Comments on: Links 1/5/08 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html Sun, 22 Nov 2009 18:20:39 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.4 hourly 1 By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31317 Anonymous Tue, 06 Jan 2009 02:23:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31317 Yves, you are great.<br/><br/>A consumer boycott of Israel & the occupation is way overdue in N America.<br/><br/>We can start w/ Motorola, the occupation's great enabler.<br/><br/>Google for Motorola Israel occupation; also see:<br/>www.endtheoccupation.org Yves, you are great.

A consumer boycott of Israel & the occupation is way overdue in N America.

We can start w/ Motorola, the occupation's great enabler.

Google for Motorola Israel occupation; also see:
http://www.endtheoccupation.org

]]> By: dearieme http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31303 dearieme Mon, 05 Jan 2009 23:50:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31303 "..an amusing economist's exercise in which the taxes paid by corporations are imputed to the shareholder households": to be fair, that's also the reason that the political left tends to advocate such taxes -they too assume that they fall on the "rich" i.e. the shareholders. They don't, of course; or, at least, they don't fall solely on the shareholders. “..an amusing economist’s exercise in which the taxes paid by corporations are imputed to the shareholder households”: to be fair, that’s also the reason that the political left tends to advocate such taxes -they too assume that they fall on the “rich” i.e. the shareholders. They don’t, of course; or, at least, they don’t fall solely on the shareholders.

]]> By: daveg http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31292 daveg Mon, 05 Jan 2009 20:33:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31292 It is us (the US) that are idiots for backing Israel on this war. If Israel wants to settle this land they should do so on their own.<br/><br/>The US does not need to get involved and we do not need to experience all the costs including the blowback that will come someday.<br/><br/>They don't hate us for our freedom folks. It is us (the US) that are idiots for backing Israel on this war. If Israel wants to settle this land they should do so on their own.

The US does not need to get involved and we do not need to experience all the costs including the blowback that will come someday.

They don’t hate us for our freedom folks.

]]> By: ccm http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31289 ccm Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:56:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31289 Just in case no one else noticed, the Mankiw data is pretty funny. This is an amusing economist's exercise in which the taxes paid by corporations are imputed to the shareholder households. Thus, hardly to anyone's surprise a full 14% of income of that .01% of the ultrawealthy is paid as taxes by the corporations they "own". (See page 10 of the CBO doc Mankiw links to.)<br/><br/>See the problem here is that a huge segment of the economics profession still hasn't come to terms with the fact that when a state permits the creation of a new legal entity with limited liability, that entity should be taxable just like the rest of us. Because economists deny the existence of these independent legal entities, they have this habit of confuting them with their owners -- which, of course, would only make sense if their owners didn't have limited liability. (Remember when lawyers want to refer to human being, they can't just say "person", they have to say "natural person". Corporations are persons under the law.)<br/><br/>Anyhow that's the story for how these ridiculous numbers have been generated. Just in case no one else noticed, the Mankiw data is pretty funny. This is an amusing economist’s exercise in which the taxes paid by corporations are imputed to the shareholder households. Thus, hardly to anyone’s surprise a full 14% of income of that .01% of the ultrawealthy is paid as taxes by the corporations they “own”. (See page 10 of the CBO doc Mankiw links to.)

See the problem here is that a huge segment of the economics profession still hasn’t come to terms with the fact that when a state permits the creation of a new legal entity with limited liability, that entity should be taxable just like the rest of us. Because economists deny the existence of these independent legal entities, they have this habit of confuting them with their owners — which, of course, would only make sense if their owners didn’t have limited liability. (Remember when lawyers want to refer to human being, they can’t just say “person”, they have to say “natural person”. Corporations are persons under the law.)

Anyhow that’s the story for how these ridiculous numbers have been generated.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31288 Anonymous Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:49:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31288 "The comptroller fails to recognize that Lehman was a victim of a financial tsunami that was beyond its control."<br/><br/>http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20090105&id=9139968 "The comptroller fails to recognize that Lehman was a victim of a financial tsunami that was beyond its control."

http://news.moneycentral.msn.com/provider/providerarticle.aspx?feed=AP&date=20090105&id=9139968

]]> By: lineup32 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31285 lineup32 Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:23:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31285 Hats off to Michael Lerner for presenting more then the official Israel PR machine take on the Gaza situation. Hats off to Michael Lerner for presenting more then the official Israel PR machine take on the Gaza situation.

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31284 Anonymous Mon, 05 Jan 2009 19:16:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31284 To really understand taxation see this:<br/>"How Consumers are Taxed"<br/>http://ecforster.netfirms.com/Tax/Doc1.html To really understand taxation see this:
“How Consumers are Taxed”
http://ecforster.netfirms.com/Tax/Doc1.html

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31273 Anonymous Mon, 05 Jan 2009 18:29:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31273 Obligatory <a HREF="http://icanhascheezburger.com/2007/04/11/you-stoled-mah-bukket/" REL="nofollow">lolrus</a> link. Obligatory lolrus link.

]]> By: charles http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31253 charles Mon, 05 Jan 2009 15:05:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31253 The CBO report quoted by Mankiw counts <i>federal</i> taxes only. Local and state governments in the U.S. rely heavily on sales taxes. Since the less well-off spend more of their income, those are heavily regressive... and the total tax burden is a lot less progressive when that's taken into account. See, frex,<br/><br/>http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/03-10-Tax_Incidence.pdf The CBO report quoted by Mankiw counts federal taxes only. Local and state governments in the U.S. rely heavily on sales taxes. Since the less well-off spend more of their income, those are heavily regressive… and the total tax burden is a lot less progressive when that’s taken into account. See, frex,

http://ase.tufts.edu/gdae/Pubs/wp/03-10-Tax_Incidence.pdf

]]> By: Anonymous http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508.html#comment-31252 Anonymous Mon, 05 Jan 2009 14:24:00 +0000 http://www.nakedcapitalism.com/2009/01/links-1508-2/#comment-31252 Question to the gallery, why did the fed take the note off the M3 index in 2006. <br/><br/>skippy Question to the gallery, why did the fed take the note off the M3 index in 2006.

skippy

]]>