HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
Organization: Penn State University
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 07:50:53 EDT
From: <DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Social Security, Pension plans, and Ending the national debt
Distribution: usa
 <7482@public.BTR.COM>

In article <7482@public.BTR.COM>, timlee@public.btr.com says:
>
>DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
>|And if you would read all my posts, you would quite clearly see that I
>readily
>|admit that Social Security is not even close to perfect.  It is, however,
>|the most effective anti-poverty program in American public policy.  The
>|difference in benefits between the largest and smallest is miniscule,
>|especially compared to other income sources.
>
>But why should there be any difference at all?  It's not miniscule;
>sample figures in an almanac indicate the rich get 1.7 times someone
>who made $15000 a year before retiring.  An anti-poverty program
>that gives more to people who don't need it than it does to those
>who do is, by definition, wasting money.

If you look at other sources of income among the elderly (wages and salary,
interest, dividends, pensions, etc.) and compare the income of the top quintile
to the income of the bottom quintile the multiples range from 4 to 17.
Social Security has a miniscule multiple of 1.7--that's about $250 a month
pre tax.  Don't forget that the rich elderly do pay taxes on their
Social Security, reducing that multiple.

There are two main reasons why I don't find that wasteful.  First, any
examination of successful public policy to reduce poverty will find that
universal benefit programs, which don't waste dollars on administrative
programs to means-test, are much more successful at reducing poverty.  The
savings that would be made by not paying benefits to the well-off would
not be used to pay benefits to the poor, but instead would be used to
construct a government office to identify who would receive benefits and
who would not.  Next time you are in the library pick up a copy of the
Social Security Bulletin and examine the administrative costs of
unemployment insurance and Social Security.  While this doesn't justify
higher payments to the well-off, it does justify universal benefit
programs.

The second reason is political.  It's a political buy-off to get the
people to support a program which re-distributes income.

>Suppose you could redesign Social Security, other welfare programs,
>and the tax system from the clean sheet.  What would you do?

Sorry, but I don't engage in fictional what-ifs.  There are no clean
sheets; they've already been wet.  In articles I've authored I have urged
increases in the maximum earnings upon which the tax is levied, increases
in SSI, as opposed to Social Security beenfits, reduced benefits/COLAS for
the wealthy, and other minor adjustments in the current system.


Dennis G. Shea, Penn State <<USUAL DISCLAIMER>>
"I believe that there is social and psychological justification
for significant inequalities of incomes and wealth....But it
is not necessary....that the game should be played for such
high stakes as at present."  John Maynard Keynes
From: tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: The Moral Basis of Property   was Libertarian history
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:30:37 GMT
Reply-To: tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <JACKSON.92Jul24164131@kaos.stsci.edu> jackson@kaos.stsci.edu (Bob Jackson) writes:
>Name three human activities that could not be
>proscribed for their environmental impact.

1. Abstinence.
2. Not voting for Dan Quayle.
3. Nameing three human activities that could not be proscribed for their
   environmental impact.
4. Stopping with three.

Seriously:
1.	Reducing environmental impact of human activities.
2.	Abstinence.
3.	Ending the WOD and various other subsidies.
4.	Not voting for Dan Quayle.
5.	Stopping with three.

	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com
	I will accept no contributions greater than $100.
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From:  eldar@lomi.spb.su (Eldar A. Musaev)
Subject: Info on the book "Taxation in Russia"
Reply-To: eldar@lomi.spb.su
Organization: St.Petersburg Branch Steklov's Mathematical Institute
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 1992 00:23:06 GMT

                An unique information in an unique book
                ???????????????????????????????????????
                ?         Taxation in Russia          ?
                ???????????????????????????????????????
               by.Mrs.Galina Musaeva and Dr.Eldar Musaev

The complete and reliable guide to the system of taxes in Russia, which
had stabilized only in June 1992, reflected in tables, schemata, formulae
and English text comppressed into 30 pages. The book covers all taxes,
import/export and foreign investments policy. Future possible changes
are supposed to be published in subsequent issues of "Taxation in
Russia".

