you people are missing the point, $1.50 compared to the wages, which are pretty low in the states and add to that this video was recorded perhaps more than a decade ago.
How can competition between states be a bad thing? Competing for the best working environment would mean lower taxes, fewer fees and less bureaucracy. Chomsky equates a tax cut to welfare, as if the government taking less is somehow a handout. I don't agree with subsidies, but most businesses don't receive any subsidies they get tax reductions. Exxon still pays an enormous amount in taxes, but they get to reduce their burden by participating in whatever the Gov wants them to.
States need taxes to distribute welfare. Also, tax reductions are subsidies. Taxes are required to maintain the existence of business. Business requires a lot of infrastructure and if they're not paying taxes then they're not paying their fare share.
The reason I differentiate between a tax reduction and subsidies is the lack of understanding by the public. Of course anytime there is incentive to do anything it is a subsidy, but most people think that government is just cutting checks to industries while the industry contributes nothing. This is what people believe. Ask someone on the street if a company that is subsidized pays taxes. 9 of 10 will say no. The word is used to imply something that is false.
Gasoline taxes do not fully fund roads, not even close. I'd write more but I don't need to poke fun at somebody that has adopted the Cato Institute's ideology and is pawning it off as their own revelation.
I don't know how much is spent repairing or building roads every year, but it should be the states responsibility. Our founders set up the republic this way so that states would compete with each other.Just an estimate on revenues last year from gas and diesel tax is around 80 billion. This doesn't include the ridiculous fees trucking companies must pay every year.You didnt answer my questions.
There is only one version of the truth, that is perhaps why Cato and many others sound much the same
Cato is regarded as a joke amongst serious scholars, by the way. 80 billion does not even remotely approach the country's road costs. States cannot fund their road systems independently...it's just too costly. Chomsky makes a good point in the video above, the federal government distributes money to the states and the states misuse the money on roads. If the roads were funded by drivers, driving would be very expensive. Why are trucking fees ridiculous.
I regard the Keynesian scholars and economist that didn't see this crisis coming as the joke. Where do you think that the Federal Government gets their money from. To say the states cannot fund their roadways makes you the joke.The fact that the fed takes from the states and then redistributes back to the state can be nothing but inefficient and wasteful. Perhaps you should start listening to some of the Austrian Economist if you want to learn how things really work..
"Perhaps you should start listening to some of the Austrian Economist if you want to learn how things really work.."
Duh. How can you seriously say that? Anyone who can think his way out of a paper bag understands the Austrian school is totally divorced from reality. That's why no one outside of it takes it seriously. Just take a look at the countries that have the things they advocate and you will see why.
Like privatizing education, plenty of countries have that, like Haiti and in some parts of Africa- see how great it works. Haiti is practically anarcho-capitalist, the government barely provides public education, roads etc, doesn't provide any system of healthcare, fire department etc, even protection of property is largely left to the individual and private companies, the minimum wage is at $2 but not really enforced, hardly any other labor regulaton etc. A real Austrian paradise.
I'm not going to have a pissing match with you. I research for a living, I know what an argument is, I know what the scientific method is and how to apply it to the soft sciences...you should try it sometime. I'm not a keynesian or a neoliberal or in support of any specific set of policies predetermined by a nationalist think tank like Cato. Do yourself a favor and do some thinking independently. Hell, maybe you could even draw your OWN conclusions.
You know the same can be said of you and Chomsky. Maybe you should stop listening to his liberal rhetoric and get some of your own ideas.
But you probably don''t need any help with your worldly experience as a researcher.
Who do you think I listen to at Cato?
My ideas about the way the world works come from years of experience owning businesses, keeping an open mind, and listening to my grandfather and others that did more with their lives than pro researcher. Who do u work for?
The latest stats I could find were from 1994. For all federal state and local roads bridges and highways an estimated 90 billion was spent. I guess that would mean about 110 billion today. Which would be covered by gas and diesel taxes and auto and truck fees, permits, registration etc.
Why do you want the government to get more in taxes? They spend it wisely in your opinion?
"How can competition between states be a bad thing? Competing for the best working environment"
On the contrary. Think that capital has a high mobility while labor (people) do not. Which means that if there is unhindred capital flows between the states, they will all be in competition to attract capital... which means they will compete for who offers the *worst* working conditions for people. They will have to go towards low wages, low benefits, a submissive well disciplined workforce,...
bad labor regulation, low social, educational etc spending, etc etc. That's one thing, the other aspect is that to attract investors they will also have to compete for who's going to offer the most welfare for the rich, plenty of subsidies, advantages and protection for the rich, tightly business controlled governments, etc etc. This won't reduce tax either, it will just shift taxation i.e. less or no taxes for those who can pay them, and more taxes on working people.
chomsky always manages to stay on the facts rather than the theories...devolution does sound like a good idea but looking at all the facts it aint a good idea at present.
Thats not devolution thats allowing a level of ppseudo-national autonomy to a country within the Empire. For other examples look at the Autonomous regions in China.
I cant remember the time of devolution but the SNP are certainly strong at the moment, they have been beating labour on traditional labour seats.
However, chomsky wasn't talking about the UK he was invoking facts on the ground in the US context. I`m not sure what his position would be on the UK, we still have business interests but perhaps not on the same scale as in the US...the political systems are certainly very different.
that's why i like chomsky, he's good at drawing a line between philosophy and facts and figuring out how to reconcile the two... most political philosophers don't care much about how the principals play out in real life at all which is how you get shit like the USSR
you people are missing the point, $1.50 compared to the wages, which are pretty low in the states and add to that this video was recorded perhaps more than a decade ago.
JagjeetMann 2 months ago
I disagree. States like Tennessee are already giving more tax breaks (the biggest break there is). I don't see how devolution can do much more harm.
SUpersaiyajinjerkbag 1 year ago
@SUpersaiyajinjerkbag "It's already bad but I don't see how it could get worse" it can give them more rights
Keinlicht 9 months ago
subway's a dollar 50?? it's like £3 here in London for the sub of the day and if you get a cookie or something that its like £5!
ykoshy 2 years ago
$1.50 for the subway?? that's dirt cheap! try riding the subway in any major european city for a change...
also, can't you buy tickets that last for a full month in the states?
GameDocumentaries 2 years ago
How can competition between states be a bad thing? Competing for the best working environment would mean lower taxes, fewer fees and less bureaucracy. Chomsky equates a tax cut to welfare, as if the government taking less is somehow a handout. I don't agree with subsidies, but most businesses don't receive any subsidies they get tax reductions. Exxon still pays an enormous amount in taxes, but they get to reduce their burden by participating in whatever the Gov wants them to.
jjrglobal 3 years ago
States need taxes to distribute welfare. Also, tax reductions are subsidies. Taxes are required to maintain the existence of business. Business requires a lot of infrastructure and if they're not paying taxes then they're not paying their fare share.
PatrickWJ 2 years ago
The reason I differentiate between a tax reduction and subsidies is the lack of understanding by the public. Of course anytime there is incentive to do anything it is a subsidy, but most people think that government is just cutting checks to industries while the industry contributes nothing. This is what people believe. Ask someone on the street if a company that is subsidized pays taxes. 9 of 10 will say no. The word is used to imply something that is false.
jjrglobal 2 years ago
Define welfare
What infrastructure are you talking about? Roads? Gasoline tax should pay for roads. Besides thats supposed to be done by the state not the fed.
The US has the 2nd highest corporate tax rate in the world. I think they pay their fair share times ten.
All gov is capable of is waste, fraud , and abuse. Why do you want more of it?
jjrglobal 2 years ago
Gasoline taxes do not fully fund roads, not even close. I'd write more but I don't need to poke fun at somebody that has adopted the Cato Institute's ideology and is pawning it off as their own revelation.
PatrickWJ 2 years ago
I don't know how much is spent repairing or building roads every year, but it should be the states responsibility. Our founders set up the republic this way so that states would compete with each other.Just an estimate on revenues last year from gas and diesel tax is around 80 billion. This doesn't include the ridiculous fees trucking companies must pay every year.You didnt answer my questions.
There is only one version of the truth, that is perhaps why Cato and many others sound much the same
jjrglobal 2 years ago
Cato is regarded as a joke amongst serious scholars, by the way. 80 billion does not even remotely approach the country's road costs. States cannot fund their road systems independently...it's just too costly. Chomsky makes a good point in the video above, the federal government distributes money to the states and the states misuse the money on roads. If the roads were funded by drivers, driving would be very expensive. Why are trucking fees ridiculous.
PatrickWJ 2 years ago
I regard the Keynesian scholars and economist that didn't see this crisis coming as the joke. Where do you think that the Federal Government gets their money from. To say the states cannot fund their roadways makes you the joke.The fact that the fed takes from the states and then redistributes back to the state can be nothing but inefficient and wasteful. Perhaps you should start listening to some of the Austrian Economist if you want to learn how things really work..
jjrglobal 2 years ago
"Perhaps you should start listening to some of the Austrian Economist if you want to learn how things really work.."
Duh. How can you seriously say that? Anyone who can think his way out of a paper bag understands the Austrian school is totally divorced from reality. That's why no one outside of it takes it seriously. Just take a look at the countries that have the things they advocate and you will see why.
