- This topic has 1 reply, 9 voices, and was last updated 17 years ago by
.
-
Posts
-
David, I did leave out the private sector, and that was a mistake on my part. Where there is a will (goofing off, goldbricking) there is a way.
After some thought about the flat tax, I can understand those that are least able to pay will have the most in the way of hardship. Having said that, It is possible a graduated flat tax is one solution. I’m certainly not an expert, but a simpler and equitable tax code makes sense.
I can understand why you would favor the present system. It is already in place, and seems to take the burden off the less fortunate or lower income groups. It is somewhat compassionate, but with many people being able to reduce their adjusted gross incomes, many pay less than their fair share, shifting the burden to the middle and lower classes.
I think it was Jefferson who said, and I’ll paraphrase, The republic will stand, till the populous figures out they can vote largess from the public treasury. Special interests are another group that figures they deserve an extra slice of government cheese.
The last bunch I forgot to mention was lobbyists. When are we going to send these miscreants packing, and let them know the government is not for sale? Probably never.
My friend, we have many issues and many challenges. None of what we say here will change things. We have to look toward electing individuals that reflect integrity, honor, duty and compassion. Our process is on its knees at present, and we have to make a stand for real change if we are going to leave an inheritance to our future generations.
Costa Rica is a young democracy, and should hopefully learn from the mistakes other free nations have made. They appear to be more engaged in their processes than we are in the US. It should be a sign they have a healthy environment in which to determine their destiny.
Hmmm . . . A “graduated flat tax”, eh, Alfred? Sounds like a contradiction in terms, I’m afraid. I’d like to hear more about that one.
The ultimate problem that I perceive is that those in power in both the public and private sectors have no incentive whatsoever to relinquish any of their advantages. Would you? Would I? I doubt it. So who or what might be the motivating factor that could turn things around? Do you seriously think that the politicians whom the power elite hire are going to turn on their benefactors? Bill Gates, Warren Buffet and Ted Turner aside, do you know of anyone who has seriously divested him/herself of his advantages? (Have they? I mean really.) Have you ever known of an instance? Can you imagine a likely scenario?
The only thing I can think of that might bring change is some kind of religious turnaround of a type never previously known in human history and unlikely in the future. Only an influence greater than self-interest and instutionalized greed could create an environment in which those who already hold all the cards might give back a few. Rather, I think things will get much worse. I think the western world (not just the United States) is moving rapidly toward a twenty-first century feudalism that only something like the combined Black Plague, a religious reformation, and maybe a catastrophic war will dismantle.
Maybe our salvation lies in the bird flu, some New Age religion and terrorism.
I’m very pessimistic which is why I’ve often said that the best decision I ever made was not to have children.
Your’e scaring me David…:) Hmm..new age religion, try “The power of now” by Eckhart Tolle although it’s not a religion or new age.
Lotus – you should be scared.
These types are now in Costa Rica. They never were before and they will be fostering Big Brother and Big Mother here. Its has become biological with them.
How about eliminate street sweeping for one. All they do is move around the dirt and It is a left over perpetuated by tax dollars that used to go to picking up horse dung in the old days – before income tax (God knows just how people got along before the existence of the federal government – I am surprised the world still exist without it and some members politically correct dung espoused above).
Next – there are too many people in the world. All you nuvo-socialist with you San Francisco values will love this one.
CUT OUT SOCIAL SECURITY – eliminate it. Let em all go back to work and laugh at em for buying into it.
Next – increase the military – and CHARGE OTHER NATIONS FOR PROTECTION.
That is what we do best (military) and we give it away (to people that do not appreciate it – like Ticos). You need to charge big for this – Simply say: Here is the bill, either pay it or develop your own protection system.
This would have one of two effects,
Either countries without the means to develop large militaries would pay – or get invaded by their neighbors. Or they would develop their military – in that case they would be purchasing the weapons from us. And we would not have to spend so much money on protecting the world. How much could we save by cutting the defense budget on “Other Peoples Defense” (OPD) in half and not spending trillion of dollars on war? – enough to rebuild the infrastructure of the entire nation and put Millions of people to work.
