A couple of comments on this thread:
"IDEA 1 - REPLACE INCOME TAX WITH A PRODUCTIVITY TAX"
Basically, you just invented corporate taxes. More generally, it's about taxing labor vs. taxing capital. Not trying to be snarky here, but I think the debate is older than the steam engine. Who pays for the state, workers or owners?
"...worse than the case you make above because you not only lose the formal income tax of the employee, you lose both the employee and employer portions of the Medicare tax, both the Employer/Employee portions of the Social Insurance tax, and on top of all that money you lose the social benefits..."
It's much worse than even that, because Ole Retired (?) Widow MacGreedy, replaced by a robot (or steam engine), now has only a fraction of her former purchasing power, which hurts the grocery store, the shopping mall, the makers of canned cat food, the shareholders of cat food factories etc. etc. Impoverished populations make bad customers. But lowering the costs of *your* employees is good for *you*, while it is bad for everybody else, including other businesses. Increased productivity is a nice thing, as long as there is somebody left to buy all the stuff. Today, at historically low interest rates, hovering near zero, corporations borrow to buy back their own stock instead of increasing production. Why? Perhaps Widow MacGreedy knows something the majority of think-tank economists don't.
"Um. Speaking of knowledge, that's coffee klatch. (I just looked it up to verify)."
Technically, it's "Klatsch" (German). But feel free to spell it as you like.
"We can learn a lot from Europe when it comes to taxes. They use a Value Added Tax which taxes each step of a product's manufacture and sale. This is a little like the Productivity tax being discussed above"
To clarify, from what I remember that's not how it works. There used to be such a tax (50 years ago) involved in every step of production, i.e. iron ore sold to steel makers, steel to auto parts makers, parts to car makers, cars to customers, with a few percent of each transaction going to the tax man. That lead to strong incentives for car makers to buy the parts makers, the steel makers and the iron ore mine to save taxes. People smarter than me then decided that vertical integration of that kind wasn't the way to go. Today, a tax is still paid, but it works like this:
A load of iron ore is produced and sold for $1000, plus $100 in taxes, which go to the state.
The steel mill pays $1100 for it, turns it into steel and sells it for $1500, plus $150 tax. At the end of the year the steel mill paid $100 in revenue taxes (to the iron mine) and took in $150. It pays the difference ($50) to the state.
The car maker buys the steel for $1650 and turns it into a car that it sells for $2500, plus $250 in tax. At the end of the year the car maker paid $150 in revenue taxes (to the steel mill) and took in $250. It pays the difference ($100) to the state.
Joe Sixpack pays $2500 for the car, plus $250 in tax.
If you add up the taxes paid by the companies ($100+ $50 + $100 = $250) and ask yourself from whose pockets the money comes… you see how it works? It’s hardly a “Productivity tax”.
“Something about government needs to be revamped. Term limits would be a good start.”
Term limits for US presidents were imposed because Republicans were afraid of another FDR - too popular with the unwashed. Be careful what you wish for.
“Declare that the US Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico together are the 51st state!”
And the UK would be assigned a new number? (Sorry, couldn't resist that one)
“Something like 75% of guns used in felonies have been acquired illegally. Obviously passing more restrictive legislation won’t help, we can’t enforce the laws we have.”
Almost all guns in the US were produced and sold legally before eventually being stolen, sold illegally, getting lost etc. and becoming illegal guns. Legislation didn’t prevent that. Therefore the only place where an effective solution can happen is the factory/place of original sale. And you know what that means. Works well in Japan.
“Why is this underclass so persistent in the USA?”
IMHO it has a lot to do with the very first question you asked in this thread.