Senator Elizabeth Warren’s proposed wealth tax is a more promising idea, I think, than Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez’s plan for a top marginal income-tax rate of 70 percent. A levy that high on very high incomes is likely to be fiscally self-defeating, but an annual 2-3 percent tax on wealth would be a big revenue-raiser even if confined to the very rich. This isn’t enough by itself to make it a good idea, but at least Warren’s proposal is fiscally productive.
Clive is following the old two step line, his Y axis represents what his talking points say it should be.
The money is already allocated, Clive, that means we already know any tax negotiations have to take into account the destination of funds and it will not be fiscally prudent. The tax payer is already negotiating a new position as tax receiver according to preset spending patterns. She is already negotiating for claw backs.
The more prudent solution is to suddenly decide not to pay nor receive, but to have a sit down of the elders for a midnight Trump shock, and that is where we are headed. The abrupt change in monetary regime will be inefficient, we already know, because economists under these conditions remain confused for a generation. And nothing is more inefficient than a bunch of confused economists with an inverted Y axis.
No comments:
Post a Comment