Also, I had the distinct pleasure of being in San Diego for the fires.
In the stadium during the evacuation helping with the efforts —- that WERE ALL VOULINTARY —. That right folks – no government involvment, and all the help was donated by private citizens that WOULD NOT wait for the government to act. Are you reading David??? We can simply just not function without Big Mother and Big Brother employing all the Davids of the world. Pathetic point of view.
Fostering ones own survival to compromise the Republic is unpatriotic. But the nuvo socialist have no problem to relinquishing freedom and putting foot baths in airports. Our contry was formed and flourished on survival of the fittest and love of a Christian God. It is the compromising of these core values that continues to ruin us.
When you are weaned on the government teat – it compromises your ability to be resourceful. It also increases your sense of entitlement. I think that government workers foster government mentality (ICE / David M as examples) and retard independence.
Can all people make it without government entitlements? – No.
Should they make it – Again, No.It’s like what the US government considers poverty in the US. Most people who are considered to be living in Poverty in the US have Heat, Running Hot Water, Television are fat and well clothed. You do not see skinny half-dressed hungry people as in other places of the world.
So it’s the entitlement buffs that think all should be regulated and their little rears should be wiped by Big Mother and the weaker among us should be equal (and they are not – they are weaker) that keeps this unrealistic view of “fairness” through Gov entitlements existing. There is nothing fair about the world. It simply is as it is.
I say erase the social cushion – cut the military in half for our defense – increase the military needed to defend other countries – put their brand name on it / while retaining control – And then charge the hell out of them for it. If they cannot pay, like Mexico, charge them in land.
Yeah Diegito – dat a boy, Go get em. That would change things.
Too many people anyways. Need to thin out the world population. Maybe a good plague would save the planet.
If we did this above we would have the strongest and most affluent nation hands down. Then we could consider helping peopole on a case by case basis instead of a blanket give away to the many non-productive leaches that refuse to educate themselves or get off dope and alcohol (legal Dope).
To all those who think we need a kinder gentler US – you pay for it – I will live somewhere else and reduce my tax burden as much as possible. I help my community on a local and individual basis.
David, I think people can save for retirement better if they do it themselves. As far as what we do. When social security started it was only 1% of income. Now its 15%. When it started the life expectancy was about the same age when you were aloud to start collecting your benefit. Now people can start taking it at 62. Life expectancy is almost 80. My solution for the next 30 years is to allow people to collect their benefit but increase the age to at least 72, and teach kids in our government schools to learn to save and invest. The system was never set up as a retirement plan, but a safety net. If you want to retire from a working life you have to save, invest and keep your overhead low. Social Security is a bad plan and now its a wedge between generations. People also need to take care of their parents, they took care of us when we were children. Its not a job for the government.
David, you are a little pessimistic. I know people that will not have children because of the situation here, and I think it is sad. Everyone has their reasons for doing what they do. For you the decision was made, and at least you are content with it.
I don’t like the catastrophic scenarios you present. We may be headed in that direction anyway with the way things are looking. I hope it turns around. We have two children we would like to see have a chance.
The graduated flat tax I had in mind, was one of a two tier system. I realize the one we have in place is graduated, but much to complex, and with too many loopholes. After 65 years old, or under a certain annual income level, the tax would be at one rate, whatever that number happens to be. Above that certain ceiling of income, another rate is fixed and remains constant. All retired seniors over 65 would be on the lower scale. Somewhat of a reward for life’s work. Remember all deductions are eliminated, and the tax is on all income. This may not be the brightest idea, but it is simpler.
Diegito, Very interesting thoughts you have there.
