Senate Bill S.786 could kill NWS internet weather products

Andrew Gideon wrote:

Matt Barrow wrote:



I can't find the source now, but I
recently saw a summary of how much money is spent simply related to
collection income taxes. This included the cost of the IRS, and all tax
preparation services such as H&R Block, tax software, tax attorneys,
CPAs, etc. The number of people and amount of money spent simply
counting and collecting taxes (and trying to avoid the same) was simply
staggering.


But how much of this is solvable not by eliminating the taxation process,
but by (honestly, this time) simplifying it. In this day of automation,
the state of tax preparation is incredible to the point of offense. I
would not tolerate this in a vendor from whom I was purchasing by choice.

Yes, a flat income, sales or VAT tax could certainly eliminate much of
the government bureaucracy.


That the government has yet to get this right - along with any other
technological project of significance, like the FBI's fiasco - is a good
point for private enterprise. However, there are inherent inefficiencies
with that approach too.

Such as? There are often inequities in private enterprise, depending on
how you define equity, but typically the efficiency is quite high over
time as the inefficient players die out.


Every payment has a cost, even in an efficient (ie. not government {8^)
world. The efficiency of the payment (ie. the amount that goes to overhead
of the payment infrastructure) drops as the actual cost of the purchased
item/service drops. In other words, it's more efficient to pay a single
large sum than several smaller sums.

This gets especially bad in the range called "micropayments", for which the
world is still waiting on a good (accepted) solution.

By aggregating several purchases, taxes do (rather: could in theory) provide
efficiency.

If only it were done well.

Yes, that is the crux of the problem. Government has no incentive to do
this well.


Matt

Yes, a flat income, sales or VAT tax could certainly eliminate much of the government bureaucracy.

.... and that's exactly what we already have in place to pay for aviation
services. A flat tax on gas. Everyone who buys gas pays for the
service, and mostly everyone who buys the gas uses the service. How
much better can it get?

Jose
(r.a.o and r.a.h trimmed)
--
Money: what you need when you run out of brains.
for Email, make the obvious change in the address.

"Matt Whiting" wrote in message
...
Andrew Gideon wrote:

Matt Barrow wrote:



I can't find the source now, but I
recently saw a summary of how much money is spent simply related to
collection income taxes. This included the cost of the IRS, and all
tax
preparation services such as H&R Block, tax software, tax attorneys,
CPAs, etc. The number of people and amount of money spent simply
counting and collecting taxes (and trying to avoid the same) was simply
staggering.


But how much of this is solvable not by eliminating the taxation
process,
but by (honestly, this time) simplifying it. In this day of automation,
the state of tax preparation is incredible to the point of offense. I
would not tolerate this in a vendor from whom I was purchasing by
choice.

Yes, a flat income, sales or VAT tax could certainly eliminate much of
the government bureaucracy.

Yes, for the first two, No, for the VAT. Also, a VAT is the most easily
hidden and abused. It also penalizes productivity.

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Matt Barrow wrote:


I can't find the source now, but I
recently saw a summary of how much money is spent simply related to
collection income taxes. This included the cost of the IRS, and all
tax
preparation services such as H&R Block, tax software, tax attorneys,
CPAs, etc. The number of people and amount of money spent simply
counting and collecting taxes (and trying to avoid the same) was simply
staggering.

But how much of this is solvable not by eliminating the taxation process,
but by (honestly, this time) simplifying it. In this day of automation,
the state of tax preparation is incredible to the point of offense. I
would not tolerate this in a vendor from whom I was purchasing by choice.

Check your cutting/snipping. That's not my post (with three levels of
indentation)



That the government has yet to get this right - along with any other
technological project of significance, like the FBI's fiasco - is a good
point for private enterprise. However, there are inherent inefficiencies
with that approach too.

Every payment has a cost, even in an efficient (ie. not government {8^)
world. The efficiency of the payment (ie. the amount that goes to
overhead
of the payment infrastructure) drops as the actual cost of the purchased
item/service drops. In other words, it's more efficient to pay a single
large sum than several smaller sums.

Government does not derive just powers from it's level of efficiency, but
from it's moral base. IOW, there are things a government MUST do by itself
(and things that it MUST NOT) due to the nature of it's power. A government
that can ititiate force against it's citizens or others is a THUG. This fact
does not go away regardless of how man people vote for it.

A legitimate governmetn cannot do anything that an individual citizen can.



This gets especially bad in the range called "micropayments", for which
the
world is still waiting on a good (accepted) solution.

By aggregating several purchases, taxes do (rather: could in theory)
provide
efficiency.

If only it were done well.

Efficiently, but not morally.

"Matt Barrow" wrote in message
...

"Andrew Gideon" wrote in message
online.com...
Matt Barrow wrote:


I can't find the source now, but I
recently saw a summary of how much money is spent simply related to
collection income taxes. This included the cost of the IRS, and all
tax
preparation services such as H&R Block, tax software, tax attorneys,
CPAs, etc. The number of people and amount of money spent simply
counting and collecting taxes (and trying to avoid the same) was
simply
staggering.

But how much of this is solvable not by eliminating the taxation process,
but by (honestly, this time) simplifying it. In this day of automation,
the state of tax preparation is incredible to the point of offense. I
would not tolerate this in a vendor from whom I was purchasing by choice.

Check your cutting/snipping. That's not my post (with three levels of
indentation)



That the government has yet to get this right - along with any other
technological project of significance, like the FBI's fiasco - is a good
point for private enterprise. However, there are inherent inefficiencies
with that approach too.

Every payment has a cost, even in an efficient (ie. not government {8^)
world. The efficiency of the payment (ie. the amount that goes to
overhead
of the payment infrastructure) drops as the actual cost of the purchased
item/service drops. In other words, it's more efficient to pay a single
large sum than several smaller sums.

Government does not derive just powers from it's level of efficiency, but
from it's moral base. IOW, there are things a government MUST do by itself
(and things that it MUST NOT) due to the nature of it's power. A
government
that can ititiate force against it's citizens or others is a THUG. This
fact
does not go away regardless of how man people vote for it.

A legitimate governmetn cannot do anything that an individual citizen can.



This gets especially bad in the range called "micropayments", for which
the
world is still waiting on a good (accepted) solution.

By aggregating several purchases, taxes do (rather: could in theory)
provide
efficiency.

If only it were done well.

Efficiently, but not morally.


Is your position that a government should not engage in an activity that
promotes the general welfare that could otherwise be done in the private
sector? Even when the government can do it much more efficiently?

Could you apply this to the building of roads and the taking of property for
the purpose thereof?

It all comes down to what is less costly, the waste in government or
the
profit margin that a private enterprise would require. If the
private
enterprise is efficient enough that it can make a profit and still
cost
less than a government agency, then it is a good deal overall.


Not in the instant case. The government would still have all
the expense of operating a weather service--then a private concern
would get to sell the fruits of that tax money. E.g. Corporate
Welfare without even the meager benefits that something like a
subsidized sports stadium brings a community.

The proper and effective way to privatize services of this sort
is to put the operational support for the service up for competative
bidding by prospective contractors and NOT by privatizing the data
themselves.



You notice they don't want to maintain the 350 or so ASOS's around the
country many of which are in remote locations. I maintain about 9 of them
along with a radar computer systems river gages precip gages alert
transmitters (NWR) etc etc. They could not do this and make a profit!