Tax Competition: A Liberalizing Force in the World Economy

[DonalLynchyou]

That gas station is not paying for your schools, infrastructure and Health Care.

Thatcher ruined Britain's manufacturing sector and Reagan (and Bush) smashed through Americas debt ceiling. Thatcher is hated in Britain but Reagan is hailed as a King.

France has amazing public amenities. Germany has a powerful manufacturing. Both are healthier the America. They all have similar GDP per capita but America lost it's triple A rating as they didn't raise their taxes.

[thisisbunk]

Notice he doesn't cover taxation for individuals. That would of course betray his advocation of Reagan and Thatcher. His presentation overall makes a powerful point, but the examples given are fodder for those who see libertarians as corporate defenders instead of the real purpose for which the political philosophy serves: to empower individuals.

[herbs814]

"harmful" tax competition?!? there is no such thing. only spoiled elitist control-freaks would think lower tax rates would ever be "harmful". To honest people, lower taxes are always better.

[mrwombator]

Wow, you really think that it is a failure of free economy? Man, you need to read... (books, not magazines) instead of watching TV.

[grraadd]

Irish leaders were consulting their politics with M.Thatcher also cultural and religious changes made women available as workers what gave the boost for the economy.

Too bad that you can no more see those reforms in UK after years of labour in power. Knowing that Irish look at UK and USA for ideas there is not too bright future for Ireland.

[Fockersnextdoor]

Thank you

[xcon99]

i hate this fucking guy!!!!. he is say let bring down taxes for big companies. you know what happens when u give big companies big tax brakes they get richer and we end up paying more taxes ,as little guys. i am living my life to pay check to pay check and taxes are getting worse

[Theman77779]

xcon99

Not entirely true. First big companies use that to expand or invest in for larger profit which creates more jobs for you and others. Second they invest it to either a) make a better product b) make that same product cheaper c) to give more jobs to more people.

Thanks to these tax breaks you get a job and better + cheaper products. Also keep in mind their big profits are still taxed.

All the government needs to do is cut spending so you and everyone else can benefit.

[Entropy56]

In other words I want the government to tax the other guy's businesses as long as they don't touch mine and cause my employer to have to lay me off.

[Theman77779]

Entropy56

Of course not, I want an equal tax rate on my business as well as yours. It is not fair for you and our costumers if someone pays more and someone else pays less on taxes.

[Entropy56]

Theman, my comment was for xcon. He thinks if we lower taxes on big business then the the rest of us will pay more taxes.

Well, if Democrats are in power that may be true. How about kicking the bastards out and lowering taxes for everyone?

[EstebanLDS]

We have become a very regressive tax nation. This has indeed increased the levels of inequality in the United States. I believe that in order to have a more rational society, more fair tax policies have to be in implemented.

[ourearthhome]

The most powerful thing we could do here is to follow the advice of the maligned 19th century economist, Henry George, and completely untax labor and capital and the products thereof and institute a 100% tax on land values. Everyone understands the enormous benefit of untaxing labor and capital. Not understood is that a tax on land values recovers for society the value society gives to land which is 100% not created or earned by landowners. Nothing a person does is penalized by the land tax.

[dagimp4]

LOL

[adamcm1993]

Why are American taxpayers funding something as useless and parasitic as the OECD?

[coblin]

"Increasing taxes to reduce income inequality is like burning your house to bake a toast."

HAHA, I love this.

[BeatBandit]

100% agree, but the tone is all wrong.

What the OECD is doing is not just anti-American, it's also anti-European, anti-French, anti-German, anti-Chinese, etc.

It's proposing something that, if implemented, would be bad news for everyone.

[yahelc]

(3:52) Celtic is pronounced "Keltic", not "Seltic".

[CrowdPleeza]

Was this video made before Sarkozy won the election in France? Sarkozy has been making tax reforms in France recently.

[fleeced]

I think it was made after - but as he says in the vid: even their right wing politicians are left of the Democrats. This applies to Sarkozy as well.

[jaar2001]

If by tax reform you mean adding new taxes i confirm. Sarkozy is far from being a French Thatcher, he's a socialist rightist.

[gizmosells]

It depends on the country tax system, and too low taxes makes it harder to mass educate the population, and too high taxes creates evasion and economic inefficeincies.

[AlienProphecy]

The school system in the US is a dismal failure in comparison to how much money we pump into it. It would be better for us to work towards privatization, cut taxes so people can afford it, and require that people's children meet some level of education.