David, by offering only sarcastic suggestions it seems you think it would be difficult in identifying government waste. I do not take such a cynical view. While I agree, one of the challenges is in defining what is waste and what is not, that is where real leadership in government is lacking. All of the essential services you mention are already funded, and have been for years by taxes already being collected. Property taxes, gasoline taxes, sales taxes, and taxes on businesses are typically adequate to fund those services. I would not describe any of the areas you mention as government waste. However, there is no doubt waste within those departments that real leadership could define and stream line.
You mention education. Education of course is not a government waste. I would argue though that education is one department that has some of the biggest abuses of wasteful spending. It’s a travesty that teachers are paid as little as they are and as little money that does gets down to the classroom. I will use the example of California. I believe it was 10 years ago that a study showed that there were eight administrators and staff for every one teacher. Each of those administrators were paid more than the average teacher, had better benefits, including much more lucrative retirement packages. People made the mistake of throwing money at the symptoms in the way of voting for higher taxes supposedly designated for education, or voting for school bond issues supposedly designated for education. What typically has happened is all of that new tax revenue simply goes to new supposedly great ideas that add more administrative and staff that are supposed to cause the problems of no money for the classroom and teachers pay. The new revenue never even makes it down to the teachers pay or the classroom in general. The education department within the State government in California has become a government in it’s self and that just breeds more and more waste. Of course those administrators typically consider themselves more important than anyone in the system below them. That was never more apparent than in the incident a few years back in a northern California district where when the district was given a check for $80,000 for their portion of the revenue from the California Lottery, the school board used the entire $80,000 to remodel a lounge for them selves. Not one dollar went to books, supplies, or anything having to do with the education of their students.
Another huge area of waste is in many of the social programs offered by Federal, State and local governments. Many programs replaced more efficient programs that were run by volunteers, churches, and other non-profit organizations. When you allow government to take over programs, they typically spend more in administrative cost than they do on the actual end results that are supposed to be met. Take the homeless issue. While there is no doubt those that have mental issues and drug and alcohol problems, the more money government throws at the issue of homelessness, the easier it makes it for people to stay in that system. I can speak first hand with having involvement in Santa Cruz, California a mecca of homeless and the programs that support them.
We could discuss endlessly the waste within governments themselves. I never understood why many city, county and state employees where we lived were allowed to take their government car home for the weekend. They technically were supposed to pay for gas they used for personal use, but what most did was fill up on Friday afternoon before leaving for home for the weekend. That is just one of numerous examples of waste that true leadership could address.
Sure there is going to be a lot of toes you have to step on, but tough! The beauty of a society that rewards entrepreneurial efforts is, if there is a need, someone will find a way to fill it and typically more efficiently and cheaper than any government agency is able to.
I don’t buy the argument comparing government waste to waste in the private sector. The glaring difference is that the waste can and will eventually bring down a company that does not address the issue. While that is tragic, at least temporarily for the employees of that company, a more efficient company will step in to fill the gap and in turn bring jobs to replace some that were lost. That is not the case with waste within government. When something isn’t working in government, they never eliminate what isn’t working, they simply raise taxes so they can throw more money at the problem. It really comes down to the basic problem of treating the symptom instead of treating the source of the problem.
While I do not think you could eliminate the personal income tax in one swift move, I do believe if there was honest leadership and massive cutting of the waste in every area, you could not only eliminate the personal income tax completely, but you could also cut other taxes substantially and not effect the essential services that we have to rely on government for. In my humble opinion, it is only the essential services that we should rely on government for anyway.
David,
Unfortunately I reread your post.
Not having children is a selfish decision that limits ones understanding and experience of life. A day without children is like a day without sunshine. Having children has a lot of selfish rewards too. Like living and feeling to the nines. If you have never had children, than you do not know the heights and the lows of life. You have no idea what it truly means to live for something outside of you.
My condolences –
Dk, on a macro level I agree with much of your sentiment. The problem, however, lies in the details. And you have yet to offer us a single detail of what it is you would like to cut. It’s not as easy as you think.