Mrs.Galina Musaeva (M.Sc.) and Mr.Eldar Musaev (Ph.D.) are specialized
in lecturing, teaching, managing of teaching and consulting in areas of
accounting, business, economical laws and privatization in Russia and
CIS. The list of their clients includes Petersburg Commodities &
Securities Exchange, different companies and institutions of
St.Petersburg. Mr.Galina Musaeva is the author of "The handbook of a tax
inspector" which contains most complete and comprehensive information on
taxes in Russia including full texts of all relevant laws and official
instructions of the State Taxing Service.

== Cut here -> ======================================== <- Cut here ==

			   Taxation in Russia
			by Galina & Eldar Musaev

        If you wish to receive the book "Taxation in Russia", please,
send this completed order form along with $23.-- per copy in cheque or
money order drawn on USA bank to

		Prof.R.Baker Kearfott
		Department of Mathematics
		University of Southwestern Louisiana
		U.S.L. Box 4-1010
		Lafayette, LA 70504-1010
		USA
		E-mail: rbk@usl.edu

-----------------------------------------------------------------
			THE ORDER FORM

Name ____________________________________________________________

Company _________________________________________________________

Address _________________________________________________________

Zip __________________ State, Country ___________________________

Phone ________________ (optional) Fax _________________ (optional)

# of copies _______ x $23.-- = $ _________ in checque/money order

Date _______________________  Signature _________________________


-------- Please, show this information in your library ! --------


Xref: sparky sci.econ:6623 eunet.politics:1006
Newsgroups: sci.econ,eunet.politics
From: des@frogland.inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd)
Subject: Re: EC tax policy
Organization: INMOS architecture group
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 13:20:32 BST

In article <10255@scott.ed.ac.uk>, guy@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Guy Barry) writes:
>The EC has just imposed a minimum VAT rate of 15% throughout the
>Community, on the grounds that a single market would be unworkable
>without it.  Yet the USA has a single market despite the fact that
>individual states can levy their own sales taxes.  What's the
>difference?

none really.

just that the baseline above which individual european states can
start adjusting rates is 15% rather than 0% .... sort of consider
15% as a european sales tax and anything above as a local sales
tax.

? do they have any national sales tax in the US ?

--------------------------------------------------------------------------
david shepherd: des@inmos.co.uk or des@inmos.com    tel: 0454-616616 x 625
                inmos ltd, 1000 aztec west, almondsbury, bristol, bs12 4sq
		"i speak latin to god,   spanish to men,   french to women 
		 and german to my horse."             - charles v of spain
Newsgroups: sci.econ,sci.environment
From: dean@vexcel.com (dean alaska)
Subject: Re: Book "Beyond the Limits"
Organization: VEXCEL Corporation, Boulder, CO
Distribution: world,sci
Date: Tue, 21 Jul 1992 15:46:59 GMT

In article <1992Jul9.073405.13556@vax5.cit.cornell.edu> d65y@vax5.cit.cornell.edu writes:
>I just saw this book at a book store.  Does anyone have any comments on it?
>
>Sam Paik

This book, and the model on which it is based, was recently discussed in
this group.

Those who supported the book (myself included) see its models as a first
order approximation with value for analysis on a global scale.

An earlier book by some of the same authors used a
similar model and its predictions over the 20 year period between the
books were fairly good (according to the authors), but how much credibility
this lends to extrapolations 100 years ahead is an open question.

Those who didn't like the models complained that it did not represent
non-linearities and demand saturation in the real world.  Some feel
that long-term modeling (more than a century ahead) is a waste of
time since conditions will change so much in the
intervening period.

Most people discussing the model were not familiar with the specific
mathematics, although the book gives a ref for a technical report
that does provide these details.

The authors challenge critics to present something better which some
of them aren't inclined to do since they disagree with the whole
field.

In short, the field of science used in creating this model is new
there is no solid consensus on it yet.

-- 

		dingo in boulder	(dean@vexcel.com)
Xref: sparky sci.econ:6592 talk.politics.misc:36333
From: tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,talk.politics.misc
Subject: Re: High personal debt and interest (was Re: What Happens to Perot's Name?)
Date: 27 Jul 92 17:14:37 GMT
Reply-To: tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <1992Jul20.135729.615@hemlock.cray.com> rja@redwood26.cray.com (Russ Anderson) writes:
>
>In article <1992Jul17.171050.13831@aio.jsc.nasa.gov>, mancus@sweetpea.jsc.nasa.gov (Keith Mancus) writes:
	[Various excerpts, not seriously out of context]
>> this.  If all those non-government debts are so huge, then the interest
>> rates ought to be up.
>>                       If you have money to invest, you'll be at a loss
>> as to what to do with it because 5% returns (less at some banks!) are
>> unacceptable.
>
>You gotta put it somewhere (or spend it).  The stock market has not been
>great...
>>                If there's this crying need for capital, somebody ought to be
>> willing to pay us 8 or 10%.  In other words, it should be a (capital) sellers

Corporate bonds pay 8-9%, which is historically a high after-inflation return.