[bvbwv3]

Bravo. Clear and to the point.

[95cooks]

It's about time that someone spoke about the economy and taxes in a way that is relevant to our everyday lives. Bravo. I'm sending this around.

[jjamestrouvons]

excellent

[RobbieKing10]

We need more tax competition in Europe. My government is tax loving too much. I send the video to many people.

[rubenerd]

These people subscribed me to their email newsletters without my permission and do not provide a way to opt out. I have to create a separate filter in all my email clients specially for their junk.

Even ignoring their flawed economic logic, the simple fact of the matter is they're nothing but SPAMMERS. Don't give them any of your time.

[SupplySideRules]

Mr rubenerd: I give them a lot of my time. They are really good. And where is the flaw in their logic? Do you know any country that attracted private investment and jobs by asphyxiating the private sector with taxes? Do you know about keynesianism and monetarism failure in the 70s and 80s ?

I know nothing about you being out on a mail list, but if you think their logic is flawed you should prove it and not just talk.

[rubenerd]

I've forwarded this video and messages over to my economics lectures and tutors at my university. The consensus is that they grossly oversimplifies problems and doesn't addresses social issues. All one has to do is research HDI for 5 to see their solution is no silver bullet.

As I thought I made quite clear already, even if their message was good, it makes me think why would they feel the need to resort to such tactics as spamming if they have salient answers to the world's economic problems.

[SupplySideRules]

Mr rubenerd: The Human Developpement Index has little meaning when you compare rich countries. If poverty in asphyxiated by taxes Sweden is measured with US standards, the percentage of poor in Sweden is 3 times the percentage in USA.

You can buy a 1990 Toyota for about $1000, lot of Swedes drive that kind of old wrecks. But lots of US citizens drive -say- $25.000 2007 Toyota RAV4's. But statistics show that all of them own a car.

[SupplySideRules]

In rich countries almost anyone has enough to eat and a TV set and all that, even in no so rich countries it is so. So you must dig much deeper to see the total failure of the european welfare state.

Just bring here your economics professsors so we can discuss. I know no overtaxed country that achieved decent growth without reducing the government.

[SupplySideRules]

The simple reality is that private investment (capital formation) is extremely important. China is 2nd in capital formation, and the economic growth and the decrease in poverty has been absolutely spectacular.

Increasing taxes to reduce income inequality is like burning your house to bake a toast.

The damage is horrific -every income group is much less rich - the gain ridiculously small -less income inequality-

[SupplySideRules]

Daniel Mitchell has done an incredible good job showing what a big failure european welfare states are. If Sweden does not fare so bad it is precisely because it has been reducing government.

The big lie that european welfare states are paradise on earth is falling apart thanks to people like Dan Mitchell that shows us tons of empirical evidence in his blog freedomandprosperity . org/blog/blog . shtml

[AlienProphecy]

If you look at where Sweden was from 1870-1970, they were one of the most prosperous nations on the earth. In 1970, the enormous taxes came in, and since then, they've fallen to 13th or so in the world for per-capita gdp.

[2132343322313]

I barely see any $1000 1990 Toyotas on the street. And I, unlike you, actually don't pull "facts" out of my ass since I happen to live here in Sweden.

I don't disagree with you - but please - don't make facts up.

[SupplySideRules]

Well, THE USA has a much higher standard of living than Sweden,that is what I meant. I never said you ALL were driving $1000 old wrecks. And you drive tons of ugly cheap bikes, that counts a lot too. And Stockholm has very little new buildings, that is obvious form Google Earth. Compare that with ubiquitous skyscrapers all over "no income tax" Florida or in some tax havens like Panama or take a look at Hong Kong, it has much more new skyscrapers than Manhattan.

[SupplySideRules]

Hong Kong with its excellent 15% or 16% flat tax, no capital gains, no dividend tax system got $41 billion in Foreign Direct Investment in 2006 but Capital and the skilled flee Sweden in enormous amounts.

Stockholm looks like a city from the 60s, even ships are old while Hong Kong looks like a city from the future with amazing number of new skyscrapers. And while Sweden has enormously more land than the USA -I think Sweden density is about 20 people per square km- while USA is 40

[SupplySideRules]

US citizens have much bigger houses than swedes. And Hong Kong is one of the most crowded places on earth, it has got 7.000 people by square km, an it still gets $41 in Foreign Direct Investment, more than Brazil and Mexico together.

Cheers

[SupplySideRules]

Before talking about Sweden I saw EVERY photograph in Google Earth. And there are lots of old ugly Volvos in Sweden, much more than in the USA. I have never been to Sweden because it is such an expensive place and it looks boring and OLD OLD OLD but I know the USA. Just read Lonely Planet Europe. Bruce Bawer in New York Tomes wrote about people driving old wrecks in Scandinavia, compared to USA. AnD there is UE vs USA by Timbro that shows with hard statistics how the standard of living is much

[SupplySideRules]

higher in the USA. Sweden is extremely expensive, just read Lonely Planet Europe. I searched YouTube for every Stockholm video before talking and I found 2 or 3 videos about people complaining about the horrible small hotel rooms they got for they money. I am not taking facts out of my ass. And Sweden bikes are REALLY UGLY.

[SupplySideRules]

You know 2132343322313, now there is the internet, and you cannot pretend anymore that Sweden is a role model. While most US people live in beautiful individual houses, in Stockholm most of the people live in apartments, all them looking the same. That is really depressing and the snow and cold makes it even more depressing.

And I doubt very much that swedish girls are more beautiful than brazilian or colombian girls, but you go on bragging about having the most beautiful girls

[SupplySideRules]

When I said "you" I meant "swedes" brag about having the most beautiful women.

[SupplySideRules]

Sorry 2132343322313.See this

After I moved here six years ago, I quickly noticed that Norwegians live more frugally than Americans do. They hang on to old appliances and furniture that we would throw out. And they drive around in wrecks. In 2003, when my partner and I took his teenage brother to New York - his first trip outside of Europe - he stared boggle-eyed at the cars in the Newark Airport parking lot, as mesmerized as Robin Williams in a New York grocery store in "Moscow on the Hudson."

[SupplySideRules]

It is an article by Bruce Bawer called "We're Rich, You're Not. End of Story." in the April 17 2005 New York Times. The article talks about Scandinavia but it is true, it never says that in Sweden people drive old wrecks. But I doubt very much that you drive much better cars than norwegians. What I meant is Human Developpement Statistics become useless once you compare rich countries because they do not make a difference between a $1000 wreck and a $24.000 Toyota RAV4. That was my point.

[SupplySideRules]

It was a mistake saying that you drive lots of $1000 Toyotas because I do not know that for sure. It was a mistake. Sorry. I needed to compare a $24.000 RAV4 with a $1000 1991 Toyota Corolla.

Norway is full of oil, $12000 per person per year when oil was much much cheaper, I doubt very very much that you Swedes have a higher standard of living than norwegians since Norway always show a ridiculously high GDP. It is so high because TAXES are counted 2 times. PPP figures are more reasonable.

[shanklinmike]

I don't get it....are you for supply-side economics or free markets?

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

Most likely for a bit of both. :P

[shanklinmike]

IN all actuality, supply-side economics and free markets are on different ends of the spectrum. Supply-side economics uses central planning while free markets allow economic freedom. Supply-side and demand-side are more closely related to each other than either one is to free markets.

[Surhotchaperchlorome]

True.

In all actuality, SSE and FM's also produce desirable results. They are also the same in that they both promote growth.

As stated in numerous videos on this channel, supply side = more incentive to be productive, as does the free market.

Also, SS typically means lower taxes, which is a component of economic freedom, according to the heritage foundation.

[AlienProphecy]

Why is it that people that are in favor of high taxes always seem so emotional and illogical? Can anyone explain how taking freedom away from people makes them more free?

Can any of you explain how the government is better at making decisions for us than we are ourselves? Evidence, please.

I can't wait until we get our taxes raised in the midst of a recession (presuming the Democrats win). What's the point of having healthcare if you can no longer afford to eat anyhting but Top Ramen?

[SupplySideRules]

Hi AlienProphecy. High Taxes ALREADY are causing a recession / slowdown. Private investment felt because the expectations of Obama winning are very high and then people do not invest as much as they do. The FED also put too high interest rates and that create havoc but now again they are at reasonable levels.

The markets are collapsing because there is a big expectation that Obama will win. Just take a look at intrade an you will see that the higher the expectations that Obama will

[SupplySideRules]

win are, the lowest the markets fall. If the markets fall that means stocks are worth less because people are expecting less profits which means there is less incentive for private investment. So private investment is ALREADY FALLING and causing crisis and helping Obama.

If I was a democrat I would talk continuously about RAISING taxes so investment collapses RIGHT NOW and a crisis happens NOW and republicans are blamed for that democrat caused crisis and so democrats win. Easy.