[Vision2020] Cost of Government Day: ATR BIAS?

[Ted Moffett]

Dale, et. al.

Yes, of course, I mentioned this "cost of regulation" in my post regarding 
ATR's figures.

You could make all sorts of claims that government regulation of one aspect 
of life or another drives up the cost of products and services.  If slavery 
was legal, think of how much cheaper products could be built with this very 
inexpensive labor pool!  So we are to include the government
ban on slavery as as a "cost of government?"  Some might include migrant 
workers as "slaves," and the government's toleration of illegal aliens as a 
way of keeping farm labor, and other labor costs, low.

I did not see that ATR presented data on what regulations they considered 
exactly as a "cost of regulation" nor what standards they used to determine 
which regulation they included or not.  You make the assertion the standard 
is "requirements consumers are not clamoring for."  Which just begs the 
question as to what these are determined by who?

You could throw the minimum wage and child labor laws into the equation as 
government regulation of business that drives up the costs of products and 
services.

The ATR report mentions the new laws regulating cigarettes smoked at various 
businesses as a cost of regulation, doing financial damage to bars, 
restaurants, etc.  But do they include the savings that may be gained in 
lowering of health care costs for medical insurance with fewer people 
becoming sick from tobacco related illnesses?  I did not see any such 
admission in their report (unless I missed it) raising a major question 
regarding their computations of the real overall cost of this regulation to 
consumers.

And the question of whether or not ATR averaged the high tax rates of the 
wealthy into their equation to figure the number of days an "average 
American worker" works in a year to pay their "cost of government" has not 
been answered.

The tax figures given from the Tax Foundation focused on those who are truly 
"average American workers," median one and two income families.

You questioned my assertion that ATR might be biased suggesting I was using 
"argument ad hominem."  I am now wondering if you really understand fully 
whether or not ATR's figures are misleading or biased.  It does not appear 
you understand fully how ATR arrives at their figures or if their methods 
are fair and accurate.

Ted

>From: "Dale Courtney" <dale@courtneys.us>
>To: <vision2020@moscow.com>
>Subject: RE: [Vision2020] Cost of Government Day: ATR BIAS?
>Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2003 17:07:52 -0700
>
>Ted writes:
> > I think ATR (Americans for Tax Reform) provides misleading
> > figures.  I
> > present data from the Tax Foundation below to support my claim.
> >
> > http://www.taxfoundation.org
> >
> > See below for an brief analysis of different conclusions than
> > ATR on percent
> > of government costs paid out of their income by the "average American
> > worker" (ATRs wording) based on a brief excerpt from a study
> > by the Tax
> > Foundation.
>
>Ted,
>
>I think the difference occurs because the ATR includes *legislated*
>requirements that we have to pay for that consumers are not clamoring for.
>ATR *claims* that Federal and State regulations add another 16.9% to our
>government overhead.
>
>Now, we can debate whether all those regulations are good for us or not; 
>but
>I don't think that we can dismiss them as not increasing the cost of
>products we buy.
>
>Best,
>Dale
>
>
>_____________________________________________________
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>                http://www.fsr.net
>           mailto:Vision2020@moscow.com
>ŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻŻ
a

_________________________________________________________________
Protect your PC - get McAfee.com VirusScan Online  
http://clinic.mcafee.com/clinic/ibuy/campaign.asp?cid=3963