It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Lower taxes and ress regulation= More entrepreneurship, more jobs and a better functioning economy..

page: 1
<<   2  3 >>

log in


posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 11:46 AM
Hi all,

The title above is the conclusion I have come to after reading articles and/or research such as these. And from experiences. Very interesting stuff that I thought I'd share.

As part of the EU and eurozone, Malta has managed to carve out a niche for itself as a second-generation international business hub. Years ago, like many small countries, it was a tax haven, plain and simple. Malta was one of the places where you would go to hide money.

Fast-forward a few decades and that model has become defunct. Tax havens are a relic of the past thanks to the OECD’s continued witch-hunts, and Malta was forced to reboot its economy.

Instead of being a center of money laundering and tax evasion, the country transformed itself into a place that makes it -very easy- to do business internationally. I’ll give you a few examples:

This is exactly the sort of thinking that only makes sense in Washington. It puts completely unnecessary and unrealistic obligations onto American firms, forcing them to deal with administrative nonsense instead of what actually matters in business: making money.

The concept isn’t hard– when companies can focus on their core business and grow, they’re more likely to hire. For all the talk that politicians want to reduce the unemployment rate, everything they’re doing is making it more difficult for businesses to prosper… and hire.

Steven F. Kreft and Russell S. Sobel
(warning: PDF file!)

The state panel causality tests we perform in this article conclude
that entrepreneurial activity causes an inflow of venture funding, and
not vice versa. Because entrepreneurial activity tends to be the underlying
factor that automatically and naturally attracts more venture
capital to an area, economic development policies should focus on
creating an environment attractive to individual entrepreneurs, rather
than on attracting venture capital.
We gathered data across U.S. states on the growth of entrepreneurial
activity in each state, other key factors that have previously
been shown to be correlated with entrepreneurial activity for that
state, and the degree of economic freedom in the state. Our results
show that an area’s degree of economic freedom significantly impacts
the underlying level of entrepreneurial activity. Put simply, an environment
of low taxes, low regulations, and secure private property
is what is necessary to encourage the entrepreneurial activity
that is vital to produce economic growth.

The point is, if the government stays out of the way of economic activities, they will prosper. What are your thoughts? Btw... Due to a lack of time I might not be able to reply very often.

P.S: A very important term that people seem to emphasize on lately is the term "Economic freedom". you'll find a goldmine of info googling that phrase.

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 12:10 PM
You are absolutely correct, less government mean more success for everyone. More government means less success. Why the Liberals can't figure that out is beyond me. It’s not rocket science.
edit on 12-9-2011 by kellynap43 because: (no reason given)

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 12:30 PM
just talked about this in my thread about greek austerity protests. i dont see why the average person cannot get this concept.... countries are now businesses. maybe back in the day a country was only funded by its own people, and the occasional traveling merchants, but the playing field is entirely different now, i shouldnt have to get into detail

why do we still stick to the theory that cutting your employees paychecks raises prophits? its true, it does for a time, but it cripples your business if this is what you rely on. we should be able to generate a massive amount of revenue from the global market. i dont mean send our factories there to take advantage of their economy, but to actually do business. we need to raise productivity. this doesnt happen when you use austerity. it never works, and yet people just go along with it..

the power of tax is the power to destroy. the point of raising taxes is to destroy something.
i dont know when we lost sight of this truth

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 02:47 PM
A lot of economic problems at the moment can be traced to a lack of consumer demand in economies that rely (as so many western nations do to a greater or lesser extent) on consumer demand to run smoothly. Lowering taxes would help to increase demand (as people with more money will generally buy more things) however this needs to be balanced with budget deficits which are causing problems across most of the developed world at the moment. Whilst cutting government spending together with taxes would seem like an easy solution to this problem we must remember that programs such as welfare also help to increase consumer demand.

