Comments on: How to turn your kids into lifelong tax cutters

By: Jon

Jon — Sat, 06 Mar 2010 23:14:36 +0000

That's what the candy trick is teaching your kids on a visceral level. The notion that taxes aren't necessarily a "patriotic duty" is something which too few people seem to be aware of. Otherwise there wouldn't be so many eager to volunteer other people's labor to pay for their entitlements

Reply - Quote

By: ark ocağı

ark ocağı — Tue, 02 Mar 2010 13:24:40 +0000

very nice..

thanks

Reply – Quote

By: throughput

throughput — Thu, 12 Nov 2009 19:21:05 +0000

After we take our third, we take an additional 20% of the remainder. We tell them in exchange that when they are 70 years old we will give them one piece of candy a day for the rest of their life. The repeatedly point out that we will be dead and that the promise is not worth very much.......I can hardly wait until they get their first job and they ask the FICA question so we can tie it all together, but with the teen unemployment rate upwards of 35%, I don't think they will get a chance to find a job.

Reply - Quote

By: TimH

TimH — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 22:39:30 +0000

with a partial h/t to Bob in an earlier comment....I see a downside risk to this exercise. After a couple years, the kids could be brainwashed into thinking this confiscation exercise is somehow out of their control, non-negotiable, and therefore should be accepted as normal. Worse, they may just become happy with the 2/3 they are "allowed" to keep, and thank me and my wife for our kindness at that. How healthy is any conversation that goes along the lines of "sure we tax 45%, but look at how much we allow them to keep?"

Reply - Quote

By: Sofia

Sofia — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:57:37 +0000

Nice site you have a very nice blog you have discovered a new am your follower: D

Reply - Quote

By: Brooks

Brooks — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 18:55:52 +0000

Thanks for pointing out those distinctions to folks here. I think most people on echo chamber blogs of left or right want to see everything and everyone in terms of black or white, good or bad, "us" or "them". So they reflexively see a "liberal" whose "last name is Obama" when I say that cutting taxes would only make sense if sufficiently aligned with spending levels that are (1) politically plausible (which I say is not the case, meaning that cutting taxes makes our long-term fiscal imbalance much worse and thus will cause much greater eventual pain, including higher taxes) and (2) that advocates themselves would actually consider desirable if well-informed on the impact, and if I point out that most economists and other budget experts seem to reject strong version of "starve the beast"/"Don't feed the beast" ("strong version" meaning equating a full dollar of incremental spending with a dollar of incremental revenues). And yes, discussion/debate of the degree to which spending responds to levels of revenues is relevant, legitimate and important, as is negotiation strategy and approach to implementation. My overall conclusion is that refusing to consider any tax increases (let alone insisting on tax cuts) -- even as part of a "Grand Compromise" (including cuts in projected spending) of any sort -- represents an irresponsible game of "chicken", with a bad risk/reward ratio even with "reward" defined by the vast majority of "conservatives" in terms of ultimate impact on spending (and spending allocation -- e.g., social vs. Defense), taxation, debt-to-GDP, GDP itself, etc. But that's a discussion/debate I'm glad to have, and you and I have had some good dialogue on that topic over at EconomistMom.

Reply - cuts<\/i>) -- even as part of a "Grand Compromise" (including cuts in projected spending) of any sort -- represents an irresponsible game of "chicken", with a bad risk\/reward ratio even with "reward" defined by the vast majority of "conservatives" in terms of ultimate impact on spending (and spending allocation -- e.g., social vs. Defense), taxation, debt-to-GDP, GDP itself, etc. But that's a discussion\/debate I'm glad to have, and you and I have had some good dialogue on that topic over at EconomistMom. '); return false;">Quote

By: Marty

Marty — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 15:58:51 +0000

Let's not go confusing charity with expropriation.

Reply - Quote

By: How Economists Celebrate Halloween (Late Halloween Post!) « The Marginalist:

Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:14:07 +0000

[...] from Keith Hennessey: My former White House colleague Tevi Troy suggested the following method for turning children into [...]

Reply - Quote

By: MAH

MAH — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 03:08:26 +0000

Hey Brooks is you last name Obama? It is simple. Damn Simple. Too many self appointed intellectuals spewing out smoke screens.