We are working on a brand new version of the game! If you want to stay informed, read our blog and register for our mailing list.
Bill: Tax Burden
Details
Submitted by[?]: Darnussian Strength Initiative
Status[?]: passed
Votes: This is an ordinary bill. It requires more yes votes than no votes. This bill will not pass any sooner than the deadline.
Voting deadline: December 2150
Description[?]:
| . |
Proposals
Article 1
Proposal[?] to change Tax percentage of the profit made by corporations.
Old value:: 25
Current: 0
Proposed: 15
Article 2
Proposal[?] to change Sales tax on luxury goods.
Old value:: 5
Current: 40
Proposed: 10
Debate
These messages have been posted to debate on this bill:
| Date | 17:32:32, December 03, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | no, the compensation is too low. And why should the burden be with the consumer anyway? |
| Date | 17:40:02, December 03, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | Urmmm, that would damage the ecomony, since it would burder the consumer and they would want to go and buy elsewhere and it might even cause a braindrain! This is sherieff of Nottingham territory, robbing from the poor to give to the rich, Besides, with this the spending will need to be changed, to aviod the disaster that happend last time when the Right wing in Darnussia lowevered taxes and increased spending, causing a deficit (though some blame can be placed on the games engine.) But yea, this will hurt the ecomony, and I, at leaset, want a strong ecomony. |
| Date | 20:02:33, December 03, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | To the CPD: There is a constant flow of labor and goods within our economy. Labor flows to the corporation from the workers, in turn goods flow from the corporation to the workers. To have a healthy flow of labor and goods, there must be a balance in the taxation of each end. At present we have full burden placed on the corporate end which is creating a bottleneck effect on the flow. Corporate spending is greatly reduced by the high taxes placed on them, so they are buying less labor, and in turn putting out less goods. So while the labor force is benefitting from lower taxes, they are also suffering higher unemployment and more expensive goods. To the SDP: The price of goods would drop dramatically with increased production from the corporations. So this worry that individuals would begin to shop out of the country is unfounded. I also don't understand the idea that this is robbing the poor to give to the rich. I have explained why the consumer, regardless of tax structure absorbs a sizable portion of the tax burden, and this bill does nothing to change who receives the benefits of government action. Furthermore, you should note that this is an increase in the taxation on luxury items, and the tax on essential items remains at zero. As for the budget, it is defunct as it is and needs to be reworked anyway. |
| Date | 20:20:14, December 03, 2005 CET | From | Vuloch Ca Korzia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | CA, you misunderstand the contentions. The current tax of 25% (in my opinion too low) is on the profit of corporations. Remove the tax and you remove the potential for the redistribution of wealth ... and then the actions you propose will not benefit the workers in any way, shape or form. In essense this will result in a massive cut in the quality of public services. |
| Date | 21:53:07, December 03, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | Non-sequitor Show me why lowering the tax for corporations and increasing the sales tax results in any of the consequences you mentioned. I stated that this has nothing to do with what government spends its money on, and that it will actually help the workforce. I went one step beyond you and explained just how these things would come about. |
| Date | 02:22:57, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | Looks like LBSC hasn't learnt from the economic disaster he caused before, giving Darnussia a huge deficit which CED and myself had to sort out! This policy will again lead to a "hole in the budget" ....maybe I should dig out the parody song I parodied! |
| Date | 07:20:22, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Socialist Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | How 'bout . . . no? Our economy will certainly decline if this bill passes. |
| Date | 07:50:25, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | You guys make compelling arguments. Do you actually have a reason to make these statements or are you just following a baseless hatred for corporations? So far everyone is telling me that this will destroy our economy, yet no one is giving me a reason why. OOC: And I am not the LBSC, I was the Anarcho-Capitalist Front of Gaduridos, but I switched nations due to a lack of variety in the parties there. I served as the financial minister there, and operated a balanced budget with no income tax, no sales tax on essential goods. |
| Date | 07:56:58, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | Also, if you would turn your attention to the budget information: Our present revenue at a 25% corporation tax equals 14B DAR. Our government surplus is 53B DAR. This means that a complete elimination of the corporate tax would only amount to a 1/3 reduction in the total surplus. Then take into account that the doubling of the luxury tax would create 14B DAR in tax revenue, and you will see that our budget will remain unaffected. |
| Date | 08:00:42, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | OOC: Even though I am not the LBSC, I am a retard. I didn't realize that there was an LBSC on here and thought you were referring to me when you mentioned forgetting the economic disaster. I apologize. |
| Date | 12:11:56, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Libertarian party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | If you place the burden on the consumer, they will consume less and it will never compensate the amnount of tax-loss. Thats why i'll vote no. |
| Date | 16:34:07, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Vuloch Ca Korzia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | So, in other words, you agree that this measure will actually result in a fall in the surplus? |
| Date | 17:04:10, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | To the CPD, by lowering the taxes corporations pay on their profits, they will be willing to accept less revenue from their operations. This means that they will take on more investments, hire more workers, and offer cheaper goods. So the burden on the consumer will be lessened for essential goods, and the same on luxury goods. To Korzia, no if you would have read my post fully you would see that I don't. I stated that an elimination of the corporate tax would lower revenue 14B DAR, with a cut of 10% like proposed, revenue would be cut roughly 6B DAR. But with the 5% increase in luxury sales tax, tax revenue will increase 14B DAR. So in summary, the drop in corporative tax would equal 6B. The rise in luxury sales tax would equal 14B, so the net effect would be to increase the tax revenue by 8B. I am proposing a budget increase of 8B DAR by shifting taxation from essential goods to luxury goods. |
| Date | 18:05:58, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Chinkopodian Economic Democrats | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | CA's argument is convincing. |
| Date | 18:24:54, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Social Democratic Party of Darnussia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | Bugger the economy then CED, Your an idiot |
| Date | 18:47:33, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Vuloch Ca Korzia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | A fine argument, but you are aware that there is no tax on the production of essential goods and that the current tax is not on production costs but on profit? |
| Date | 18:47:36, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Vuloch Ca Korzia | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | A fine argument, but you are aware that there is no tax on the production of essential goods and that the current tax is not on production costs but on profit? |
| Date | 19:53:45, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Darnussian Strength Initiative | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | I would say that any tax on profit is a tax on production costs, as corporations are going to have a required profit included in the costs of production anyway, and the lack of tax on the essential goods is the point. To the CED, thank you for not dismissing my reasonable arguments as the ranting of a madman. You can see by the DARNS' response to your vote that they are not seeking a reasonable discussion on this issue. They simply hold a hatred for corporations and seek to harm them no matter what harm it brings to the consumers and workers as well. |
| Date | 23:54:00, December 04, 2005 CET | From | Progressive Democratic Alliance | To | Debating the Tax Burden |
| Message | We think a 10% taxation on luxury goods is outrageously high so we will not support this bill as a 5% tax is sufficient and able for the consumers of the nation. Remember, if we raise taxes or create more taxes, less people will consume and buy products which will slow down the capitalist economy of not just our nation but of the world. If we set such a high tax, many might even leave the country to dodge high taxes. |
subscribe to this discussion - unsubscribe
Voting
| Vote | Seats | |||||
| yes |
Total Seats: 105 | |||||
| no |
Total Seats: 96 | |||||
| abstain | Total Seats: 0 |
| Random fact: "Kubrk" is a Jelbic word that has the colloquial meaning "old man" or "geezer". |
| Random quote: "In America today, you can murder land for private profit. You can leave the corpse for all to see, and nobody calls the cops." - Paul Brooks |