Jots with dots 4/16

Serendipity:  I made this observation in this space a couple short weeks ago.  It’s a stupid question

Government is just the things we do together and if you don’t like it you should just go live in Somalia chortle chortle…:  Preceded by:  Mark Dayton comes off well.  The absurdity is the DOT at various points begging off because their hands were tied…  I read the Moberg books, they are an important parable if you are an American Swede.

But it’s a noble lie:  On immigrant grandparents: I had none.  Two immigrant g-grandparents (Sweden, England)  Buncha g-g-grandparents (Germany, Norway) g-g-g-grandparents (Ireland, Norway)

I agree with his premise.  Bi-party reform, where the police are one of the parties, is a myth.  Legislatures have to abridge their power and expand their culpability.

Coulda talked a bit about taxes yesterday.  I made peace with taxes…wisdom acquired with adulthood there…. withhold, pay your taxes….. but it’s not like I want to pay more.  More importantly, I don’t think it’s a good idea people like me, ie, the ‘middle class’ pay more.  Some people do.  Annually on 4/15 you get this obsequious garbage  Which I like to call, ‘the Democrat party’s radical inner dialogue, in which they conspire to take away the money that everyday Americans spend on flat screen TVs, a winter trip to Mexico, or second car… cuz those bourgeois habits are decadent and global warming and privilege…’  Also, you get articles like this also, which I also don’t agree with.  These guys keep wanting to go back to the Eisenhower top bracket marginal rate of 92%.  Some of these guys are obtuse.  Author Weissmann has a couple lines in there:

As any mildly snarky liberal will remind you, the country seemed to do just fine in the Eisenhower era, when marginal income tax rates  topped out at a confiscatory 92 percent. It also fared pretty well after Bill Clinton raised rates to close the deficit in the early 1990s. If you’re looking for a slightly more formal source, when the Congressional Research Service looked at the issue in 2012, it found that there was no statistically significant correlation at all between top marginal tax rates and real GDP growth.1

A conservative will counter here that the astronomical tax rates of mid-century America were basically a fiction, or, as commentators put it at the time, “a colossal illusion” riddled with loopholes. This is somewhat true.

So he’s not obtuse, but you actually make that last sentence accurate by taking out the word ‘somewhat’.  It’s entirely true, not merely ‘somewhat’, and obviates 93% the premise.  No one ever crossed the threshold to pay 93% on income, doing so would have meant getting paid 7% on the dollar for your efforts.  I also accepted, in my wisdom, that the rich should pay more, cuz there are things to pay for, and they have the money.   Fairness I think is too squishy a concept to be a determinant.  Other thing is… I know liberals can’t acknowledge the efficacy of trickle down, but to the extent they know it’s valid, I think they still misunderstand it.   Ya know, it’s probably arguable what the velocity of money is that rich guy spends on mansions and yacht… or investment….  IE, that it don’t trickle that fast, or trickle that far.  But I don’t think thats the point of trickle down.  The point is, those large balances remain in larger economic ecosystem to contribute to its dynamism, available to be allocated via banking, rather than sucked up by the government where it generally buys less value.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s