From the Nanny State to the Bully State | Patrick Basham | Cato Institute: Commentary: "Providing health information has not failed. What has failed is the state's expensive attempt to instill fear in the minds of its citizens about many of their dietary and recreational choices. Serious health warnings are diluted when consumers are deluged by 'warnings' about every imaginable item, ingredient, and eventuality. There is already evidence that consumers are confused by warning labels, for example. Clearly, most of these labels should come with their own warning: 'Caution: Bureaucrats at Work'.
Prevention has failed to ward off lifestyle illnesses for the fundamental reason that such illnesses are multifactoral and, therefore, it is clinically impossible to identify the sole cause of a disease. Consider, for instance, the multiplicity of risk factors for both lung cancer and heart disease-thirty for the former and over three hundred for the latter."
"The standards of scientific evidence required to justify public health interventions are far, far higher than those employed by policymakers. Evidence-light, photo-op policymaking often makes for good media coverage and, at times, good politicking, but it rarely makes for good public health."
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
The Rich Can't Pay for ObamaCare | Alan Reynolds | Cato Institute: Commentary
The Rich Can't Pay for ObamaCare | Alan Reynolds | Cato Institute: Commentary: "From past experience, these are just a few of the ways that taxpayers will react to the Obama administration's tax plans:
* Professionals and companies who currently file under the individual income tax as partnerships, LLCs or Subchapter S corporations would form C-corporations to shelter income, because the corporate tax rate would then be lower with fewer arbitrary limits on deductions for costs of earning income.
* Investors who jumped into dividend-paying stocks after 2003 when the tax rate fell to 15% would dump many of those shares in favor of tax-free municipal bonds if the dividend tax went up to 23.8% as planned.
* Faced with a 23.8% capital gains tax, high-income investors would avoid realizing gains in taxable accounts unless they had offsetting losses.
* Faced with a rapid phase-out of deductions and exemptions for reported income above $250,000, any two-earner family in a high-tax state could keep their income below that pain threshold by increasing 401(k) contributions, switching investments into tax-free bond funds, and avoiding the realization of capital gains.
* Faced with numerous tax penalties on added income in general, many two-earner couples would become one-earner couples, early retirement would become far more popular, executives would substitute perks for taxable paychecks, physicians would play more golf, etc.
In short, the evidence is clear that when marginal tax rates go up, the amount of reported incomes goes down."
"If an accurate ETI estimate for the highest incomes is closer to 1.0 than 0.5, as such studies suggest, the administration's intended tax hikes on high-income families will raise virtually no revenue at all. Yet the higher tax rates will harm economic growth through reduced labor effort, thwarted entrepreneurship, and diminished investments in physical and human capital. And that, in turn, means a smaller tax base and less revenue in the future."
* Professionals and companies who currently file under the individual income tax as partnerships, LLCs or Subchapter S corporations would form C-corporations to shelter income, because the corporate tax rate would then be lower with fewer arbitrary limits on deductions for costs of earning income.
* Investors who jumped into dividend-paying stocks after 2003 when the tax rate fell to 15% would dump many of those shares in favor of tax-free municipal bonds if the dividend tax went up to 23.8% as planned.
* Faced with a 23.8% capital gains tax, high-income investors would avoid realizing gains in taxable accounts unless they had offsetting losses.
* Faced with a rapid phase-out of deductions and exemptions for reported income above $250,000, any two-earner family in a high-tax state could keep their income below that pain threshold by increasing 401(k) contributions, switching investments into tax-free bond funds, and avoiding the realization of capital gains.
* Faced with numerous tax penalties on added income in general, many two-earner couples would become one-earner couples, early retirement would become far more popular, executives would substitute perks for taxable paychecks, physicians would play more golf, etc.
In short, the evidence is clear that when marginal tax rates go up, the amount of reported incomes goes down."
"If an accurate ETI estimate for the highest incomes is closer to 1.0 than 0.5, as such studies suggest, the administration's intended tax hikes on high-income families will raise virtually no revenue at all. Yet the higher tax rates will harm economic growth through reduced labor effort, thwarted entrepreneurship, and diminished investments in physical and human capital. And that, in turn, means a smaller tax base and less revenue in the future."
South Korea Needs Better Defense | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary
South Korea Needs Better Defense | Doug Bandow | Cato Institute: Commentary: "As long as 27,000 American personnel remain on station in the ROK, the South is not doing enough militarily."
"Yet the South is capable of defending itself. Over the last 60 years it has been transformed from an authoritarian wreck into a prosperous democratic leader internationally. The ROK's economy ranks 13th in the world. South Korea's GDP is roughly 40 times that of the North. Should it desire to do so, Seoul could spend more than the entire North Korean GDP on defense alone."
"Yet the South is capable of defending itself. Over the last 60 years it has been transformed from an authoritarian wreck into a prosperous democratic leader internationally. The ROK's economy ranks 13th in the world. South Korea's GDP is roughly 40 times that of the North. Should it desire to do so, Seoul could spend more than the entire North Korean GDP on defense alone."
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)