We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (ScottT) — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 21:06:37 GMT

To address the lasting concerns of Mr. Layman:

1: Higher fee for use of cash--no tax on cash transactions. Fee was pre-paid, you see. Not even charged when it goes back into a bank account. Only when it is withdrawn.

If it was really going to be a show stopper, it isn't necessary. It is nice to be able to tax the black market for a change, though.

2: Barter--let whoever wishes to barter do so. This fee is for the use of money, and barter...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (wjhermann) — Wed, 13 Aug 2008 20:47:39 GMT

Art,
I sincerely mean it, your last post was very succinct and covered your points of concern well.

Here is where we stand. I find your arguments quite valid, as you know they are. Frankly, I considered most of these points prior to becoming involved with this meager attempt to lead this effort. And...... I found these several arguments insufficient to deny the nation the benefits of this tax plan. Everything we do is an "on balance" decision. No tax plan is...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Art A Layman) — Sat, 02 Aug 2008 12:55:39 GMT

Doc:

Your comments regarding the dialogue here are right on point. Even though I'm sure that I am not one of the targets of your comments, I hope those others pay attention. Oh ok; My used car salesman comments may be below the belt. Were I inclined to drift into the level of crude, uncivil commentary that you mention, rest assured that I would never say anything over the internet that I would not say face to face. That is assuming that my opponents are not...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 15:29:24 GMT

Dr. Hermann, Jhadley, All:

Upon reading Dr. Hermann's most recent post, I feel like this discussion just got a new lease on life, and I thank him for it. I also want to shoulder responsibility for my share of the escalating rhetoric. I will take Dr. Hermann's counsel and follow his example and exercise restraint from now on. Beyond that, I have a couple of questions to throw out there.

First, am I the only one who sees great significance in the pie chart where...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (wjhermann) — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 20:41:44 GMT

I can't quite figure out whether your statements are smoke and mirrors or just a failure to think things all the way through.

Neither, the purpose of this website is to qualify the APT idea in a public setting and to stimulate serious consideration and a detailed, current, independent study with a constructive slant of the many variables involved in implementing a transaction tax. I do believe that...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Art A Layman) — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 12:35:15 GMT

Doc:

Not generally given to anyone's, I don't thinks or I don't believes, but clearly we have some posters here where accepting those at face value would be an act of sheer foolishness. When those who post, "APT does not tax transactions", enter the realm of thinking, which they appear to have little faculty for, one has to shudder.

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 09:03:52 GMT

Dr. Hermann:

Sorry to keep posting before you get a chance to reply. But it seems know-it-all has just been elevated to a lofty level where we are to be saved from our own foolishness by the exalted one who knows all. I've been emphasizing the big picture of shifting the majority of the tax burden out of the GDP economy and into the huge funds that have dollar values in multiples of the GDP. In response, we get more nit picking.

As for the complaint about the 50%...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Art A Layman) — Sun, 27 Jul 2008 06:28:44 GMT

Doc:

One would suggest that when recruiting supporters one should seek those who at least understand the concept.

In order to garner revenues from a tax you need three things; a tax rate; a base to apply that tax rate against; and a mechanism for collecting the computed tax. APT taxes money flows. Notwithstanding cash, money flows take place through the banking system in the form of transactions. APT proposes to tax those money flows...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:37:57 GMT

Dr. Hermann:

It's amazing to see someone impressed with himself for seeing the plainly obvious transactions term in the long version of the APT title while continuing to miss the greater significance in the 70 times increase in the tax base with APT. The problem with a know-it-all is their mind is closed to learning. Another problem with a know-it-all is they just can't believe someone can know as much as they do. All of which doesn't lend itself to...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (wjhermann) — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 13:06:11 GMT

Art,

Had to spend some time on the used car lot today but will turn to a response to your thoughtful post this evening. By the way you asked about my inventory. Well, indeed, it was a problem a few days ago but then your post gave me a great idea. I put up a sign "Total Tax on ALL Sales 0.3%" -- just sold my last big Texas sized SUV this AM -- inventory gone!.

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Art A Layman) — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:54:15 GMT

Doc:

I assume, in fact believe, that by now you know that my jabs are mostly in fun. Others are so sensitive and insecure that they fail to be able to deal with that. As far as we know we get to go around this life one time and there's not a lot of sense doing it if you can't have fun along the road.