The more the stock market drops, the more it can go up.

5% is about equal to inflation after taxes, which is the highest return you
deserve to get without risk.  A bit too high for people in lower tax 
brackets.
	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com
	I will accept no contributions greater than $100.
From: flower@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Graham Flower)
Date: Wed, 22 Jul 1992 19:07:29 GMT
Subject: War Resistor's League - Do They Or Dont They?
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
Newsgroups: sci.econ





      Bill Clinton may not inhale but i am satisfied beyond all reasonable
      doubt that the War Resister's League does, ... extensively. How else
      can we account for their accounting on the Federal budget.


Graham Flower ms 90-TT               |  Better to have convictions and act on 
Hewlett-Packard  350 W Trimble Rd    |  them, even if they are wrong, than to  
Microwave Semiconductor Division     |  waffle in indecision endlessly.
San Jose, California, 95131          |
 graham_flower@sj.hp.com             |
From: timlee@public.btr.com
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: Social Security, Pension plans, and Ending the national debt
Date: 22 Jul 92 05:16:46 GMT
Reply-To: timlee@btr.com (Timothy J. Lee)
Followup-To: sci.econ
Distribution: usa

DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu writes:
|In article <7482@public.BTR.COM>, timlee@public.btr.com says:
|>[rich get more SS than the poor]
|There are two main reasons why I don't find that wasteful.  First, any
|examination of successful public policy to reduce poverty will find that
|universal benefit programs, which don't waste dollars on administrative
|programs to means-test, are much more successful at reducing poverty.  The

Ok.  I don't dispute that.  But perhaps a more important reason for
universal type benefits is to eliminate the high marginal tax rate
bubbles that discourage people on welfare from working.  Note that
Social Security has this problem as well as other welfare programs.

|                                             While this doesn't justify
|higher payments to the well-off, it does justify universal benefit
|programs.
|
|The second reason is political.  It's a political buy-off to get the
|people to support a program which re-distributes income.

In other words, you support wasting anti-poverty money by giving
more to the rich instead of a fixed benefit just because of
possible political effects.

|>Suppose you could redesign Social Security, other welfare programs,
|>and the tax system from the clean sheet.  What would you do?
|
|Sorry, but I don't engage in fictional what-ifs.  There are no clean
|sheets; they've already been wet.  In articles I've authored I have urged
|increases in the maximum earnings upon which the tax is levied, increases
|in SSI, as opposed to Social Security beenfits, reduced benefits/COLAS for
|the wealthy, and other minor adjustments in the current system.

Such changes won't fix the structural problems in a welfare and tax
system that is basically a kludge with many unintended effects.

Instead of Social Security, other welfare, and the current tax system,
why not:

1.  A flat tax rate.  Computing income would still be the complicated
part, but guessing wage withholding and estimated taxes would be easier.
No type of income would be treated to a special tax like a payroll tax.
(If you really want to argue that the rich should pay a higher rate,
then imagine a higher rate near the top of the income scale; it
doesn't really affect the argument presented here.)

2.  A standard credit (not deduction).  If this makes taxes negative,
it becomes a welfare / Social Security payment.

The above scheme would eliminate the disincentive that people on
welfare face when they consider working (loss of welfare combined
with taxes can create an effective marginal tax rate of close to
100% in some cases).  It would also make all deductions usable by
all people.  It would eliminate the adminstrative costs of means
testing, and also eliminate the waste of giving richer people more
benefits.  It would eliminate the current regressive payroll tax.
By combining everything into one tax, applied to all income, it
would give a clearer picture of how much taxes there are.
From: tucker@shiva.edsg.hac.com (George Tucker)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: The Moral Basis of Property   was Libertarian history
Date: 24 Jul 92 22:06:39 GMT
Reply-To: tucker@shiva.UUCP (George Tucker)
Organization: Hughes Aircraft Co., El Segundo, CA

In article <50764@dime.cs.umass.edu> yodaiken@chelm.cs.umass.edu (victor yodaiken) writes:
>Fortunately, one is not required to either endorse Chairman Mao or
>the Dupont Corporation unless one is a member of an extremist
>political party, e.g. Sendero Luminoso or the LP.

