Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy • Hacker News Board

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#41

Post by pitaj » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:35 PM UTC

moate wrote: post #32

pitaj wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So what do you think a better tax system would look like? Here's what I think: - No corporate taxes - No income tax deductions - No income tax exemptions - Lower income tax rates across the board - Income tax rate is calculated by a continuous function based on your income - Such a function would be based on existing effective tax rates Done correctly, such a reform would be much simpler, easier to deal with, and rev…

>>and revenue neutral. Why is this a good thing? It seems that most people feel that the problem is twofold. 1- Middle and Lower class families feel like too much of their money is forced to pay for taxes or services that taxes could be used to provide and thus they're not getting a fair shake. 2- Rich people are able to navigate the complex legal codes relating to tax in such a way that they benefit by "not paying t…

If revenue should increase, it's much easier to increase it by changing some constants in the function. Same applies if you think revenue should decrease, or if you think the taxes should be more progressive.

A simpler system benefits everyone: it's easier to comply with, it's easier to enforce, it's easier to change.

For instance, adding a negative income tax would be as easy as adding a negative offset to the function.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#42

Post by SeanAppleby » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:38 PM UTC

WillPostForFood wrote: post #18

sykic wrote: post #12

Making matters worse, America’s low tax-to-GDP ratio – just 27.1% even before the Trump tax cut – means a dearth of money for investment in the infrastructure, education, health care, and basic research needed to ensure future growth. In comparison to our peers the U.S. is under taxed. The OECD average is 34.2%. What makes the average person feel overtaxed is the combination of federal income tax, state income tax (w…

It is easy to convince a significant portion of average Americans that taxes are too high. So they vote for politicians that promise to lower taxes. Except they don’t lower taxes for average people. Let’s be honest, tax cuts may be bad policy, but it is not true that they haven’t been lowered for the average person. Rates are down, standard deduction is up.

SALT caps really screw a lot of people though. My effective federal tax rate is higher after the tax "cut" than it would have been under the previous tax laws.

It really depends on where you live. Some blue areas have had effective tax increases for a sizable chunk of the population.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#43

Post by sykic » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:48 PM UTC

refurb wrote: post #13

sykic wrote: post #12

Making matters worse, America’s low tax-to-GDP ratio – just 27.1% even before the Trump tax cut – means a dearth of money for investment in the infrastructure, education, health care, and basic research needed to ensure future growth. In comparison to our peers the U.S. is under taxed. The OECD average is 34.2%. What makes the average person feel overtaxed is the combination of federal income tax, state income tax (w…

United states is 26% tax to GDP. Australia is 27.8%. Switzerland is 27.8%[1] Are those countries broken too? [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_tax_reven...

The political system in the U.S. is broken from my perspective. It is not broken because tax rates are too low. That tax rates are low for the very wealthy is a symptom of the brokenness of the system. It is not the cause and I did not claim the U.S. has a broken system due to low taxation.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#44

Post by sykic » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:51 PM UTC

rb808 wrote: post #16

sykic wrote: post #12

Making matters worse, America’s low tax-to-GDP ratio – just 27.1% even before the Trump tax cut – means a dearth of money for investment in the infrastructure, education, health care, and basic research needed to ensure future growth. In comparison to our peers the U.S. is under taxed. The OECD average is 34.2%. What makes the average person feel overtaxed is the combination of federal income tax, state income tax (w…

> In comparison to our peers the U.S. is under taxed. The OECD average is 34.2%. What makes the average person feel overtaxed is the combination of federal income tax, state income tax (where it occurs), along with stagnant wages and high medical care costs. The U.S. spends far more per capita on healthcare than any other OECD nation. Its really difficult to compare. Healthcare is a big difference, if we relabeled he…

The problem I have with this relabelling is that decent health care is largely dependent upon how rich/nice your employer is and it costs lots of money at the point of contact. Healthcare in the U.S. is not provided to citizens in a way that resembles a government program.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#45

Post by sykic » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:53 PM UTC

WillPostForFood wrote: post #18

sykic wrote: post #12

Making matters worse, America’s low tax-to-GDP ratio – just 27.1% even before the Trump tax cut – means a dearth of money for investment in the infrastructure, education, health care, and basic research needed to ensure future growth. In comparison to our peers the U.S. is under taxed. The OECD average is 34.2%. What makes the average person feel overtaxed is the combination of federal income tax, state income tax (w…

It is easy to convince a significant portion of average Americans that taxes are too high. So they vote for politicians that promise to lower taxes. Except they don’t lower taxes for average people. Let’s be honest, tax cuts may be bad policy, but it is not true that they haven’t been lowered for the average person. Rates are down, standard deduction is up.

