Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
And PS to Hoonose - you know that collecting rent from leasing owned property is "profit seeking", not rent seeking/extraction, right?
Profit made from the difference in cost and revenue is simple trade. Rents on leased real estate are not extractions, but are mutually agreeable trading of cash (rent) for a service (allowed to live/work inside owned space). Totally different than government sponsored extortion based on their monopoly on force and violence.
Rent seeking or rent extraction is where one makes money from a business or operation by exploiting some niche within that business or operation. An exploit which is typically passive and does not add to results or production. So for relatively little input the rent seeker gains a disproportionate bunch.
It might be gov't related, it might be local monopoly related. Usually legal.
But the perp learns the game, and then either uses existing rules, bends or creates new rules to suit his position.
Pols certainly can be in such positions before and after public service. Maybe news people.
These days with import/export legislation there can be some big money waiting to be made.
Rent seeking doesn't just refer to property. One of the biggest areas it applies is to intellectually property, like copyrights
For instance moneys made by people/companies buying up patents and then leaning on other companies infringing - or not. There can be large gray zones there, and litigation expensive. Rent seeking can be like legal extortion.
Just like if I run a convenience store, if a customer decides they want a bag of chips without paying, you don't just let them walk out of the store with it. Don't be dense😒
How else is government supposed to run without taxes. Are government employees supposed to work for free as volunteers?
Trying to leave without paying is taking other people’s fruit of labor by force.
Just like if I run a convenience store, if a customer decides they want a bag of chips without paying, you don't just let them walk out of the store with it. Don't be dense��
How else is government supposed to run without taxes. Are government employees supposed to work for free as volunteers?
What if you give them the bag of chips when they never asked for it, then force them to pay?
How else is a convenience store supposed to stay in business if you can't force people to buy stuff?
What if you give them the bag of chips when they never asked for it, then force them to pay?
How else is a convenience store supposed to stay in business if you can't force people to buy stuff?
Spring is a little late in your neck of the woods from what I understand. Still, there's nothing stopping you from going door to door and getting lawns in shape after the long winter (cutting, fertilizing, leaf pickup). Then just knock on the door of the unsuspecting home owner and demand compensation for services rendered.
Tell them the Statists on CD told you it was ok and that you'd be paid. Then report back to us on how it goes.
Spring is a little late in your neck of the woods from what I understand. Still, there's nothing stopping you from going door to door and getting lawns in shape after the long winter (cutting, fertilizing, leaf pickup). Then just knock on the door of the unsuspecting home owner and demand compensation for services rendered.
Tell them the Statists on CD told you it was ok and that you'd be paid. Then report back to us on how it goes.
Well they are in my territory, so they agreed to it by not moving. I might even threaten competing businesses because they're uh...unlicensed by me...so they're not trustworthy and need to be shut down for public safety reasons.
I figured keeping the marginal rate under 50% at the top still was low enough to incentivize work or production
I think that for the most part, lower rates serve to incentivize work. Higher rates...not so much. Historically, when we cut taxes monies to the Treasury increase.
Location: Live:Downtown Phoenix, AZ/Work:Greater Los Angeles, CA
27,606 posts, read 14,601,062 times
Reputation: 9169
Quote:
Originally Posted by carcrazy67
There is nothing magic about the number you came up with. Maybe a good number, maybe not so much. Why not 45% or 65%? Point is, There has to be some semblance of logic when coming up with a tax rate....not just a guess or "I feel". As anyone knows, when rates get too high they have a negative impact on monies to the treasury.
And as The Cheeto's tax bill is showing, too low of rates have a negative impact on the treasury as well.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