As last week's Barrons pithily pointed out, there are two branches of the LP -
right-Libertarians and left-Libertarians.  Right Libertarians are "the
ones who would convert the corridor to your bathroom into a private
tollway".  Left Libertarianisms are those who "still want to <whatever you
do with them> magic mushrooms".   Personally, I just don't vote for
drug warriors or think bureaucrats are my good buddies.   The LP has never
required me to endorse anything nor do I believe it ever does so.
Membership in the Sendero Luminoso is probably much different.

	 George Tucker        tucker@tcville.hac.com
	I will accept no contributions greater than $100.
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: jackson@kaos.stsci.edu (Bob Jackson)
Subject: Re: The Moral Basis of Property   was Libertarian history
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
	<50707@dime.cs.umass.edu>
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 13:46:36 GMT

w.r.t.
As Joe Slovo, longtime head of the South African Communist Party, pointed
out, the record of capitalism is not so damn wonderful either. The
interesting question is why a system which has made it profitable to 
tear holes in the ozone layer in the cause of selling air-conditioners
should be considered to be the best way of organizing human society or even
a viable way of organizing human society.


Since aparteid was created by white socialist trade union members to
prevent black workers from competing with white workers, I find the Slovo
comment amusing.

As to air conditioners, the profit is made or not made in selling air 
conditioners.  The flourocarbon emissions probably occur when the air
conditioner is operated by the owner rather than during manufacture.

The environmental record of the 'non-capitalist' regimes is something
to behold, e.g., Mao's anti-bird campaign and the ~ex-Aral Sea.

If patriotism is the last refuge of scoundrels,
Then environmentalism is the current refuge of totalitarians.
Xref: sparky sci.econ:6626 eunet.politics:1008
From: whg@INEL.GOV (William H. Gray)
Newsgroups: sci.econ,eunet.politics
Subject: Re: EC tax policy
Date: 31 Jul 92 15:49:58 GMT
Reply-To: whg@INEL.GOV (William H. Gray)
Organization: Idaho National Engineering Lab

In article <1992Jul30.132032.22204@wraxall.inmos.co.uk>, des@frogland.inmos.co.uk (David Shepherd) writes:
|> In article <10255@scott.ed.ac.uk>, guy@cogsci.ed.ac.uk (Guy Barry) writes:
|> >The EC has just imposed a minimum VAT rate of 15% throughout the
|> >Community, on the grounds that a single market would be unworkable
|> >without it.  Yet the USA has a single market despite the fact that
|> >individual states can levy their own sales taxes.  What's the
|> >difference?
|> 
|> none really.
   ^^^^

Wrong.  See my previous post.

========== long legal disclaimer follows, press n to skip ===========

Neither the United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering
Laboratory or any of their employees, makes any warranty, whatsoever,
implied, or assumes any legal liability or responsibility regarding any
information, disclosed, or represents that its use would not infringe
privately owned rights.  No specific reference constitutes or implies
endorsement, recommendation, or favoring by the United States
Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory.  The views and
opinions expressed herein do not necessarily reflect those of the
United States Government or the Idaho National Engineering Laboratory,
and shall not be used for advertising or product endorsement purposes.
Newsgroups: sci.econ
From: jackson@kaos.stsci.edu (Bob Jackson)
Subject: Re: Social Security, Pension plans, and Ending the national debt
Organization: Space Telescope Science Institute
	<92204.081135DGS4@psuvm.psu.edu>
Distribution: usa
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 13:40:08 GMT

Social Security has the basic problem of trying to be both

	Insurance
and
	Welfare

Those are mutually incompatible goals.

If one is entitled to benefits because one 'paid' into it,
then the welfare aspect is suspect.

If one is entitled to benefits because you are poor, then
the benefits being related to contributions is suspect.

