Alcohol 'more dangerous than heroin'

[Skipper]

however I guess that could be achieved via an income tax if the idea you propose has a sliding scale, increasing for higher earners?

Erm...I think you should look up what a "flat tax" is.

All right smart arse haha

Nah, I'm more on the side of those who can, paying more. Not the amounts they do now though as I don't think it's right to be taking up to 50% of what someone earns just because they have been successful, chances are if they are making so much they are playing a large part in creating further jobs anyway.

And I'm all for less government. One of the reasons I hated labour so much was their insistence on becoming a part of every aspect of everyone's lives.

[Autumnlicious]

And I'm all for less government. One of the reasons I hated labour so much was their insistence on becoming a part of every aspect of everyone's lives.

Ideally, I think tax laws should be invasive enough to accurately track the flow of money such that half of ones money goes to the local economy, and then merely tax the businesses for services.

As I see it, an economy with constant cash flow is a rich and productive economy, with the maximum equality possible without resorting to taking money from the individual. We should encourage more spending and more investment in local innovation and industry - thus the industry should be taxed to support the consumer (after all, they're supporting the industry with their wallet).

We'd see a feedback system, with people always willing to invest money in an economy.

Tax growth and encourage spending to promote growth.

[Scarlet Pimpernel]

One of the effects of criminalising drugs is that we deny ourselves, society, their benevolent, nay, miraculous effects:

http://scienceblog.com/52862/marijuana-l...tage-aids/

That's downright stupid!

[theVOID]

Ideally, I think tax laws should be invasive enough to accurately track the flow of money such that half of ones money goes to the local economy, and then merely tax the businesses for services.

A sales tax is by far the most efficient method of achieving that, half of all sales tax revenue staying local and the rest being at a national level, plus it would be the quickest way to eliminate the excessive centralization of powers.

As I see it, an economy with constant cash flow is a rich and productive economy

Not necessarily, it is often the case that a strong cash flow is associated with an unproductive and thus indebted economy. The movement of money does not it's self create value and thus does not enrich lives, it is only certain applications of money that achieves that end.

with the maximum equality possible without resorting to taking money from the individual.

Care to explain this conclusion a little more?

We should encourage more spending and more investment in local innovation and industry - thus the industry should be taxed to support the consumer (after all, they're supporting the industry with their wallet).

The best way to support more local investment is to give individuals more purchasing power, eliminating centralized power in the process.

The consumer does not support the industry with their wallets any more than the industry supports the consumer with their goods and services, people willingly make these exchanges precisely because of the mutual benefit, was that not the case there would be no transactions - Taxing the producer to fund the consumer only creates a dangerous shift in balance, encouraging more consumption at the expense of production - this is precisely the major contributing factor behind the economic failures in so many nations at this time, including your own.

Tax growth and encourage spending to promote growth.

There is so much wrong with that notion that it's hard to know where to begin...

For starters, spending does not lead to growth, nor does it diminish it, it is merely an exchange of wealth - in totality there is neither an increase nor decrease of the sum wealth available, only an exchange of resources. The growth happens not from the person who spends the money but from the person who received and saved or invested it, both of which are the very antithesis of spending. Without investments (the most efficient form of which comes from savings) there would be now growth, only decay as existing value is consumed.