[Vision2020] IBTA Decisions

[Taro Tanaka]

Art Deco writes:

[[ Whenever one person, a group of persons, or an organization is given 
preferential tax treatment, the rest of us must make up the difference with 
our tax payments. ]]

Putting aside for a moment whether this claim is actually true, isn't it an 
irrelevant point? Nobody is being given preferential tax treatment in this 
case. The part that is being used for business is fairly taxed, and the part 
that is being used for non-profit is fairly exempted from tax.

(One could also make the counter-claim that since, on the one hand, most 
money paid in taxes is wasted, while on the other hand money remaining 
outside the coffers of government is mostly NOT wasted, everyone in society 
benefits when money collected in taxes is minimized rather than maximized.)

[[ I resent having to pay for the Hertiage Foundation pursuance of their 
goals and I am sure that there are members of the Heritage Foundation that 
resent being forced to pay for the activities of the Brookings Institute . . 
. This is a clear violation of personal freedom to choose what 
ideals/activities to support with our own money. ]]

There is a rather convoluted logic at work in the above statement, but the 
best way to deal with the perceived problem is to reduce government taxaton 
across the board. The total tax burden on all of society could be slashed by 
more than 75% and the government would still be collecting more money than 
it needs to accomplish the legitimate functions of government.

[[ we as citizens and they as legislators are basically ignorant of the cost 
to each taxpayer of these gifts and the financial and ethical impact on 
those not so gifted. ]]

Again, there is some very convoluted reasoning at work in the above 
statement. It is like a thief deciding not to steal my wallet and calling it 
a "gift" to me from all the other people that he is going to steal money 
from. The fact remains that the net cost to the taxpayer of these "gifts" is 
negative. And what on earth could conceivably be the "ETHICAL IMPACT on 
those not so gifted?" (Emphasis mine.) Are the "gifts" causing "those not so 
gifted" to be full of envy?

[[ A start to curing . . . would be . . . to determine . . . the amount . . 
. lost  ]]

This is inherently unknowable with any sort of accuracy, because any 
accurate calculation would also have to take into acount the resulting 
GAINS.

That entire post was so rife with fallacious, shallow economic thinking that 
as an antidote I can only urge the author to go read Henry Hazlitt's 
"Economics in One Lesson," which starts at the following link:

http://jim.com/econ/chap01p1.html

See especially the section "Public Works Mean Taxes." But the entire brief 
work is arguably the single best piece of economic writing ever, and I 
cannot recommend it highly enough.

-- Princess Sushitushi

_________________________________________________________________
Express yourself instantly with MSN Messenger! Download today it's FREE! 
http://messenger.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200471ave/direct/01/