c.i. : when ABC-News showed the feature on "medical" outsourcing, they also interviewed a spokesperson from a large U.S. insurer. he stated that the company sells a policy with reduced premium payments to those willing to have major medical procedures done offshore. on another program a patient who had gone to india for medical treatment (he said that he had no medical insurance) paid less than one-third of the cost of having the operation done in the U.S. (and that included airfare). he said that he was extremely satisfied with the treatment received; as an example, he stated that during his two-week stay a nurse had been at his bedside at all times.
one of the reasons for the popularity of the hospitals in thailand (and other asian countries) ties in with the fact that many of the patients that used to come to the united states for treatment from the middle-east, can no longer get a visa to enter the united states. i remember that two years ago i read in a german news-magazine that some of these patients were going to germany. apparently, they were used to bring their whole entourage with them when coming to a (private) U.S. hospital, and they would often take over a whole hospital floor. the german hospitals were willing to take the patients, but refused to set aside a whole floor for family and staff. since these patients have plenty of money (increase oilprice by five cents a barrel), they demand the best, and it seems that they can get it. hbg ... btw. the hospital entrance hall looked more like a combination of taj mahal and a royal palace - just incredible.
falling u.s. $
mr. greenspan has suggested that a
COMSUMPTION TAX might be a useful weapon to combat the falling u.s. dollar and reduce the increasing u.s. trade deficit. canada introduced (the hated) GST (general sales tax - a federal sales tax, in addition to provincial sales tax some years ago. the combined tax is now 15 % in ontario). it'll be interesting to see if a fedeal consumption tax will be implemented in the u.s. in canada the introduction of the GST has certainly helped reduce the tax burden for manufacturers. of course, everytime you buy something (foods excepted) and you see those 15% appear on the sales slip you feel like screaming, but pay you must ! hbg
Greenspan Says Consumption Tax Could Spur Growth
By DAVID STOUT
Published: March 3, 2005
WASHINGTON, March 3 - Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan said today that the tax system should be simplified, perhaps with some kind of consumption tax, to encourage national economic growth and personal savings.
Mr. Greenspan, testifying before President Bush's advisory panel on tax reform, said conditions had changed greatly since the last big federal tax overhaul, in 1986, and that it was high time to set things right again.
"Changes since the 1986 act have been largely incremental without the appropriate all-encompassing context that broad reform brings to the table," Mr. Greenspan told the group. "It is perhaps inevitable that, every couple of decades, drift needs to be addressed and reversed."
President Bush has made an overhaul of the tax code one of the two overriding domestic-policy goals of his second term (the other is revamping Social Security), and White House officials and Republican allies in Congress have floated the idea of some sort of consumption tax - basically, a tax on money that people spend, such as a sales tax, rather than on what they earn.
Mr. Greenspan spoke in his typically circumspect manner, no doubt aware that his remarks, however couched in caveats, have been known to affect the markets. "I would not presume to suggest the best specific path for reforming the tax system," Mr. Greenspan told the panel, which is headed by two former senators, Connie Mack III, a Republican from Florida, and John B. Breaux, a Democrat from Louisiana.
But he did say that many economists would back a consumption tax, "particularly if one were designing a tax system from scratch."
Democrats have asserted that a consumption tax would hurt poor people, so any Congressional debate would likely bring calls that a consumption tax exclude items that poor people must buy, just as some states exempt food or clothing from sales tax.
Mr. Greenspan said a consumption tax might be combined with changes in the income tax system. He said a consumption tax might encourage people to save (over all, Americans save less than do people in many other countries), but that "getting from the current tax system to a consumption tax raises a challenging set of transition issues."
President Bush pledged during his campaign for re-election to simplify the tax code, and Mr. Greenspan backed that fundamental principle. Since the 1986 tax reform, Mr. Greenspan said, "tax code drift" has caused a situation "where taxpayers are again confronted with great complexity" and must work through an "overlapping web of deductions and exemptions."