PavedStones 2 years ago
Like privatizing education, plenty of countries have that, like Haiti and in some parts of Africa- see how great it works. Haiti is practically anarcho-capitalist, the government barely provides public education, roads etc, doesn't provide any system of healthcare, fire department etc, even protection of property is largely left to the individual and private companies, the minimum wage is at $2 but not really enforced, hardly any other labor regulaton etc. A real Austrian paradise.
PavedStones 2 years ago
Haiti is one of the wealthiest place in the world by now, right?
Or allowing corporations to raise private armies- awesome idea! Please join the real world and leave your Austrian bubble
PavedStones 2 years ago
You and your serious scholars need to start looking at actual facts and stop making shit up as you go. It makes you look seriously retarded.
jjrglobal 2 years ago
I'm not going to have a pissing match with you. I research for a living, I know what an argument is, I know what the scientific method is and how to apply it to the soft sciences...you should try it sometime. I'm not a keynesian or a neoliberal or in support of any specific set of policies predetermined by a nationalist think tank like Cato. Do yourself a favor and do some thinking independently. Hell, maybe you could even draw your OWN conclusions.
PatrickWJ 2 years ago
You know the same can be said of you and Chomsky. Maybe you should stop listening to his liberal rhetoric and get some of your own ideas.
But you probably don''t need any help with your worldly experience as a researcher.
Who do you think I listen to at Cato?
My ideas about the way the world works come from years of experience owning businesses, keeping an open mind, and listening to my grandfather and others that did more with their lives than pro researcher. Who do u work for?
jjrglobal 2 years ago
I can't argue with someone as intellectually advanced as yourself. I give up.
PatrickWJ 2 years ago
No, you cant argue because your ideology is fundamentally wrong. This is why people that push socialism and communism always leave an argument.
jjrglobal 2 years ago
The latest stats I could find were from 1994. For all federal state and local roads bridges and highways an estimated 90 billion was spent. I guess that would mean about 110 billion today. Which would be covered by gas and diesel taxes and auto and truck fees, permits, registration etc.
Why do you want the government to get more in taxes? They spend it wisely in your opinion?
jjrglobal 2 years ago
"How can competition between states be a bad thing? Competing for the best working environment"
On the contrary. Think that capital has a high mobility while labor (people) do not. Which means that if there is unhindred capital flows between the states, they will all be in competition to attract capital... which means they will compete for who offers the *worst* working conditions for people. They will have to go towards low wages, low benefits, a submissive well disciplined workforce,...
PavedStones 2 years ago
bad labor regulation, low social, educational etc spending, etc etc. That's one thing, the other aspect is that to attract investors they will also have to compete for who's going to offer the most welfare for the rich, plenty of subsidies, advantages and protection for the rich, tightly business controlled governments, etc etc. This won't reduce tax either, it will just shift taxation i.e. less or no taxes for those who can pay them, and more taxes on working people.
PavedStones 2 years ago
And if the states don't do all that, then the investors destroy the place with capital flight. It's like globalization but on a smaller scale.
PavedStones 2 years ago
You dont seem to realize that the UK iisn't a nationstate its an Empire.
patient0Studios 3 years ago
chomsky always manages to stay on the facts rather than the theories...devolution does sound like a good idea but looking at all the facts it aint a good idea at present.
calvinjones 3 years ago 11
Devolution has worked wonders in Britian with the scottish national parliament and the Welsh regional assembly.
All scottish student tuition fees are now free and curbed support for the SNP party who want independance.
The Welsh now have free medical prescriptions.
Not sure how itd work in the US we're just fine with it.
Oceansize1 3 years ago
Thats not devolution thats allowing a level of ppseudo-national autonomy to a country within the Empire. For other examples look at the Autonomous regions in China.
patient0Studios 3 years ago
do you know where this talk is from?
PatrickWJ 2 years ago
I cant remember the time of devolution but the SNP are certainly strong at the moment, they have been beating labour on traditional labour seats.
However, chomsky wasn't talking about the UK he was invoking facts on the ground in the US context. I`m not sure what his position would be on the UK, we still have business interests but perhaps not on the same scale as in the US...the political systems are certainly very different.
calvinjones 3 years ago
Nothing is free
Unless you have magical powers and can create things effortlessly without using an resources.
jjrglobal 2 years ago
that's why i like chomsky, he's good at drawing a line between philosophy and facts and figuring out how to reconcile the two... most political philosophers don't care much about how the principals play out in real life at all which is how you get shit like the USSR
d3p3ch3mod3 3 years ago