Tax Code That Encourages Manufacturing and Savings

[Simfan34]

Some ideas:

Lowever the top corporate rate to 20% while cutting out loopholes.
Cut the top rate by 5% while phasing out most of the deductions and loopholes.
Tax capital gains for those earning more than $150,000 at the same rate as regular income.
Institute a 27.5% tax deduction for income sent to a savings account of up to $100,000 per year.
New tax credit for the opening and maintainance of manufacturing and innovative industries. Higher credits for heavy industry.
A tax credit for the employment of indviduals in those industries, with a higher credit for jobs in STEM-related fields.
75% tax credit for private infrastructural spending. Income invested in the to-be-created National Infrastructure Bank is not taxed.
110% tax deduction for the start-up costs of a manufacturer or researcher.
Impose a 10% VAT. People earning under $40,000 will be eligible for reimbursment of VAT up to the first 5% of their income, first 15% if under $25,000.

Much, much more is needed to stimulate spending and manufacturing, but this is what pertains to the tax code. I'm more than willing to elaborate.

[Simfan34]

Some ideas:

Lowever the top corporate rate to 20% while cutting out loopholes.
Cut the top rate by 5% while phasing out most of the deductions and loopholes.
Tax capital gains for those earning more than $150,000 at the same rate as regular income.
Institute a 27.5% tax deduction for income sent to a savings account of up to $100,000 per year.
New tax credit for the opening and maintainance of manufacturing and innovative industries. Higher credits for heavy industry.
A tax credit for the employment of indviduals in those industries, with a higher credit for jobs in STEM-related fields.
75% tax credit for private infrastructural spending. Income invested in the to-be-created National Infrastructure Bank is not taxed.
110% tax deduction for the start-up costs of a manufacturer or researcher.
Impose a 10% VAT. People earning under $40,000 will be eligible for reimbursment of VAT up to the first 5% of their income, first 15% if under $25,000.

Much, much more is needed to stimulate spending and manufacturing, but this is what pertains to the tax code. I'm more than willing to elaborate.

Whenever you're ready, Simfan....   

Over the weekend, sorry.... I am quite busy.

[Simfan34]

Some ideas:

Lowever the top corporate rate to 20% while cutting out loopholes.
Cut the top rate by 5% while phasing out most of the deductions and loopholes.
Tax capital gains for those earning more than $150,000 at the same rate as regular income.
Institute a 27.5% tax deduction for income sent to a savings account of up to $100,000 per year.
New tax credit for the opening and maintainance of manufacturing and innovative industries. Higher credits for heavy industry.
A tax credit for the employment of indviduals in those industries, with a higher credit for jobs in STEM-related fields.
75% tax credit for private infrastructural spending. Income invested in the to-be-created National Infrastructure Bank is not taxed.
110% tax deduction for the start-up costs of a manufacturer or researcher.
Impose a 10% VAT. People earning under $40,000 will be eligible for reimbursment of VAT up to the first 5% of their income, first 15% if under $25,000.

Much, much more is needed to stimulate spending and manufacturing, but this is what pertains to the tax code. I'm more than willing to elaborate.

Whenever you're ready, Simfan....   

Over the weekend, sorry.... I am quite busy.

Are you still busy?  I am keen to see what you have in mind... 

I'll have it tomorrow! Been busy, and reading up.

[Simfan34]

The beginning:

I have never found the idea of a "service economy" even mildly palatable. Service economy? Who are we servicing- ourselves? With what money? People abroad? They can go to cheaper countries. The idea of a "service economy" is a fallacy- if we lose that cornerstone of any economy- manufacturing, particularly heavy industry- the need to provide services will eventually diminish and those in need of services (i.e., emerging economies) will provide them for ourselves.

Even if we accept the Luddite fallacy as a... fallacy, we still have to face those jobs lost to technology, which in the coming years will even beyond our comprehension of what a machine or computer could do: waitstaff, janitors, even mid-level management. With the ever quickening pace of technological innovation, it will be one of the great challenges of the 21st century to teach or re-train people with the skills necessary to compete in the job market at a rate to keep up with innovation. That is to say, have them learn the skills before they're rendered redundant by the latest widget or whatsit.

With an increasing proportion of the population holding redundant or soon-to-be-redundant jobs, more and more of whatever wealth that remains in the country will be concentrated in managerial positions, which will require ever higher amounts of education (already, I know some companies that seek applicants with a BS, MS, and MBA). Who's most likely to be educated? The children of the wealthy. These jobs that require advanced degrees are more so jobs that involve "thinking"- and so there does exist an window for education for jobs that will not be redundant- and predicting the "grunt jobs" of the future that will not be done by algorithms.

Many Americans believe that the rise of China, as well as other so-called “emerging economies” such as Russia, South Korea, India, and Brazil, will lead to challenges to American economic growth and continued prosperity, but many more point to unrealized fears of the United States being eclipsed in economic might and global preeminence by the Soviet Union and Japan. What the new challengers have in common is population strength- both India and China have populations over a billion, as compared to Japan and the Soviet Union, which both had populations near 150 million, and the United States, with 300 million people. Demographics are on the emerging economies’ side, and the United States will have to effectively compete in order to retain its position in the world, which is rapidly eroding.

Essential to this position is the economy, and essential to the economy is manufacturing. For decades now American manufacturing has weakened, and so the cornerstone of the economy has been eroded as. Many still fail to realize this. If the United States intends to compete in the 21st century, much remain the world’s most important economy, it will have to develop a clear, developed, and effective policy towards manufacturing. Attitudes must change. People must no longer regard manufacturing as an artifact of the past, something that the United States can do without. Without such changes, the decline and demise of American manufacturing will soon become the decline and demise of America.

[Simfan34]

The beginning:

I have never found the idea of a "service economy" even mildly palatable....

Nice essay, but do you have any specifics? 

This is just the beginning... setting the tone.

[Simfan34]

Wow, I never got back to this. I shall.