Saturday, November 1, 2008

Trickle Up of Down, What is the Growth?

I have not brought this up before i keep meaning to.

Obama on low taxes: “Selfishness”
"This reveals the basic underlying philosophy of the Left - that one cannot possibly be charitable unless they use the government to redirect their funds. Obama assumes that people who don’t want to pay higher taxes are somehow “selfish”, but that’s only true if one assumes that the so-called rich won’t do anything else with their money except sit around like Scrooge McDuck, counting it constantly. Most people today invest it, which creates jobs, or spend it, which creates even more jobs, or donate it to charity — which works much more effectively and with much less overhead than filtering it through government bureaucracy."
This is an example of a more basic problem with not just the left but every day people. Just for a minute set the morals aside and the necessary taxation for military and roads.

The goal is to have a basic safety net and help those at the bottom up. Both sides are talking about the same pool of money. The money from the rich and business. Do we give the money to government to give to those they deem need it? Or do we leave it with the citizens or businesses.

Remember the goal. It goes to government. The talk it over and come up with a plan that is pieces of this idea and that. They take into account disability(real disability), age, income and the other things they should. They use some things they shouldn't like economic state in the area or ignoring the willingness to work. Moral judgments in effect. That aside what is the efficiency? The cost of mailing checks alone wastes millions not to mention the 30% or so fraud in Medicaid.

So lets say overall 20% is wasted in overhead of the agency set up for this and fraud. If we have an imaginary $100, easy to work with. At this point our citizen, imaginary, gets $80. That is spent into the economy. (Citizen $80, government 0)

I will assume nothing for savings or paying dept. If your going to do either you will do it much the same no matter where it comes from

The other side. I am assuming that our $100 is taken from profits and that this $100 is above the taxes taken for the necessary. The overhead of the business is already covered by the ongoing business.

If invested it gives a company about $100 and makes a little money. So it makes 3% or$3 (easy math)and the government takes 4.5 cents year in and year out at 15% cap gains tax. Really it will be more year over year long term as that $3 are added to the investment. (citizen 0, government 4.5 cents and a company has an extra $100)

If they hire someone nearly all of the $100 goes to the our citizen, that gets spent back into the economy. Oh and something like 5-8% profit is made by the company, 35% or (5$*.35) $1.75 t0 taxes. (citizen$98, Government get $1.75 and company growth)

If it is spent on supplies or equipment for the company it goes back into the economy. Yes 5-8% profit is made by the company 35% or (5$*.35) $1.75 t0 taxes. ( citizen 0, government get $1.75 and company growth)

Mostly it ends up in the economy in general plus grows the business that spent it. The economy grows that much faster creating more jobs and more money for our citizen. The government still gets a little and more as the economy grows.

And charity, good charities keep overhead to around 10%, so $90 to our citizen and it goes back into the economy. Or better yet you buy $100 worth food or clothes and take it to the charity. Better yet give it directly to the people that you know that could use that little bit of help. 100% to a citizen and you know it is getting to where it can help the most.

I meant to go with a individual self-reliant comment but you got this instead. It is a little harder to argue with this way.

No comments: