The U.S. economy added more jobs in July than in any
month since February, but the unemployment rate ticked up, signaling that
the U.S. recovery, while not headed for a stall, remains too weak to bring
down high unemployment.
Employers added 163,000 jobs in July, far above the paltry 64,000 they added
in June ...
The report provides the latest evidence that the economy lacks the momentum
to make a dent in the unemployment rate. It takes roughly 100,000 to 120,000
new jobs a month just to keep unemployment from rising, which the economy
failed to do in July.
2-4-8 Response
Millions of Jobs
Now
I expect my representatives in Washington reform the
tax code to create millions of private sector jobs without government
spending; or die trying.
Replacing job killing payroll taxes with a
2% net wealth tax (excluding $15,000 cash and retirement funds) is the tough
medicine needed to realign the economy:
• Typical consumers will have
$100 a week more to spend and stimulate the economy
• Business will have
7 1/2% of payroll to spend on workers
• The wealth tax will create a
healthy negative reinforcement (“use it or loose itâ€) to productive
investment (as opposed to putting gold in a safe, opening a foreign bank
account or buying a third vacation home)
• Social Security and Medicare
will have a sound tax base
• Income tax expenditures (“loopholesâ€) would
be unnecessary and permit the individual tax rate to be lowered to 8% (and
capital gains, estate and gift taxes eliminated).
Together, these
changes stimulate maximum investment in business.
Completing the
perfect tax reform plan would be a 4% value added tax (VAT) on business and
an 8% corporate income tax rate for the most competitive business rates in
the world. Foreign profits would also return to the U.S. without switching
to a territorial tax system.
The wealth gap today is as bad as it was
just before the Great Depression of 1929. As a result of the tax code half
the country now lives on only 1.1% of the wealth (down from 3.6% in 1995).
Our economy cannot be sustained with the luxury markets. Tax reform must
allow broad based consumer demand to stimulate job creation.
Decide
for yourself and let us know at www.TaxNetWealth.com if
you can identify a logical, legal or economic reason why this 2-4-8 Tax
Blend would not produce a sustainable economic recovery as promised.
Eugene Patrick Devany, JD, MPA
Q1
A luxury/wealth/austerity tax is the appropriate way to
allocate scarce resources efficiently during a Great Recession.
A1
There is no scarcity of resources at the top. The
country has over $60 trillion in net wealth. The problem is that 50% of the
country lost most of their wealth as a result of the tax code and they have
just a little less than $600 billion. This is an extreme wealth distribution
or wealth gap.
• Ninety years ago the well-to-do enjoyed a low 25%
tax rate (which was actually reduced to 24% for 1929 – congress never saw
the depression coming).
• Top income tax rates were increased from 24%
to: 63%, 79%, 81%, 88% and finally to 94% in 1944 in order to correct the
economic imbalance.
• The Wealth Gap was ignored by tax reformers (today
half live on only 1.1% of wealth-down from 3.6% in 1995).
• High
unemployment today has not been this bad since the Great Depression of 1929.
• It is worse today because the job killing payroll taxes did not exist
(Social Security began in the1930’s).
Q2
Wouldn't a 2% wealth tax be significantly higher than
all existing wealth taxes? I'm no crazed anti-tax person but a high wealth
tax seems like it would self-evidently cause serious capital flight. You
seem to be suggesting that "productive investment" would be deducted? How
would that be structured?
A2
Others countries use wealth taxes as a surcharge on top
of high progressive income tax rates and most are in the 1% to 1.5% range.
The 2% wealth tax is used to lower the income tax rate to 8% - a much needed
political trade-off for the elimination of $1.1 trillion in tax
expenditures.
The wealth tax is a negative reinforcer along the lines
of the Obama penalty for not having insurance. You are going to pay one way
or the other. The term "productive" use is simply meant to suggest that
ownership of luxury items often do not produce any return on investment. If
you are not earning 2% you are losing money.
Q3
Eugene,
Why don't you just say we should move
to fascism?
Wealth tax? Yeah, that would be great....the blizzard of
legislation while the liberals find ways to exempt themselves. ...like they
do from student loans, social security, etc., etc.
You guys are
starting to come out into the open....
A3
William
Your use of "fascism" and "you guys" and
"liberals" shows your lack of business analysis of the advantages of an 8%
income tax rate. A wise investor would welcome full employment and would
likely want to keep 92% of income and pay 2% of the unconsumed portion for
the next 11 years, than to pay a 30% tax rate each year. The elimination of
capital gains, estate and gift taxes would also save quite a bit to those
who know how to make deals and want to be free to do so.
Enjoy the
Roaring 20's while it lasts.
Q4
A wealth tax ???
Find a new country to live in.
A4
Anthony,
It is not un-American to want to create
millions of jobs without government spending; by replacing the payroll taxes
with a net wealth tax (especially when it lowers the income tax rate to 8%
and rich and poor pay the same rates).
Is a VAT also Un-American?
After all the U.S. is the only developed country in the world without a VAT
(and that is why we have the 35% corporate tax rate).
Q5
Commie
A5
Sforza knows a "Commie"?
Well I did attend Woodstock back in 1968, but actually
I'm just a person open to economic
progress and against tax loopholes.
That is why the Tea Party has grown. You should give it a try.
|