The problem with private social service programs lies in their application. Overall, they tend not to afford their services equally to all comers, and they have few resources when needs mushroom. The church-affiliated charities tend to take care of their own sects first. The ethnic-oriented groups do as well. And so do the political groups. The benefit of governmentally-offered programs is that they are required to serve the entire population that qualifies and, frankly, they do it pretty well.
And, while I generally admire the motivations of volunteers, commitment and discipline are serious problems. I worked virtually full-time on three different volunteer ambulance services in rural Michigan in the 1970s. Maintaining training, getting volunteers to do what was medically required, and keeping them active for long durations is very, very tough. Turning out the church men’s group to paint the parsonage is one thing; running an ongoing service delivery system is very, very different.
And you are certainly correct that taxes might be lowered if government were streamlined, but exactly the same can be said of waste and prices in the private sector. Reduce executive salaries to a level commensurate with those paid in Europe and Asia and there’d be plenty of money left over to reduce retail prices. And, for Pete’s sake, don’t think that there isn’t massive waste and inefficiency in the private sector.
I used to know a foreman at a GM plant in Flint, Michigan. He was taken off the line to devise a system the object of which was to assure that when the assembly workers opened a gross box (144 items) of something provided by one of their suppliers, there would be not fewer than eighty (that’s right, the goal was 80) items inside. Shall I go on?
It’s easy to talk in gross generalities. It’s much tougher to address the details.
I will disagree on several points you make David. First of all, I would disagree that church affiliated charities tend to take care of their own sects first. My experience being involved in church affiliated charities is just the opposite. The vast majority of charities reach out to the community at large and do not descriminate based on religion, race, or anything else. Food banks, clothing exchanges, housing assitance, etc. are all offered through organizations like this and are run much more efficiently and less expensive than any similiar program run by a local, state or federal government.
You seem to want line item details laid out in a business plan format before you will except that cutting government waste is realistic. I have offered plenty of details or suggestions on cutting waste. They are generalizations, but all are glaring examples of wasteful spending. I consider that detail enough for the sake of this conversation. Now if someone wanted to get serious about implementing some of the cuts then we can get down to brass tax about the details of handling each individual situation. To do so simply because you demand it for the sake of trying to win an argument here is a waste of our time. You make the statement “And you have yet to offer us a single detail of what it is you would like to cut”. Perhaps you need to re-read what I wrote. It’s pretty clear the several suggestions I made pointing out waste in our education system, waste in our public service sector, etc. I made just a few suggestions, but I gaurentee you that if people wanted to start jumping in here and listing wasteful spending it would not take long before we had a list of 100’s of things that with careful evaluation, most could be cut in one manner or another and in a lot of cases completely eliminated. It would take hard work and an honest effort from the leadership of anyone that is in office at the time. I do not except your pessimistic view that “It’s not as easy as you think”. No, it really is as easy as just doing it. I will admit the complicated part is in the details of implementing cuts, but that isn’t rocket science either. it just takes getting started and making the effort.
I’m not sure why you keep trying to compare government waste with that in the private sector. The two are completely seperate issues and have absolutely nothing to do with the other. You seem to think that we aren’t allowed to complain about government waste because there is waste in private business. As I previously stated, you have enough waste in private business and it will fail. If we are not a share holder, member of the board or even work for one of those companies, we have no say in how that business is run. The glaring difference here is that when it comes to government wastefull spending we do have a say. I do think a lot of excutive salaries are rediculous, and there is plenty of wasteful spending especially the larger the company becomes, but you have the option to not do business with that company if you feel that strongly about how they run their business. You have the option to not work for that company if you feel that strongly about how they run their business. We dont’ have the option to not have government. Unfortunately it is a neccessary evil. We do have a responsibility to make sure our money is being spent wisely and that no more of our personal income is siphoned from us than should be neccessary for government to provide essential services.
Perhaps that is why GM is in the mess it is in today and Toyota is not. Note to Feds: Please do not model yourself after GM, consult Toyota playbook where 144=144 not 80.
