The government has announced its decision to lead the country into an IMF program. Soon the citizenry will brace for the roll out of phase two, three and the several others that will be required – given the stasis state of recent – to kick start the economy and the social benefits that must be be sustained and improved.
The blogmaster shares the following video to support the job of continuing to create awareness about our current state, the plan and …
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
@ sirfuzzy
Try it and see if it does not work, if it doesn’t switch back to the old method.
++++++++++++++++++++
LOL
Trial and error?
Boss..
In our complex and competitive world,
– even innovative and proactive (but lazy) people are dying.
– even hardworking and productive (but not creative or innovative) people are dying
– shiite… even creative, proactive, hardworking people are dying – if they are unlucky enough to be living in the wrong place at the wrong time…
Trial and error is just an elaborate method of committing national suicide….
The future success of a society is directly linked to the current effectiveness and relevance of its educational system.
…and current success is built upon the WISDOM of past educational effectiveness….
It is clearer now why outsiders control our economy… and why our ass is grass…?
@ Backooful Jack September 2, 2018 7:41 PM
@sirfuzzy That might be bad for greenfield investment.
It seems we are in catch 22. So what do we do? Do we prosper survive or die/suffer?
@ Bush Tea September 2, 2018 7:54 PM
U gine mek me starting drinking; as i could old afford mauby i might live longer than if drinking rum.
The moment u enter this world u are given a death sentence, but it is what u do before u die that matters.
In your opinion where did we go wrong in our educational system? At what point if u can say did we become “unwise”
@sirfuzzy (i was a sheep some years ago; not a sheep anymore) September 2, 2018 6:56 PM
“In my scenario i will only be applying this “revenue tax” on the corporations. ”
++++++++++++++++++
Grenville suggested this but it is fatally flawed. A “revenue tax” is simply another sales tax. Think it through… a tax on revenue is a tax on the corporations sales that will be passed straight on to their customers (you and me) just like every other sales tax in existence. This simply shifts the tax burden to consumers and lets corporations out of paying any tax at all on their profits.
Bush Tea September 2, 2018 7:54 PM
“… even creative, proactive, hardworking people are dying…”
++++++++++++++++++++
This is the good news Bushie… if they are dying it simply means they aren’t dead yet, because as sirfuzzy points out “The moment u enter this world u are given a death sentence…”
To misquote Margaret Mead “Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change Barbados for the better; indeed, it’s the only thing that ever has.”
“The future success of a society is directly linked to the current effectiveness and relevance of its educational system.”
Spot on. Ministry of Education accounts for 1/3 of all civil service salaries (Nearly 300 Million)
If we look at this from a business standpoint, the success or failure of the business will hinge on the performance of this department.
To ensure success it would be mandatory to have performance appraisal and KPIs, audits (both operational and financial), benchmarking against world leaders and a commitment to continual improvement.
Any long term economic plan that does not make reforming education its central issue is doomed
@sirfuzy I dont think it is worth taking a risk doing that in a desperate attempt to get more tax revenue. What we should be focussing on are ways to grow and diversify the economy. Then increased tax revenue ill come. The way to do that is through improving the ease of doing business and broad education system reforms especially relating to technology and creativity. This is why I still support a new, revamped form of EDUtech despite the flaws in the prior version’s implementation.
Broad Education reforms is one of our best ways out besides discovering oil.
@ peterlawrencethompson September 2, 2018 8:14 PM
Forgive me by i cannot see how it makes any difference who pays the bill.
In my scenarios
The govt has a 10% revenue tax rate. 10% rate on dividend and corp tax income. Corp allocates 30% of income for shareholders dividend payments.