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:46 PM
reply to post by TheBandit795

Less regulations all on it's own is dangerous. Some regulations are Absolutely Necessary! Had the banks and wall street been BETTER regulated, we would not be in the bailout mess we are in! Regulations are what prevent child labor, unnecessarily dangerous work conditions, keeping the environment safe (remember, you can have an environment without an economy but you can't have an economy without an environment), preventing ripoffs of the public, truth in advertising, dangerous products on the market place.... just where do you stop deregulating? As a blanket term you're asking for trouble. It's finding the middle ground that's important. Not cumbersome regulations but not totally free of regulations.
Lowering taxes on whom? Corporations that don't pay any to begin with? The rich, who somehow, in this terrible economy, have been getting richer while the poor get poorer? How does this happen anyway? If you don't think taxes are necessary, how do you pay for all the damage done with recent storms and fires? How do we build roads and bridges? How do we pay for all the wars? Taxes are necessary too. It's the middle ground again. It's the MIDDLE CLASS that makes the jobs with the smaller businesses! Give them a break! Corporations that send jobs overseas? How does that help the economy? It's Local Businesses that need to grow!
It's easy to say lower taxes and get rid of regulations but also pretty short sighted. Be more specific. We need clean air and water and a healthy environment. We need infrastructure and the ability to help out people in need, which means taking something from those who have more to save our fellow citizens who are in need. I don't mean multi-generational welfare recipients. They are a total drag on society. I don't mean people claiming disabilities that don't have them. I mean people in need. Perry wants to secede from the U.S.? But he also wants help fighting fires and National Emergency declared? You can't have it both ways. People need governing because there are unscrupulous people. That requires taxes AND regulations. Or maybe you don't mind eating lead along with your food, or breathing in mercury in your air, or driving cars with faulty brakes and exploding gas tanks?

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 08:52 PM
Reply to post by jaxnmarko

You mention the more regulation = no bail-out problems.

You are missing a factor. GOVERNMENT bail-out.

Less restrictions, businesses make bad decisions, government should not bail them out. Let them fail.

That is business. Tough titty said the Kitty.

Posted Via ATS Mobile:

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 09:11 PM
I agree with that, the bailout was a mistake and any business too large to fail is an oxymoron. I kinda think the anti-monopoly laws were good, and the Sherman anti-trust act, because I do believe in good competition. I don't like everybody blaming Obama solely when the bailouts were started under Bush, its a group effort by govenment.... who seem to have their elections paid for by corporations? The "corporations are people" ruling that allows unregulated amounts of spending by corporations for PACs? Shouldn't that be regulated so elections are up to the citizenry? And why give the money to the banks but let all the houses get foreclosed on? Why not pay off the houses and the money would have ended up in the hands of the banks anyway while people don't lose their homes? It's thoughtful regulations that are important. Don't throw out the baby with the bathwater. But yes, why Shouldn't banks fail when they make mistakes? When we DEREGULATED the banking industry we allowed them to create and trade and invest in these fake and dangerous mortgages. Banks were supposed to take in money, loan out money at a price, pay people to save, and keep it simple. The banks make money, people get loans to grow businesses, and people get paid to save for the future. What was wrong with that? The deregulation made it risky and dangerous for the entire economy.. Greed ruled. I think we need to RE-regulate the industry in a well thought out manner to keep it safe for the taxpayer.
edit on 12-9-2011 by jaxnmarko because: misspelling

edit on 12-9-2011 by jaxnmarko because: spelling

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 10:53 PM
So that's why all the customer service agents you get on the phone answer in India...
I don't think that helps jobs here, though I'm sure they dig it India where they get paid ridiculously low wages as the corporations rape the common man.

Yep, less regulations is always better

posted on Sep, 12 2011 @ 11:56 PM
reply to post by pirhanna

thank you!

tax havens =/= a good thing. tax havens and loose regulation are why many companies in the US don't pay tax. they claim their assets offshore, ireland, bermuda, etc and eventually down the line end up paying almost no taxes whatsoever.

tax havens may be good for multi-national corporations, but they are not good for the working man or the people at large. free trade agreements and lack of multi-national corporate regulation is a big part of the reason why we were in the mess we are in globally.

op, why don't you google 'double irish' or 'dutch sandwich' and see the ridiculous lengths these companies go to to avoid paying taxes. they have no allegiance to the country or community. we need to rein in these companies, not further empower them to game the system
edit on 13-9-2011 by thedeadlyrhythm because: dont feel like getting quite that into it

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 12:15 AM
less taxes ok but the money has to come from somewhere no ?? so more taxes have to be put on the financial profiteurs who are the richest in the country and live from the money they have on the bank and more taxes on the financial transactions ( Tobin taxes ).

