hit Main Street, why not direct a bail of Main Street?'.

 

[Olsen]

On Ron Paul

On Ron Paul

I am not familiar with all personalities in US politics, but I have noticed Ron Paul as an interesting politician. He has come with very relevant questions and comments at Capitol Hill hearings. Both in connection with the Bear Stearns bail out and the infamous 700 billion Wall Street bail out.

Ron Paul is a facinating guy, but I disagree - intensely - with him on certain issues. Like:

There is no such thing as a 'free market'. It had been if all participants started off with the equal resources - say - a hundred dollars. But we don't. The notion that such a market can fix just about everything is a daydream. A 'free' market gives an unfair advantage to the market participants with 'the most money'. Leaving things solely to the market is like 'giving it away to the rich', in most instances.

Ron Paul is alergic to 'government intervention', ranging from everything from 'gun control' to 'paying taxes'. There is plenty of African states with no or very little taxes - or gun control. But they are hardly paradises. We Europeans have far better experience with government participation in everything from pension sceems to health care and social wellfare. It seem to us that conservative politicians have let the US public sector deteriorate so that they easier can sell private participants - privatisations, which is big business for the private sectors.

He points out the old Soviet Union as a 'socialist state'. Was it? I would call it a facist state. I don't know any socialist states (- also a day dream), possibly with the exception of Israel under Ben Gurion.

 

[Olsen]

Watching the financial crisis unfold, it strikes me that democracy has stopped functioning in the US. The politicians tries to force a bill upon the people that they don't want. Why elect politicians if they don't do what is the wishes of the people?

If anything needs to bailed out in USA, it is main street (to put it simple). This seems to be the standpoint of something like 70% of the US voters, regardless if they are D or R. The politicians think the voters are a flock of idiots, obviously....

Horrendous!

 

[blw]

Horrendous indeed Olsen!

It's never been a true democracy anyway. We're more descriptively labelled as a "representative republic".

Regardless....both votes this week were a farce. The House "dramatically" votes down the one resolution (by a slim margin mind you) and...well take a look here...the entire House is up for re-election in a month. Imagine THAT!

So then the Senate "sweetens" the prior resolution (read: bumps the original $700 billion to $850 or so) a bit and votes on it and you get a 74-25 result which was more or less predicted.

Wanna guess how many Senators are up for re-election in a month? 35. I know for sure that the one in my state that's up for re-election voted "no"- as if it were going to matter anyway.

Regarding your findings on Ron Paul...I'm not surprised that you weren't thrilled with him- that's fine. Unfortunately, he's about the highest profile politician over here I agree with- at least regarding how this country's economy should work. And he's still considered a kook in his own Republican Party- most likely because of his Libertarian Party history.

I certainly agree with him that the turning over of the printing of our currency to a private banking entity almost 100 years ago is the greatest fundamental problem in our economy right now. Our currency probably hasn't represented our nation's true wealth in over 80 years. Why do you think it was considered a "sweetener" to up the FDIC's coverage to $250k? The dollar just lost a little more value with that one...

 

[Olsen]

Nor is Norway such a marvelous democracy either; we have a predictable set of party laundry lists to choose from. Take it or leave it.

We had our banking crisis -as a result of the US Savings & Loans crisis, in the late 80' too. Sweden (conservative Carl Bildt as prime minister) and Norway (soc.democrate Gro Harlem Bruntland as prime minister) solved it diamentally different.

Bildt 'saved the banks' by this 'bad bank' tactics which Paulsson now wants. - Saving the bank's share holders that is, by releaving them of any bad accoounts. Sweden still has this 'federal' debt of 1.350 billion SEK which costs the Swedish tax payers some 100 million SEK in interests alone, 5% of the governments budget.

Bruntland first asked the bank's boards if the shareholder had more money to invest in the banks. They got a weekend to think it over. They, -hoping for a 'Swedish' solution, answered 'no'. Then Bruntland 'nationalized' the banks; wrote down share holder's shares to nill and filling the bank's coffers with fresh capital from the government't till. Some years later the banks were partly privatized with a handsome profit on the hand of the government (tax payers).

So, if you are going to save any banks; nationalize them! Like Hugo Chavez. Or Franklin d. Roosvelt. Great president, by the way.

 

[Olsen]

The Bush administration has decided to use some of the bail out money to buy shares in US banks, - which I think is an excellent way for tax payers to help. The tax payers then has a reasonable chance of being part of any up side when that comes. Some call this a 'socialist solution' which is a lot of bull. Well, regardless, it's a good solution - the best, for the tax payers.

The socialist government of Norway, however, has decided to 'give the banks reasonable loans in exchange for - what they call, 'good colleteral loans', a trade that only the shareholders will prosper from. Norwegian tax payers will loose out.

So, Norway's socialist government chooses a 'brownish conservative solution' and the b-b-b- US government chooses a 'socialist solution'...!

Couldn't you just normalize relations to Cuba? We have.

 

[jody36]

have to admit i didnt read whole tread got off subject. but i cant answer poll dont own an M8 i do make enough to buy one if I save or make payment plan but personally think an M8 is a waste of money I do however want a m6 or 7 one day. Seeing as how I want a nice car and motorcycle my other cameras will work just fine till I get one. beside a leica wont make me a better photographer hell quite possibly nothing will. what struck me as funny is how upset people get talking bout there income. I dont care who knows what I earn. And i promise I earn it.

 

[Olsen]

.... what struck me as funny is how upset people get talking bout there income.....

I can't see anyone getting upset talking about their income. What do you mean?

 

[39per1]

I must be a statistical anomaly that there are more owners who make 0-8k than those who make 13-30k. How do you guys do it? Eat lots of spaghetti?

Sorry mate, I'm italian, I'm in 13-30k area and I EAT SPAGHETTI EVERY DAY...I Can't afford an M8 anyway....😎
Any other suggestion to do it?
Bye

 

[Spoks]

I am rising up through the classes here. Not because of higher wages in Norwegian Kroner, but because of a falling dollar...!