The difference is when private companies detect waste in most cases they sincerely try to attack it, private companies do go bankrupt and cease to exist if they fail to be profitable. Heads of corporations are also accountable to boards that will fire them when performance is down. This system does not exist among the many bureaucrats that are not elected holding the purse strings.“Unfortunately it is a necessary evil.”
“We do have a responsibility to make sure our money is being spent wisely and that no more of our personal income is siphoned from us than should be necessary for government to provide essential services.”
That sums it up. And the smaller the government the less waste.
“I do not except your pessimistic view that “It’s not as easy as you think”. No, it really is as easy as just doing it. I will admit the complicated part is in the details of implementing cuts, but that isn’t rocket science either. it just takes getting started and making the effort.” – well said
They want to maintain the Status Quo because they are some of the least patriotic of all. They cannot be patriotic because patriotism requires them to eliminate as much Gov as possible. Its an inherent conflict.
“I’m not sure why you keep trying to compare government waste with that in the private sector. The two are completely separate issues and have absolutely nothing to do with the other. You seem to think that we aren’t allowed to complain about government waste because there is waste in private business.”
I am sure why he does it – to defend his job. These are attitudes of peopled weaned on the government teat. It is self defeating for them to admit that public government is inefficient and less effective.
My God – just look at their slimy leaders. They get into office and abuse their position. I would venture to say 80% of high level officials abuse their position and the low level officals that are in “power hat” positions flaunt those hats when you deal with them, instead of being human first – they are their position first. This is not normal in CR yet – people are human first – then they are their job title. But as the US culture moves in – and the gov types come here, you see this starting to change.
You will see the “Drone Attitude” worn by those who are their position first – human last, become more prevelant.
DK going off topic a bit here what is the resale market like for lots and homes in the area? It seems the stuff sold by developers gets gobbled up pretty quick, wondering how the secondary market is doing?
The secondary market is actually quite well depending on the product. The well established and well financed projects are selling good because they have a good product and good reputation. That reflects on the good resale market in their projects, especially on finished units. Many of the luxury condo projects in Jaco have an excellent resale record. There is good resale also in the private sector of single family homes when the asking price is a reasonable. That is the key to the misconception that a lot of people make when they say “the market is down”. The market isn’t neccesarily coming down, the asking prices are coming down to a reasonable level. The homes that are being sold though, in almost every instance are selling for a nice profit over what the seller originally purchased it for. The seller may have had to lower their expectation of tripling or quadrupling thier investment. So in reality its the asking price that is down, not the market it’self. The market has slowed somewhat, but it is not really down in my opinion.
Some of the developers of the large tracts of gated community type projects are still selling quite well I think because they still incorporate a fairly high pressure sales approach and in the cases of the large tract developers are still over promising and under delivering. I have heard stories of great profits of 2 and 3 times the original purchase price on resale of lots in these big unfinished developments, but I have yet to actually meet someone that has realized this windfall. I know of at least 5 or 6 lots for sale in the Costa Esterillos project that have been on the market for a year now with no seious inquiries. Of course many of those lots were purchased site unseen, or purchased before anything was done other than dirt roads, so people bought based on the promises of the developers. I think one of the biggest factors that effects the resale market in these types of developments is the lack of progress. It’s a big red flag to people when they drive up and see a beautiful gated entrance, with fountains and nice landscaping that has been there for a year, and walk through the other side of that gate to see mud, gravel, huge rocks, and weeds 3 feet tall growing in the middle of what was once a dirt road. It’s not real promising to potential buyers on the resale market when they know the development has bragged about selling 80% already, or their boast of “sold out in just 4 months”, and then to see the only progress is a beautiful gate and no other progress in a full year. To be somewhat fair, they have finally moved some equipment to the Costa Esterillos site and are moving some dirt around. Someone told me CD told them they could start building their home the first week in January. I do not see that happening, but I do hope for the sake of all of the people that have invested in those types of developments that the company does eventually follow through on all of their promises. I think resale is going to continue to be slow in those types of developments for some time.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