I misspoke. The cuts have been mostly but not exclusively for the very rich. For instance, Reagan thought the tax on capital ought to be higher than the tax on labor. Now if a politician suggested this they'd be labeled a socialist by the Republican party.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#46

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 5:59 PM UTC

sykic wrote: post #44

rb808 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> In comparison to our peers the U.S. is under taxed. The OECD average is 34.2%. What makes the average person feel overtaxed is the combination of federal income tax, state income tax (where it occurs), along with stagnant wages and high medical care costs. The U.S. spends far more per capita on healthcare than any other OECD nation. Its really difficult to compare. Healthcare is a big difference, if we relabeled he…

The problem I have with this relabelling is that decent health care is largely dependent upon how rich/nice your employer is and it costs lots of money at the point of contact. Healthcare in the U.S. is not provided to citizens in a way that resembles a government program.

> Healthcare in the U.S. is not provided to citizens in a way that resembles a government program.

Except for the ~1/3 of Americans who get healthcare through one or more of the government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Tricare, etc.)

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#47

Post by lotsofpulp » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 6:02 PM UTC

clairity wrote: post #40

lotsofpulp wrote: post #9

This is the inevitable result of efficiencies of scale. With computers, databases, instant communications, why would a business be restricted in anyway to expand as far as it can once it has perfected whatever it is selling. In the long run, it would be beneficial for all consumers to be able to select from multiple sellers, but in the short term, it's beneficial for each consumer to purchase from the whomever is giv…

you're suggesting we optimize along a single axis of a (probably infinite) multidimensional system. the simplistic retort would be that "value" condenses all that complexity down into a single metric, but we know how well optimizing for one metric works out. we get all kinds of distortions and mis-aligned incentives. we might even name that class of problems "externalities". the corporate free lunch ain't free. bigne…

I'm not suggesting we optimize along a single axis, I'm stating what the reality is. Short term, it makes sense for each individual to use Costco/Target/Walmart/Amazon/Google/Apple/BoA/Chase/Nordstroms/Trader Joes/Aldi/United/Delta/American/Hilton/Marriott/Home Depot/Lowes/AMC/Regal/P&G/J&J/Conagra/UPS/FedEx etc. These big organizations have achieved efficiencies of scale (and political clout) to be able to offer services at a price that others can't. Long term, we are ceding pricing power to fewer and fewer sellers (and buyers on the labor side), but I doubt people will stop and start giving business to the local retailer or bank or hardware store, if they still exist.

Obviously, I'm not talking about infrastructure monopolies as the consumer has little to no choice there between things like mobile/internet/electric/gas/water/sewer/waste removal providers.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#48

Post by tabtab » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 6:09 PM UTC

lotsofpulp wrote: post #9

This is the inevitable result of efficiencies of scale. With computers, databases, instant communications, why would a business be restricted in anyway to expand as far as it can once it has perfected whatever it is selling. In the long run, it would be beneficial for all consumers to be able to select from multiple sellers, but in the short term, it's beneficial for each consumer to purchase from the whomever is giv…

I'm not sure it's fully from efficiency of scale, especially outside of manufacturing. What I keep seeing is using one's size to keep out newcomers as the most important factor. You have more patents and more lawyers and can accept financial losses longer on specific products to keep them out: products A and B subsidize C when C is threatened. And you can bundle multiple products into "special deals" the way a single-product producer can't. And there's the network effect that social networks use: you need more customers before you can get customers.

In short, economic bullying.

Since the early 80's I've watched Microsoft grow, and don't see it about raw merit at all. It's poker, not chess.

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#49

Post by sykic » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 6:14 PM UTC

dragonwriter wrote: post #46

sykic wrote: post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The problem I have with this relabelling is that decent health care is largely dependent upon how rich/nice your employer is and it costs lots of money at the point of contact. Healthcare in the U.S. is not provided to citizens in a way that resembles a government program.

> Healthcare in the U.S. is not provided to citizens in a way that resembles a government program. Except for the ~1/3 of Americans who get healthcare through one or more of the government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Tricare, etc.)

I fail to see what your point is. You believe the totality of all U.S. healthcare spending ought to be viewed as a tax because - using your statement - 1/3 of the people receive healthcare via a department of the federal government?

Re: Market Concentration Is Threatening the US Economy

#50

Post by dragonwriter » Wed, Mar 13, 2019, 6:29 PM UTC

sykic wrote: post #49

dragonwriter wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Healthcare in the U.S. is not provided to citizens in a way that resembles a government program. Except for the ~1/3 of Americans who get healthcare through one or more of the government programs (Medicare, Medicaid, VA, Tricare, etc.)

I fail to see what your point is. You believe the totality of all U.S. healthcare spending ought to be viewed as a tax because - using your statement - 1/3 of the people receive healthcare via a department of the federal government?

> I fail to see what your point is.

The point is exactly and only what the text of the comment said.

> You believe the totality of all U.S. healthcare spending ought to be viewed as a tax

No, I never said that. Nor, AFAICT, did anyone upthread. The claim rb808 made seems to be more "comparing tax rates between countries where there is a substantial difference in the extent to which essential services are provided through tax funded programs is of limited utility".