Of course, insecurity is one thing, ignorance, quite another. To wit:

APT does not tax transactions. The tax is conveniently and efficiently...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 14:42:21 GMT

Dr. Hermann:

I think there might be a real need to clarify once and for all what constitutes the expanded tax base under APT. All arguments made against APT's viability that I've ever seen posted here conveniently ignore that APT's tax base is 70 times the current income tax base. Your pie chart speaks volumes to me, yet is seemingly lost on so many others who I assume are in good faith attempting to understand the APT concept.

Further, I find it...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Art A Layman) — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 11:28:55 GMT

Doc:

Sure hope you don't have a lot of used car inventory to move.

I can't quite figure out whether your statements are smoke and mirrors or just a failure to think things all the way through.

You frequently refer to the expanded tax base as the euphoric solution to driving the APT tax rate so low. No doubt that is a true statement. You then tend to try and draw comparisons of the .3% rate to the rates existing under the current system, the 20% or...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (wjhermann) — Wed, 23 Jul 2008 19:19:16 GMT

Well, let me try one more time. There are three reasons why I firmly believe that the theoretical cascade effect is either unlikely or, even if it occurred would be easily tolerated. Why easily tolerated?-

First, because companies would be realizing considerable savings as orders of magnitude above the tax rate. That is, I was using the Fair taxers 20% as a little jab at them but there would be considerable savings of employer FICA and tax compliance costs. Further if the...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 14:09:21 GMT

Brian Winters:

Let's not lose track of the main point in comparing APT with inflation. Of course, they are not the same thing. The whole point in making the comparison is to help understand the introduction of the APT tax into the business supply chain. I thought it was a very instructive exercise. But obviously it has caused undesired confusion, and distracts from the real issue it was intended to clarify. I find this all extremely frustrating, and have no answer as to...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Brian Winters) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 17:22:18 GMT
Art:

The last post in the thread is the one I was referring to. But then again, he brings up the whole 20% cost savings thing again, but of course it's apples to oranges like you've said already.

Rubicon:

The reason people keep bringing it up is because there's such refusal to acknowledge it and actually understand it. FAQ #2 on the site is WRONG about this point. It should just be re-written completely. Inflation is primarily a devaluation of...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 14:27:33 GMT

Brian Winters:

I didn't mean to infer that a cascading effect does not occur in the business supply stream. Obviously it does. I'm just baffled by the amount of attention this obvious yet inconsequential concept receives here. I was able to get past it pretty quick. It concerns me that we dwell on this non-issue. Maybe I wasn't quite clear in my last post. When APT gets implemented, there is a cost increase for business transactions. While this cost is perpetual,...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Art A Layman) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 12:07:58 GMT
Brian:

Thanks for the nod.

I was beginning to think it was just me who thought I was getting no real answers to my questions/objections.

I followed your link and scanned the posts. Didn't see precisely where Doc backtracked but it wouldn't surprise me. I marvel at the constant harangue about the 20% savings from an APT conversion. This is an apples to space shuttles argument. However you want to calculate the 20% savings and that is obscure at best,...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (Brian Winters) — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 17:56:21 GMT
Rubicon:

If you understand compound interest, then you should see why the cascade effect is real. So much so that even Dr. Hermann realized his mistake in a previous post years ago. Inflation would actually be the one time "cost" while APT will constantly occur. As for everyone paying less yet maintaining revenue neutrality, again, I've already addressed that in the thread...

Re: We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (rubicon) — Sun, 20 Jul 2008 12:26:44 GMT

Brian Winters:

I wonder if I could have you update me on a couple of points you make in you recent post to jhadley. If there's a subject I thought was thoroughly dealt with and resolved here it was that of cascading. First, the tax savings with APT more than offsets the fraction of a percent accrued at each transaction. As for the inflation comparison, I agree there is a difference. APT is a one time cost increase, whereas inflation is constantly...

We have a responsibility to move this idea forward

feeds@yuku.com (jhadley) — Tue, 15 Jul 2008 21:37:12 GMT
I am a very concerned business person, I believe everyone of us that knows and understands this tax system, and it's benefits has a responsibility to aide in moving it forward to the mass media, and working to get it discussed in the political arena. This is the perfect time with the economy in the tank and the next election up for grabs. We can work each day to do one thing to advance this idea into the masses of the American public. I have started many discussions about this topic...