3 ms·

>There is a long list of papers from the right and left that say the same. Each of your links appear to be left biased. From my observations, the right-wing lo

>There is a long list of papers from the right and left that say the same. Each of your links appear to be left biased. From my observations, the right-wing love trickledown. Curious if you could provide me an example where right-wing are against this. The reality is that the economy is very complex. At the same time as 'trickle down economics' you had hyperglobalization from china's free trade zones and adoption of capitalism. You had global egalitarianism greatly increasing the supply of labour. You also have the reality that trickle down economics never fully implemented. How can a study control for all of these gigantic variables? If the study cannot, they cannot come to any conclusions. Lets step back for a second and look at globalization alone. When china implemented capitalism and their free trade zones attracted heavy foreign investment whose goal was to obtain cheap labour in china. Every big corp moved there, remember nike and their slave child labour? Or for that matter all the others as well. Factories dont exist in north america anymore except for costly transportation markets. In order to attract those jobs back, you must compete with the tax rates of those places with very low taxes. globalization means tax rates must reduce.

tonyedgecombe 6y ago
In order to attract those jobs back, you must compete with the tax rates of those places with very low taxes. globalization means tax rates must reduce. No, you need to compete with the labour rates which isn't the same thing. Interestingly total tax take vs GDP isn't much different between China (20%) and US(24%)[1]. It's somewhat easier to compare two similarly sized countries in Europe. The UK and Germany for instance. Germany has a total tax take of about 45%, the UK is at 35%. Yet German exports are much higher than the UK[2]. globalization means tax rates must reduce. Globalisation means taxes will shift away from corporations and towards consumption, dividends and land value which are much harder to avoid. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_reven... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports
- sleepysysadmin 6y ago
  >No, you need to compete with the labour rates which isn't the same thing. could you point to me 1 government in north america who has lowered minimum wage? That's how you would compete with labour rates. >Interestingly total tax take vs GDP isn't much different between China (20%) and US(24%)[1]. I'm not sure we're comparing apples to apples here. Tax to GDP while also looking at the entire country. The free trade zones are certainly not 20%. Mainland is around 20% for sure. In fact some of the zones are lower than hong kong on purpose. Which according to that source is 13% but that seems high. >It's somewhat easier to compare two similarly sized countries in Europe. The UK and Germany for instance. Germany has a total tax take of about 45%, the UK is at 35%. Yet German exports are much higher than the UK[2]. I believe we're missing the forest through the trees though. so many missing factors, for example Germany also has very low debt but they also benefit greatly from the Balkan countries. Germany sits well because Crotia and neighbours are the ones heavily in debt. >Globalisation means taxes will shift away from corporations and towards consumption, dividends and land value which are much harder to avoid. they may shift but the balance is what matters. What's more important is what's about to happen. The governments of the world are increasingly bankrupt. No politician will consider dynamically changing the fundamentals of how taxes are collected. If land value taxes come about, it will be a new tax that is in addition. they will be raising taxes. The exact opposite of what they need to be doing.
manicdee 6y ago
In order to attract jobs back to USA from China you can simply stop buying goods from China. It’s down to the individual shopper to think twice before buying the imported product manufactured with unethical labour.
born_a_skeptic 6y ago
lol logical arguments get flagged...

tonyedgecombe 6y ago

In order to attract those jobs back, you must compete with the tax rates of those places with very low taxes. globalization means tax rates must reduce. No, you need to compete with the labour rates which isn't the same thing. Interestingly total tax take vs GDP isn't much different between China (20%) and US(24%)[1]. It's somewhat easier to compare two similarly sized countries in Europe. The UK and Germany for instance. Germany has a total tax take of about 45%, the UK is at 35%. Yet German exports are much higher than the UK[2]. globalization means tax rates must reduce. Globalisation means taxes will shift away from corporations and towards consumption, dividends and land value which are much harder to avoid. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_revenue_to_GDP_ratio https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_reven... [2] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_exports

sleepysysadmin 6y ago
>No, you need to compete with the labour rates which isn't the same thing. could you point to me 1 government in north america who has lowered minimum wage? That's how you would compete with labour rates. >Interestingly total tax take vs GDP isn't much different between China (20%) and US(24%)[1]. I'm not sure we're comparing apples to apples here. Tax to GDP while also looking at the entire country. The free trade zones are certainly not 20%. Mainland is around 20% for sure. In fact some of the zones are lower than hong kong on purpose. Which according to that source is 13% but that seems high. >It's somewhat easier to compare two similarly sized countries in Europe. The UK and Germany for instance. Germany has a total tax take of about 45%, the UK is at 35%. Yet German exports are much higher than the UK[2]. I believe we're missing the forest through the trees though. so many missing factors, for example Germany also has very low debt but they also benefit greatly from the Balkan countries. Germany sits well because Crotia and neighbours are the ones heavily in debt. >Globalisation means taxes will shift away from corporations and towards consumption, dividends and land value which are much harder to avoid. they may shift but the balance is what matters. What's more important is what's about to happen. The governments of the world are increasingly bankrupt. No politician will consider dynamically changing the fundamentals of how taxes are collected. If land value taxes come about, it will be a new tax that is in addition. they will be raising taxes. The exact opposite of what they need to be doing.

manicdee 6y ago

In order to attract jobs back to USA from China you can simply stop buying goods from China. It’s down to the individual shopper to think twice before buying the imported product manufactured with unethical labour.

born_a_skeptic 6y ago

lol logical arguments get flagged...