![]() Econlib Resources
Subscribe to EconLog
XML (Full articles)RDF (Excerpts) Feedburner (One-click subscriptions) Subscribe by author
Bryan CaplanDavid Henderson Alberto Mingardi Scott Sumner Subscribe by email
More
FAQ
(Instructions and more options)
|
TRACKBACKS (3 to date)
TrackBack URL: http://econlog.econlib.org/mt/mt-tb.cgi/137
The author at Random John in a related article titled The abominable Republican tax break strategy writes:
COMMENTS (4 to date)
Jason Ligon writes:
I don't understand the focus on corporate taxation in any event. Isn't it just a de facto tax on the consumer? Why would a politician concerned about a middle class squeeze want to tax Wal Mart to a greater extent? Posted October 8, 2004 8:14 AM
Boonton writes:
The loopholes create a constituency for the tax. If you benefit from a $500,000 loophole then repealing the tax altogether will cost you $500,000 (or at least take away an advantage your competition may not have). It's interesting that Bush campaigned against Gore on the grounds that Gore wanted to give out tax cuts in the form of loopholes rather than blanket rate cuts. Posted October 8, 2004 2:16 PM
Bill Fellers writes:
Taxes are evil, but targeted tax cuts are evil-er! Every targeted tax cut makes winners and losers. If you're going to have a tax system it should be the same for everyone, period. Are all politicians evil, or are they just very, very stupid? Posted October 9, 2004 2:18 AM
Tom Grey - Liberty Dad writes:
Yes, but it doesn't matter (to the constituency) if the repeal would, or would not, be costly -- it is certain that the highly paid lobbyists who were recently successful in gaining any tax break would be against losing it. Posted October 10, 2004 6:44 PM
Comments for this entry
have been closed
|
||||||||
![]() |
![]() |