But less regulation ??? come on, for example you really want better food or Monsanto Frankenfood not regulated or controlled, you want good normal commercial activity or anarchy and bad competition, you want a human economy or a corporations dominated one ( BP oil spill = not enough security control ... ) ok ?

I can tell you lots of examples where the economy gets screwed up if not regulated by the people !!! you give a finger to the entrepreneurs and they take a whole arm to make as much as possible big profit to the detriment of the citizens, in the end they do not even care about the health of their food or the quality of their products ( look at China where they mix lots of dangerous products in the milk for example, or bad quality products ... ).

So this is not only a capitalist issue, it's a human behaviour of some to fraud .... and deceive other people and this must be evoided by regulation and control !!

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 01:04 AM
I think it is dangerous when people who know relatively little about economics, speculate which policies and in which climates the economy would prosper. The situation isn't as simple as less government means more money. Inferior government regulation led to the Great Depression and the Global Financial Crisis which spread across the globe and had everlasting repercussions. The free market system is anarchy and problematic, yet it is the only system which currently works relatively well. To put your head in the sand and act as if the world would be perfect if we strictly adhered to its guidelines would ignorant. Yes lower taxes means more consumer and business spending and in times of recession it helps to boost consumer and business optimism, but when time are good increased taxes can ensure that the government runs a surplus budget and has money so essentially save for a rainy day (i.e. to use when there is an economic downturn in order to stimulate the economy with things such as the construction of infastructure and so forth).

However I find no flaw with your contention. I simply want to ensure that people are aware of the complexities of the free market system.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 04:49 AM
S&F good point.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 05:06 AM
Good job no one bothered to regulate those banks or we would all be in whole load of trouble right now. The light handed approach has worked out so well for us.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 08:49 AM
reply to post by jaxnmarko

Did I say less regulations, or did I say no regulation? Of course some regulations (safety for example) are necessary. But too much regulation and too much bureaucracy will always be detrimental to business and to the economy.

This is a prime example of ridiculous, absurd regulation:

As for taxes, IMO the taxation laws should revert back to pre-1913 where there were no income taxes. Sales taxes are fine; in fact, there could be a system in place for sales taxes and for small taxes to be taken every time a bank transaction takes place.

Look at the interests the U.S. pays on debt alone, and a lot of this goes to the owners of the Federal Reserve. They get all this money for printing money out of thin air. A ponzi scheme coming out of your income taxes since 1913. If you and the rest of the countries with a central bank want to keep supporting this ponzi scheme, power to you.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 08:57 AM
reply to post by pirhanna

Then let the small mom and pop businesses keep closing until none exists anymore. It's very difficult to open a small business in the U.S. and other countries of the western world.

Start A Business? In The United States? Are You Kidding Me?

12 Ridiculous Government Regulations That Are Almost Too Bizarre To Believe

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:04 AM
reply to post by TheBandit795


The title of your thread is 'radical'

However there are no 'radical' ideas on a sinking ship.


posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:18 AM

Originally posted by woodwardjnr
Good job no one bothered to regulate those banks or we would all be in whole load of trouble right now. The light handed approach has worked out so well for us.

If the SEC actually did their work and investigated the crimes that were being committed at the time the economy would've been in much less trouble. Keep in mind that such investigation is not regulation.

Those banks should've been left for dead and shut down. Like we say in Dutch, "zand erover". Now they're being rewarded by the government for their fraudulent behavior.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:19 AM

Originally posted by SpeachM1litant

However I find no flaw with your contention. I simply want to ensure that people are aware of the complexities of the free market system.

Yes, it is complex, but governments seem to think they can control it.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:27 AM
Here's an interesting video on economic freedom. It's not really mentioned here, but there are tons of so-called third world countries that are moving towards more economic freedom while western world countries are moving towards less economic freedom.

posted on Sep, 13 2011 @ 09:31 AM
reply to post by TheBandit795

To an extent I agree, however without at least some regulation there opens the possibility of the 'too big to fail' scenario which hasn't exactly helped us in the past.

top topics

<<   2  3 >>

log in