Scenario A. Lets assume a corp collects $100.00 in sales and produces $50 in GP and manages a final profit of $10.00, Govt gets 10% thus $1.00. $9.00 remains with corp (shareholders holders get $2.70 and $6.30 retained) Dividend income tax is $0.27
Total income for govt $1.00 + 0.27 = 1.27
Scenario B. Lets assume a corp collects 110.00 in revenues(100 in sales & collects 10.00 in new tax); and produces $50 in GP and manages a final profit of $10.00, $10.00 remains with corp (shareholders get 3.00 and 7.00 retained) Dividend income tax is $0.30
Total income for govt $10.00 + 0.30 = 10.30
Govt should see increased shareholder taxation, and improved revenues. This addition revenue will be spent wisely on the right stuff hopefully.
Tweaks to the system as needed as the tax collection issues are identified. Persona;l incomes brackets may be adjusted to assist here necessary.
Gasoline $ 2.55 cad per litre in Barbados.
Gasoline $ 1.35 cad per litre in Toronto.
@ Backooful Jack September 2, 2018 8:36 PM
Normally the IMF insists that a country improves its tax collection and widens its tax base.
We need to make sure we plugs the holes in the leaky ship also, so if or when growth happens we are collecting our appropriate share of the new tax revenue.
Also how are we going to sustain the new educational thrust that we need to prepare the youth unless we fix the leaky ship etc.
It a holistic approach; but fear, that fear of change will win this battle also unless we persevere to the next level of change.
” The recent revelation by Government’s economic advisors that 1,000 Barbadian workers could be on the breadline is within reason, General Secretary of the Barbados Workers Union (BWU) Toni Moore has said. ”
#MIAgotthis.
@ sirfuzzy
In your opinion where did we go wrong in our educational system?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
By our political jackasses focusing on shiite like ‘co-education’ and the ’11-plus exam’ in the interest of making the academically retarded among us feel less threatened by the Ping Pongs, Jeff Cs and PLTs with book heads.
By people like Dame Billie and Tull getting into micro managing our schools and creating the Ministry of Education shiite system that has systematically neutered our school Principals – replacing them with balls-less pappy shows that mainly inspire the children to be ANYTHING ELSE but like those shiitehounds.
By the asinine policy of mass producing ‘graduates’ at Cave Hill – thus devaluing what it REALLY means to be a university graduate. There jokers with Masters degrees now comfortably work as clerks and messengers for foreigners with good O’levels.
RATHER THAN EXPANDING THE THEN EMBRYONIC SCHEME TO ENCOMPASS GROWING SECTIONS OF THE VARIOUS TALENTS THAT COMPRISE OUR YOUTH.
You know how long Bushie has been calling for 11+ exams in sports, music, arts, dance, manufacturing skills, singing, eating, brass bowlery …. whatever…
We are currently PAYING for this idiocy…
@ PLT
No comment on your 8.14 pm criticism of Grenville’s tax plan. Bushie ALREADY said that you have not thought this through.
In any case, sirfuzzy probably explains your error much better at 9.03 pm.that Bushie could.
@ Hants
Gasoline $ 2.55 cad per litre in Barbados.
Gasoline $ 1.35 cad per litre in Toronto.
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So What??!!
Gasoline is a non renewable, expensive, IMPORTED, environmentally UNFRIENDLY resource.
It should be valued as such – perhaps $10 cad per litre
Then the BB jokers bout here would leverage the technologies available to use green energy.
1,000 Barbadian workers could be on the breadline…
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
So what…!?!
Hard ears yuh won’t hear –
Own way yuh going feel….
Besides…
That is 1000 TO BEGIN with…
When devaluation comes, even those still working (or rather, AT the work place) will be ‘on the bread line…’
Bushie thought that wunna was BEGINNING to grasp the severity of our predicament…
Yuh mean wunna have to wait for the cold water to engulf the Titanic to know that it will be wet…?
@ peterlawrencethompson September 2, 2018 8:14 PM
This is an ideological battle that rages within me.
Quote (This simply shifts the tax burden to consumers and lets corporations out of paying any tax at all on their profits.)
Why should i be paying taxes on the “net profit”? I think that this is wrong. If you are a clean and above board company organisation that follows all the rules and regulations after you have sweated and researched and developed and hired and trained and paid my workers salaries/wages and all the other benefits,etc, why cannot i keep the fruits of my labours.