In recent years, more and more households have been affected by the alternative minimum tax, created in 1969 to limit deductions for a relatively few wealthy people to stop them from avoiding taxes through loopholes. But people who might have been defined as "wealthy" in 1969 - those making $100,000 a year, for instance - are less easily so defined today, particularly if they live in or near big cities and have children. Yet they are being affected in greater numbers by the alternative minimum tax.
The president's advisory panel has been given six months to come up with recommendations on how to make the tax system simpler, fairer and more encouraging of economic growth. Comprehensive tax reform, Mr. Greenspan said, "will require tradeoffs among competing objectives and will create both winners and losers."
Implicit in any changes to the tax code is the fact that one taxpayer's "loophole" is another one's legitimate deduction, and that the term "special interests" can have various definitions. The deduction for mortgage interest is a good example. It is a favorite of such "special interests" as banks, real estate firms, home builders - and many millions of middle-class taxpayers.
Greenspan finally said something that we can all chew on. No need to read between the lines on this one! LOL
hamburger - The one assumption I've seen over and over is that a GST would allow manufacturers to lower prices since they wouldn't have to include their taxes in figuring the cost of the item.
Did that happen there? Did items go down in price or stay the same and have the additional GST added at the register?
Good question, squinney. Shud'a thought about that q meself.
squinney asked : " Did items go down in price or stay the same and have the additional GST added at the register? ".
i don't think i have an answer to that. all kinds of statistical data amassed by pro and con forces show differing results. imho the main purpose of the consumption tax was to eliminate the manufactures' tax; that means that goods produced in canada can be exported before the tax is added and that imported goods (that previously were free of the manufactures' tax) are now subject to a similar tax as domestically produced goods. looking at it in general terms : the canadian trade balance has improved, the value of the canadian dollar has risen against the u.s. dollar (not always appreciated by exportes !) and canadian manufacturers have generally done quite well.
as an aside : in germany the sales taxes are shown in the final purchase price (but with a breakout of the tax below the line), in canada the purchase prices are shown net of sales tax. so if you see a car advertised at $30,000, youll find that the price you are paying is (in ontario) $34,500(plus whatever else might be added). i can tell you that mrs h is ready to have a fit everytime she sees the added salestax !
is this helpful ? hbg
I think your statement, "i can tell you that mrs h is ready to have a fit everytime she sees the added salestax!" says it all!
I know a gallon of milk is $3.99 in our area. If we switched to GST, I don't think the price would go down to $3.94. I just wondered if you had noticed this happening with everyday items.
How much will the falling dollar add to inflationary pressure? Eventually it must effect the price of goods we purchase that come from off shore sources.
The falling dollar IS inflation. It already affects the price for American tourists to Europe, and Japan is considerably more expensive.
squinney : a consumption tax should have little or no impact on food staples. it mainly would impact "manufactured" goods, such as : furniture, clothing, cars.
of course there are oddities : buy ONE muffin or donut and you pay tax in canada, buy SIX muffins or donuts and no tax applies. as i said, foods are generally exempted from the tax, but you pay tax on such store bought foods as : barbequed chicken, prepared salads and all restaurant foods. it's a bit of a game.
c.i. : as you know, in germany the sales tax is included in the price, so mrs h doesn't feel quite as "hot under the collar" about purchases in germany (we also try to get a partial sales-tax rebate on goods purchased in germany and taken outside the country. that means we'll have to see customs for export certification !
as i stated earlier, the consumption/sales tax is designed mainly to reduce the cost of goods being exported(that is increase competiveness of exports) and increase the cost of imported goods. and it does seem to increase exports.
what i find unusual when we go to south-carolina is that most groceries that we buy are taxed (state sales tax). there are no provincial or federal sales taxes payable on regular groceries in canada. hbg
hamburger
In, NY City we now pay a sales tax on everything except food of over 8%, combined city and state income tax and every other tax ever conceived by man.
Kalifornia is the same; we pay over 8 percent sales tax on everything except food. Beer and wine has extra taxes - as does cigarettes.
