Sound Questions from Craig Newmark
How to have a little fun with a Congressperson . . .
. . . who supports a "windfall" profits tax on oil companies. Ask 'em if they support a windfall profits tax on corn and soybean farmers, and if not, why not.
How to have fun with somebody who advocates higher taxes . . .
. . . ask 'em if they support Massachusetts legislator Paul Kujawski's proposal to tax university endowments over $1 billion. Wouldn't that tax be "equitable"? Wouldn't the money be able to fund many worthwhile programs?
Bravo, Craig, bravo.
As we all know from Econ 101, corn is a commodity and in a monopolistic commodity industry there can be no excess profits. The only windfall profit being generated is a direct result of government subsidy so windfall profit taxes for corn farmers is a waste of time, congress would just have to turn around and create larger subsidies. Simply put, it saves congress the time of stuffing more pork into the farm bill, by not bothering with the taxes in the first place.
P.S. The should start taxing university endowments, Harvard's look at my big dick fund, is ridiculous, they're charging 50k a year, what the fuck is the point of the god damn endowment? Why is the government subsidizing harvard's vanity projects, they want to invest and not pay taxes, let them buy Munnies.... though i say put the ceiling at 5 billion, most humble state schools have a billion in the bank.
Posted by: David Swensen | May 21, 2008 at 07:25 AM
Rather than tax the endowments, just do what is morally and economically right and stop taxing corporations. The "corporate tax" is a lie, just as are the "employer portions" of payroll taxes, social security contributions, healthcare benefits, and unemployment insurance.
Governments should only be allowed one tax - make the cost of government obvious and the demand for it goes down rather drastically. Surprise, surprise, NGOs, unions, and pols want to defraud the public by hiding the cost.
As to windfall profits - just end all subsidies to farmers and put all public lands up for auction. If Greenpeace wants to keep an area wild, they can pay for it. Thus the government gets the best price and the land goes to its highest and best use. Critical habitat stays wild, while productive resources get used intelligently. Any government owning property over and above the needs of the military and police is a travesty and should be ended immediately!
Posted by: Bulging Bracket | May 21, 2008 at 03:25 PM
Great points all around, BB (and a fantastic writeup on DB in the financial literacy section)!
Can you do me a favor and lob me an email?
Posted by: 1-2 | May 21, 2008 at 04:38 PM