If u had a pear tree that u had planted and cared for until it reached the age where it bearing fruit. U cared for it for the years before bearing. You purchased the fertiliser, the sprays, the tree doctor visits, the water etc. Now that it bearing your neighbour gine tell u u gotta give me 30% of all the fruit u harvest. Where was he before it bore fruit? Probably spying on me as it developed?
Any modern day organisation will be paying taxes on the inputs that they consume. If you managed to make zero net profit at the end of the FY u will have paid all the taxes that you needed to pay. However if you make $10.00 in profit they will tax u again that is double taxation. This practise has lead the the complexity in our tax codes, the need for large concessions, the rise of picking winners and losers, the incessant need for incentives etc.
Level the playing field; remove the complexity of the tax code; make some of the accountants work for their pay. Let risk takers and investors reap the sweets of the risk they took, lets let investors get decent cash dividends on their shareholdings. Stop the madness that high finance has become. You will probably have more small investors as they will probably be a greater incentive to start a business and thus more smaller investors to invest in the new business and probably more employment and jobs. Thework ethic in Barbados would surely be different in a positive way.
@sirfuzzy (i was a sheep some years ago; not a sheep anymore) September 2, 2018 9:03 PM
“… i cannot see how it makes any difference who pays the bill.”
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
You are right that it does not make a difference to government coffers, but it does make a difference to economic growth. Understand that what you are proposing is basically the 10% NSRL but renamed “revenue tax.” Same disastrous effect on economic growth… same disappointing returns to the treasury when growth stalls… same annoyance to the public who then agitate for wage rises to compensate. The only difference is that you have given $250 million a year back to corporations because you have wiped out corporate income tax, so in total it ends up worse than the NSRL.
@ peterlawrencethompson September 2, 2018 10:15 PM
I suggested the 10% as it is easy for the maths. it can be any figure. It may be a combination. VAT @ 10 (down 7.5%) and Revenue tax at 5%.
That is what we need to look at the possible combination with the VAT rate
@sirfuzzy September 2, 2018 10:25 PM
If you are recommending additional sales taxes to solve the fiscal deficit that is one thing, but don’t confuse things by misnaming it a corporate revenue tax because corporations are not going to be the ones paying it. In addition you would have to justify giving corporations a $250 million tax cut if you remove corporate income taxes.
I want to learn, but I don’t quite understand the concept of “GROWTH” in economic term and in relation to Barbados.
Will someone anyone explain how GROWTH happens in the Barbados economic context
Thanks
@ peterlawrencethompson September 2, 2018 10:32 PM
If i collected 250m in taxes on the sales of corps via a “revenue tax” as opposed to collecting 250M in corp income tax will that be enuff of an explanation.
Btw i dont think that a company should pay income tax on net profits. After all the company probably paid all the taxes necesary on the inputs to make the net profit in the first place.
@sirfuzzy September 2, 2018 10:45 PM
“If i collected 250m in taxes on the sales of corps via a “revenue tax” as opposed to collecting 250M in corp income tax…”
++++++++++++++++++++++
The NSRL, a 10% corporate “revenue tax,” raised about $250 million per year (not the almost $300 million that Sinckler promised). It did not cure the Barbados economy, and most experts concluded that it made the economy worse. If Sinckler had given all that revenue away to corporations by not collecting corporate income tax I think that would have made things even worse because it would make the tax system much more regressive: reliant on taxing poorer people rather than richer ones.
@sirfuzzy September 2, 2018 10:37 PM
Economic growth happens in Barbados only when Barbadians increase the amount of foreign currency that they earn from non Barbadians and repatriate those earnings to Barbados.
@ peterlawrencethompson September 2, 2018 10:59 PM
Thanks Peter do have a good nite
@ PLT
Economic growth is an albino-centric concept that presumes that growth can be infinite in a VERY finite world.