Kind of like a fried snowball - Internally Contradictory
From: flower@hpcc01.corp.hp.com (Graham Flower)
Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1992 22:29:58 GMT
Subject: Re: Re: The Moral Basis of Property   was Libertarian history
Organization: the HP Corporate notes server
From: greimann@pecan.cns.udel.edu (john greimann)
Subject: Need ftp site for info
Organization: University of Delaware, Newark
Date: Thu, 23 Jul 1992 00:38:20 GMT

	Sorry if this is a really bad place to ask this question.  I'm 
looking for an ftp site or some similar source of corporate data, such
as information about the US auto industry (total sales in $, volume sold,
) and data on Japan.  Basically, I need data to do comparisons between 
countries and companies.  National data would be sufficient if data isn't
available for individual companies...I just need to be pointed in the right
direction as to where to find such data.  I've obtained the CIA World 
Factbook (something like that) but that doesn't go into enough detail...


Any help would be appreciated...


					Thanks in advance,

					Brandon

-- 
...............................................................................
To reach me through e-mail: greimann@freezer.cns.udel.edu
From: ernie@ncrcol.ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM (Ernie Corley)
Subject: Re: Minimum wage: balancing job losses vs pay increases
Organization: NCR E&M Columbia SC.
Date: Thu, 30 Jul 92 14:36:36 GMT

In article <hellmann.712258228@oak.cs.scarolina.edu> hellmann@cs.scarolina.edu (Douglas R Hellmann) writes:
>
>>And lets not assume that "most" Americans are forced into working
>>for minimum wage. "Only 3.4 percent of the American work force
>>now hold jobs that pay the minimum wage or less" (from Newsweek,
>>April 17, 1989).  "And of those 3.9 million person, some 80 percent
>>are second- or third- wage earners in statistically unpoor 
>>households."
>
>Why is it so important for all these teenagers to have jobs?  I mean,
>not that I don't want them too, but why is it so important?  The people
>we should be worried about are the adults who are trying to feed their
>families.  What percent of the people working for minimum wage are in
>this group?
>

I guess you'd rather have kids out on the streets then scooping ice cream.
Recent events here in Columbia that involved teenagers and guns suggests
otherwise.  The local Urban League and NAACP blamed the incidents on
the lack of jobs for local youth.  It's funny that they are the same
ones that scream for job-destroying minimum wage laws.  

>>Given that one of the main causes attributed to the LA riots is
>>pent-up frustration at lack of opportunity, and that starting at
>>a minimum wage job allows unskilled workers to begin to climb the
>>economic ladder, I wonder just how much effect pricing teenagers
>>out of the job market has in creating the type of frustration
>>that led to the riots. 
>
>Maybe there could be two minimum wages?  One for these kids that don't
>have real skill or experience, and one for the people that need the
>money and are somewhat skilled and experienced?
>
But you don't need government intervention to make that happen.  It's
interesting how the free market works.  People with skill and experience 
are more valuable then those without skill and experience.  Therefore, 
they make more money.  

>>____________________________________________________________________
>>Ken Rose    (kenr@storage.tandem.com)
>>The Usual Disclaimer:  Any opinions expressed above are mine alone, not
>>those of my employer (who is kind enough to allow me Usenet access).
>
>Doug Hellmann
>hellmann@cs.scarolina.edu


-- 
        --Ernie.Corley@ColumbiaSC.NCR.COM
From: joseph@valis.biocad.COM (Joseph Truitt)
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: Re: cost-of-living change for period of 8/91 to 8/92
Date: 31 Jul 92 04:16:51 GMT

Arggh... I meant 7/91 to 7/92.  If that's too recent, 6/91 to 6/92
would still be a helpful interval for me.  Yes, and I noticed my "8/91
to 8/91" typo in the body of my last message--5 seconds after I sent
it.  Sorry for the inconvenience.  --Joseph (joseph@biocad.com)
From: P.Pal@cs.ucl.ac.uk
Newsgroups: sci.econ
Subject: <<< MATHEMATICAL MODEL ON TECHNOLOGY TRANSFER >>>
Date: 30 Jul 92 09:50:49 GMT


I LIKE TO KNOW ANY REFERENCES ON MATHEMATICAL MODEL ON TECHNOLOGY
TRANSFER. ANY HELP WILL BE APPRICATED.

THANKS,

PAUL