Comments on: Does this mean we’ll have an Americavision Song contest?

By: pushmedia1

pushmedia1 — Sun, 02 Aug 2009 02:14:20 +0000

corporate tax != capital tax

I think I grabbed these data from stateminder, but median data are available at ipums.

By: Thorstein Veblen

Thorstein Veblen — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 23:08:35 +0000

Tax data look fishy… Says US capital taxes are over 40%… Is that the highest corporate bracket? I’m in the 0% LT capital gains bracket, which is why I ask… And I think Goldman Sachs paid something like 6% tax on their corporate profits last year, if memory serves…

Also, how does Wyoming rate in median income?

By: TheMoneyIllusion » The American Union; or how a right-winger learned to stop worrying and love the EU.

Sat, 01 Aug 2009 21:59:07 +0000

[...] 8/1/09: Ambrosini has an interesting take on this issue. He mentions that Connecticut would rank third on the HDI. No mention of NH. [...]

By: pushmedia1

pushmedia1 — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 05:43:07 +0000

These are the BEA NIPA so they’re final goods, not transfers. I don’t understand why people put total government expenditures over GDP. The statistic I report gives a better sense of how important the government is in the economy. Its about 1/5 of the economy. Thought experiment: imagine a government that had a 100% “tax”, collected the money, paid themselves and just reimbursed people proportionate to their incomes. Is that government much more important in the economy than one that had 0% tax?

I make no normative claims about remittances. Evidently, they are important. There has been a couple papers, OTOH, that claim remittances are better targeted than official aid, especially during natural disasters.

By: piero.sraffa

piero.sraffa — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:40:03 +0000

Also, what is the mechanism for remittances to be better than aid? Federal government sends money, corrupt official gives it to a family member.

I assume that’s much worse than immigrants goes to the US, gives it to family member?

Not to justify corruption, but I don’t see that remittances will behave much differently. Of course, remittances don’t require taxes, which is a plus.

By: piero.sraffa

piero.sraffa — Tue, 28 Jul 2009 03:37:07 +0000

I think there is an issue with slide 4.

Federal government outlays are between 15-20% for most of the postwar period, but you have them below 10% after about 1970. Are you measuring something else?

http://www.cbo.gov/doc.cfm?index=3521&type=0

If anything, it proves your point better this way, but just to check. I though total government spending was about 30-35% now including fed and localities.

By: pushmedia1

pushmedia1 — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 23:09:50 +0000

suppose so

By: swong

swong — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 21:48:12 +0000

you’re going to put ’someone’s eye’s out with them apo’strophe’s