Social and economic progress should be contingent ONLY on growth in national productivity. There is nothing really wrong with periods of zero , or even negative, growth where national productivity has been lagging….as with Barbados.
Can you think of ANY kind of tax that is not ultimately paid by the customers?
Why dismiss a SIMPLE, easily administered sales tax (if you want to call it that) in place of a tax on profits which basically means that corporations pay only TO\KEN taxes – and in many cases, none at all..
The NSRL was not intended to ‘cure’ our economy.
It was a REACTIVE move to bring consumption into line with lagging PRODUCTIVITY…. and it worked.
Just like devaluation will when we reach the point of its inevitability…
This idea that we DESERVE to continue living the big life while producing bare shiite is fatally flawed…
But you know that….
Grenville had some WORKABLE ideas. They were dismissed by theorists such as yourself …which have empowered the usual political suspects with the same old same old….foolishness.
A better plan would have been to BUILD on Grenville’s new thinking…..
Of course he was not very receptive to such critical inputs…
Oh well… here comes the grass….
@Bush Tea
We have had this debate before. Do not agree with a flat tax because it ignores what the gurus refer to as tax incidence. Taxes will impact the population segments in society differently and by extension companies.
Food security is often mentioned as a national concern. What about “energy security”? I have been told that Barbados produces about 30% of it’s petroleum related needs. The oil pumped out of the ground by BNOCL is shipped to Trinidad to be refined. I assume (but could be wrong) that we get most of our gasoline, diesel, aviation fuel etc from Trinidad. Now I am reading that the Trinidad government is shutting down the Petrotrin refinery. How does this affect Barbados?
Economic growth happens in Barbados only when Barbadians increase the amount of foreign currency that they earn from non Barbadians and repatriate those earnings to Barbados.(Quote)
Please explain this theory, or better, say where in the vast literature it can be found?
@Hal stop it, you know this is flawed but you just want to send him further down this path and then take pleasure in belittling him
His proposal makes sense if we want to continue with the flawed model we have built our country around. He is proposing a fix to a symptom but not the root cause. This type of analysis has plagued our country for decades.
According to his definition growth occurred during the Owen Arthur years……… but it has been pointed out ad infinitum that selling land/assets and taking advantage of a weak regulatory financial system to attract offshore company’s and their profits did not constitute growth.
It has been clearly demonstrated that earning foreign exchange does not equal growth.
The model is the problem, it needs to be changed, unfortunately he is an insider who has been taught that the model is stable and viable so long as we keep earning foreign exchange.
Growth needs to me redefined outside of monetary terms. Everyone rails against lawyers on this blog but economist are worse. This American concept of growth is a fallacy and if Barbados is to move forward every economist that subscribes to this religion should be fired and ostracized.
Redguard,
It does not take very much to bluff your way out of serious discussions. BERT is backed by Kevin Greenidge, PhD, Clyde Mascoll, PhD and Avinash Persaud, PhD.
All it takes to get a PhD is to write a reasonable thesis of about 40000 over three years, or about 14000 wds a year, or about 1200 a month, or 38 words a day.
We must stop being deferential to mediocrity. A good book to read is The End of Growth, by Richard Heinberg.
@Redguard
Trying to understand your point of departure to what Peter posted. Barbados is a services economy in the main as presently constructed. Meaning that tourism and services pay our bills i.e. imports. Construction primarily drives the activity in the domestic economy. To Peter’s point, growth measured by a foreign exchange KPI is not unreasonable is it? In the Arthur years note that he borrowed at low/concessionary rates in a boom which masked the fault lines in the economy when external shocks visited us.
@Hal Austin September 3, 2018 3:45 AM
sirfuzzy did not ask for an academic macroeconomic definition of growth in a capitalist economy, he asked “how GROWTH happens in the Barbados economic context” and that is the question I answered succinctly and lucidly.
