Some economists are touting Elizabeth Warren's wealth tax as a solution to our budget woes. Closer examination reveals that their revenue projections are wildly exaggerated.
Every promise of a free government service should be greeted with instant, habitual, and empirically verified incredulity.
An “efficient” carbon tax — one that truly solves the so-called “market failure” problem — requires that government officials first divine the optimal rate of emissions and then set the tax at a level that will result in this rate of emissions.
The opportunity to voluntarily tax yourself at rates you so choose is available to you via the US Treasury.
The prospect that the US president would conclude that tariffs cause growth has always been the downside of good economic numbers. Good performance of the macroeconomy only encourages his worst instincts to impose more harmful trade policies.
The problem is not a single program or regulation. It’s the complete paradigm of a state that knows no limits to its power. That paradigm has gradually faded. Another will take its place.
Given the high levels of uncertainty surrounding inequality measurement and ongoing improvements to each technique, common sense should caution us against adopting a sweeping tax code overhaul based on such an ambiguous and disputed statistical record.
The Democrats who just took control of the House of Representatives have already implemented changes to House rules so that if they decide to act on Ocasio-Cortez’s idea to jack up the top marginal tax rate to 70 percent, no procedural obstructions will block their way.
While people in France and Austria might not be completely aware that this added tax will actually hurt them in the long run, authorities in those two countries should be reminded that the digital tax is nothing but an additional burden on the consumer; pretending the plan is about fairness will not fly.
The collapse in confidence in government from 77% to 18% is one of the most striking changes in public philosophy of the last half century. To proceed as if this means nothing represents astonishing ideological blindness.
The historical narrative we've been hearing is both simplistic and wrong. It relies upon a confusion between the statutory tax rate (i.e., the number that’s on the statute books) and the effective tax rate (i.e., the percentage of income that people actually pay once exemptions, deductions, and other tax-code incentives are accounted for).
The GoFundMe campaign for the wall illustrates both the possibilities and the limitations of relying on voluntary revenue collection. Private efforts might be able to collect the money they need, but they will not and should not obtain the powers that government possesses to take away the people’s liberty and property.