Barbados is a minuscule part of the global economy and so if we continue to be a part of that global economy our economic growth is inextricably tied to earning more FX. Think this through by imagining economic change that does not involve earning FX… if, for example, we grew our agriculture and agro-processing sector to replace $100 million worth of imported food this would be a good thing in most people’s estimation, but we would have simply have replaced $100 million in import consumption with $100 million in local production and consumption and this would have no effect on growing the GDP. It is only when we export some of that production that GDP grows.
As Bush Tea points out “Economic growth is an albino-centric concept” and I’m not saying that it is how we should be defining our national economic goals. We need more meaningful objectives than growing the GDP.
However, if we wish to grow our GDP then, as Bush Tea explained more extensively in another thread by making the analogy to an extended household that does a lot of internal trading of goods and services, some household members need to go out and earn wages outside the household (FX) if they are going to be able to purchase cars or computers or anything else that they cannot produce with their own hands and raw materials.
@Redguard September 3, 2018 5:13 AM
“According to his definition growth occurred during the Owen Arthur years…”
++++++++++++++++++++
Yes, growth did occur during the Owen Arthur years… it’s a matter of historical record. It is a fact that “selling land/assets and taking advantage of a weak regulatory financial system to attract offshore company’s and their profits” did absolutely produce growth, but that just demonstrates what a poor objective economic growth is.
Do not confuse economic growth with improvement to community well being. Growth is not all that it is cracked up to be… income disparity matters, environmental health matters, educational opportunities matter, psychological and spiritual satisfaction matters, low crime rates matter, etc… and none of these factors are measured in the growth rate of GDP.
Trying to understand your point of departure to what Peter posted. Barbados is a services economy in the main as presently constructed. Meaning that tourism and services pay our bills i.e. imports………(Quote)
@Redfguard,
This is economic buffoonery. Barbados is not a service economy. Tourism and what make up our services sector? List the services. I do not want to discuss the nonsense that passes as our tourism product, as some people call it. We get by on tourism, that is all. The UPP tried talking about international business during the general election, but when challenged drifted in to Bajan speak about international businesses providing jobs for taxi drivers, and restaurants, etc. The Arthur years added to our economic under-performance, there was nothing redeeming about those years.
@Hal Austin September 3, 2018 6:27 AM
Thanks Hal, I will download “The End of Growth” by Richard Heinberg to my Kindle. In turn I recommend “Capitalism Without Capital: The Rise of the Intangible Economy” by Haskel and Westlake for a clear analysis of where and why economic growth does occur in the contemporary global economy.
How could it be nonsense? What category do you locate tourism and international banking? Would you categorize them as agriculture perhaps?
You have the last word.
@Redguard September 3, 2018 5:13 AM
“The model is the problem, it needs to be changed…”
++++++++++++++++++++++++
I agree with you wholeheartedly. Economic growth is defined as increases to the GDP. We need to pursue better measurements of community well being than economic growth. As someone once said “we are more than an economy, we are a society” (like a stopped clock, even Freundel was correct occasionally).
@PLT,
Barbados has under performed the regional and global economies for the last 50 years, and, according to the latest ECLAC, nothing ha changed. Discussing who managed the economy best – Barrow, Adams, Sandiford, St John, Arthur, Thompson and Stuart, I being naïve. We are trying to differentiate between different types of failure.
They have all been prisoner of an economic orthodoxy that is out of place in a modern world. Here is the outstanding economist James K. Galbraith: “Leading active members of today’s economics profession…have formed themselves in to a kind of Politburo for correct economic thinking……they do not re-examine their ideas…They do not consider the possibility of a flaw in their logic or theory….No one loses face, in this club, fore having been wrong. No one is dis-invited from presenting papers at later annual meetings. And still les is anyone from the outside invited in.”
Sound familiar? Think Frank Alleyne; think DeLisle Worrell; think Avinash Persaud; think Kevin Greenidge; add your own list of names, all saying the same thing. Even on BU you get persist4ant nonsense about foreign exchange like a programmed robot.
@David
That concept of growth is unsustainable.
Using forex earned as a KPI is the problem, it is not a true performance indicator. Selling BNTCL or Hilton earns forex does that indicate improved performance?
What about foreign exchange spent?
@SIMPLEsimon
Your handle says it all SIMPLE. You got your head buried not in the sand but up some BLP/DLP ASS.
Individuals like yourself are the PROBLEM and not part of the solution, time to wake up and smell the roses.
Forex is ONE kpi. And no we are not saying that selling national assets is sustainable. We need organic growth.
Oh David, please. When adults are talking please keep quiet and listen. @PLT, I will get a copy of the book recommended. I do not do digital. I like real books.
@ peterlawrencethompson September 2, 2018 11:01 PM
“Ecomomic growth happens in Barbados only when Barbadians increase the amount of foreign currency that they earn from non Barbadians and repatriate those earnings to Barbados.”(Quote)
So if i as a bajan manages to earn forex but never repatriates any of it then Barbados economy will not experience growth? Imagine if big corps and all ad sundry manages to be 45% successful in doing this. With the aim at being 100% successful. As Bushtea says “our ass is grass”. Very little growth can be expected on this island.
I have been under the impression that we are under the wrong economic model. We did not write the model and thus it was not designed for us. But we follow it like a bad religion.
Most economist like disciples of any religion are faithful to their doctrines and dogmas. However, If you got a “bad corrupt religion” your sincerity of belief or faith to it does not necessarily make u a good prophet it just makes u an accomplice.
I think that economics is premised on a flawed assertion. One of the bedrocks of economics is “scarcity”. But my God explicitly says he will provide ALL my needs. In Christian believing Barbados scarcity and faith in God appear to conflict. Thus we claim to believe in God but we worship at the feet of economists and economic theory.
@Bushtea says/feels there is a disconnect in our educational system. Yeah that maybe true; but we often teach the youth what we know to “really true” or what we “believe to be true”(feconomics). We need to connect with God and resist religion in all forms We also need to resign it(religion) he bust bin of history where it came from originally.
Just my take.
It is all in the words…
PLT is using the language of ‘economists’ when he speaks of growth
Because these economists’ (whatever the Hell those are) focus is the dollar, growth to them is represented by an increase in dollars.
Common sense however tells us that if Bushie goes and borrows /begs /steals / wins/ some money tomorrow, the kind of ‘growth’ that this represents is not deserving of association with a human society’s progress towards perfection.
Arthur fabricated ‘growth’ by all kinds of shenanigans – such as inflating land prices – to COW’s benefit while putting his other neighbours in the position of being unable to pay high land taxes and insurance costs…or acquire more land.
He came up with BOLT projects – to hide the true cost of infrastructure from the bottom line by passing these costs on to his grand daughter.
Growth shiite!!! the only thing that grew was our false pride, our indebtedness, and our exposure to shiite.
Here is growth….
Continuous improvement – based on an attitude of doing a bit better every single day… shiite …. every single hour..
It is building on what you have – with hard work, creativity, ingenuity, faith, and imagination.
PRODUCTIVITY produces growth….. not ‘getting money’…. all this produces is a bubble….
and these ALWAYS eventually burst….especially when near to fans…
…and BTW Bushie did not (- and WILL NOT) read any shiite books written by ‘economists’ (whatever the Hell those are…) who do not even know the objective of being alive – far less what constitutes growth, death or even living….
Wuh that would be like reading GP’s book on “God’s plan for the rapture” – when he admits to not knowing how that same God could be a trinity – when one of the three players was dead for a while….
..or Stinkliar’s coming book on ‘managing a small economy’.
…not stinking Bushie…..!!!
LOL
ha ha ha
@Redguard September 3, 2018 7:42 AM
“That concept of growth is unsustainable.”
++++++++++++++++
Economic growth is not a good objective for community development. It may be part of a larger agenda or be a byproduct of sensible development policies, but if we make it an objective we will repeat the distortions that Hal complains about.
Some economists realize that economic growth of GDP is a stupid target to aim at: https://www.weforum.org/agenda/2016/04/five-measures-of-growth-that-are-better-than-gdp/
@David
Earning or increasing forex is an objective or a goal….. this goal is achieved by measuring the performance of relevant sectors and setting KPI’s that will be monitored. Monitoring KPI’s will allow corrective actions to be taken when performance drops.
Earning money for a football team is a goal, but it is not an indicator of performance, look at MAN U.
The goal of a country should not to be to earn foreign exchange, it should be to create and grow an enlightened society where all forms of intelligence are appreciated and celebrated and this intelligence can be channeled for the betterment of the country (earning forex being one if it is a need).
If a country’s goal is to earn foreign exchange, then it should stop calling itself independent.
@Bush Tea September 3, 2018 7:56 AM
“PLT is using the language of ‘economists’ when he speaks of growth…”
+++++++++++++++
I am, but mainly because sirfuzzy asked me a question specifically about economic growth, so that is the question I answered.
I personally think that economic growth is a con game played by the rich against the poor. I think that economics as practiced in capitalist economies is fundamentally evil.
I work toward community development, which is in many ways subversive of “economic development” because community development prioritizes the needs of the many over those of the few.
@ David
Do not agree with a flat tax because it ignores what the gurus refer to as tax incidence
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
LOL
You beginning to sound like the Doc GP now….
You disagree with Bushie because some ‘gurus’ said otherwise….? … like his Trinity believers..?
You need to understand when these gurus are talking shiite boss… (which is mostly…)
…and that Bushie has ‘high-up’ adopted families…
Tax incidence Bushie’s donkey…
ALL TAXES ARE PAID BY CONSUMERS.
Producers and suppliers are only means to the final end of consumption.
So any discussion of ‘equity and balance’ between taxes paid by the various classes is pure shiite talk.
The SIMPLE fact is that a basic, flat tax on sales will be easy to understand, easy to manage, easy to collect, easy to police and easy to administer – and it generates more revenue than ANY OTHER shiite system that we can conceptualise.
But of course if we did that ..what would the economists (whatever the Hell those are) spend their days doing…?
How would the big companies with their dishonest, thieving executives be able to AVOID paying their fair share?
What excuse would the ‘poor man’ (AKA the lazy-ass-brass-bowls) have for not contributing his fair share?
This FLAT system simply makes too much sense; is too easy to implement; produces too many positive benefits; and avoids too many pitfalls …. to be seriously considered by hopeless brass bowls who are intent on sinking their boat…
@Bush Tea September 3, 2018 8:18 AM
“… a basic, flat tax on sales will be easy to understand, easy to manage, easy to collect, easy to police and easy to administer – and it generates more revenue…”
+++++++++++++++++++++++
Absolutely true… just don’t lie about it by calling it a “corporate revenue tax.”
@PLT,
Develop the society and foreign spending will follow. If you had the choice of visiting Paris or Bridgetown, which will you visit. Our economy has been badly managed by all parties. Consider this: the US has a total population of just over 300m, while China has a middle class of about the same. So, China can shift its economic growth from an export-led one to an endogenous, proving the material things the more mature US middle class also have: cars, white goods, televisions, overseas travel, etc. In a smaller way Barbados can do the same.
@Redguard
Agree with your position. Benchmarks be all seen in context. For example BERT will anchor the stabilization project in the GDP measure :-).
@Hal Austin September 3, 2018 8:24 AM
“In a smaller way Barbados can do the same.”
+++++++++++++++++
That’s the problem Hal, Barbados cannot do the same because efficient industrial production requires economies of scale and access to large markets which China has but Barbados does not. We cannot produce consumer goods for Barbadians that can compete with the ones imported from China and we cannot keep the ones from China out without breaking the WTO rules that we have signed on to.
We need to produce intangible goods and services that can get to a world market with the click of a button. We cannot compete in producing material goods so it is a complete waste of public money to try policies based on that illusion.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.