The number “70” for this morning’s Monday Musings post reminds me of 1970, a great year to be a young Baltimore sports fan. The Orioles won the 1970 World Series and the Baltimore Colts won the Super Bowl for the 1970 NFL season, played in January, 1971.
Fast forward to today…the Orioles have gone almost 40 years without winning the World Series and the Colts left Baltimore almost 40 years ago. After a dozen years in the NFL wilderness, Baltimore re-joined the NFL and the Ravens have been successful, for the most part, winning two Super Bowls and often making the playoffs.
The first Orioles game I ever attended with media credentials was Opening Day, 1984. The team began its ultimately unsuccessful defense of its World Series championship mere days after the Colts left town. For the occasion, the mood was less than festive as the Colts’ move hung in the air.
Baltimore was, and still is I guess, a football town first. The loss of the Colts was a big blow to the city even if many of us were glad that Bob The Red-Faced Owner was no longer around. Anyway…from better days, below is a photo (from The New York Daily News) of Jim O’Brien’s field goal that gave the Baltimore Colts the 1970 NFL Championship. By the way, the win made the team the first recipient of the Lombardi Trophy. The great coach died in September, 1970 and the NFL named the championship trophy in his honor and memory.
Dr. Zal, Dr. Hoss and I met Jim O’Brien in San Diego in the mid-1990s before a Ravens-Chargers game. He was very gracious and it was quite a thrill as I think all three of us were transported back to that day when the Baltimore Colts won the Super Bowl.
Abruptly switching gears…I think it’s arrogant of the US to try to dictate to other countries what their corporate tax rate should be. However, I have an even more radical idea: I don’t think corporate profits should be taxed at all. Instead, and I mean instead and not in addition to, I think corporate revenue should be taxed.
I envision a single-digit percentage flat rate with the first $1 million in US revenues being exempt so smaller businesses can get the break they deserve. I do think it’s less than ideal when a company with billions in revenue pays no tax, often because of accounting tricks that, while they may be legal, are certainly not in the spirit of the law.
I also think this legislation should include a provision that it would take a super-majority, say 60%, of the House and Senate to change the rate of this tax. High taxes are a drag on the economy, but so is uncertainty surrounding tax and regulatory regimes.
Nothing inherent in this proposal is revenue neutral, revenue “enhancing” or revenue “diminishing.” It all depends on the rate, which I fervently believe must be in single digits. I haven’t done any work on what rates would produce what revenue.
This proposal would greatly simplify the corporate tax code and, of course, would put a lot of attorneys and accountants out of work. I also think it’s inherently more fair than our current system.
Going back to 1970…here is a chart/list of the most popular model for each US Big Three make for model year 1970. Not breaking my arm while patting myself on the back, but except for Chevrolet, my source for this data did not aggregate by model so I had to manually add model variants, often for two or three models since I couldn’t always tell by eye-balling what was the best-selling model for a particular make. Anyway:
|Dodge||Dart||210,154||Includes Custom and Swinger|
|Lincoln||Continental||37,695||Excludes Mark III|
|Oldsmobile||Cutlass||244,739||Includes Cutlass Supreme|
|Plymouth||Valiant||268,002||Includes Valiant Duster|
American Motors sales were not broken down by model. Where I included sub-models like the Dodge Dart Custom it was because they were on the same chassis with the same wheelbase. The Continental Mark III did not have the same wheelbase as the “regular” Continental.
I would never have guessed that the Ford Maverick was the most popular car in the US in 1970. It was basically impossible to find a picture of a “stock” Maverick; this is the best I could find:
Perhaps channeling their inner Mustang, Ford introduced the Maverick on April 17, 1969–the same day the Mustang was introduced in 1964–as a 1970 model year car. The Maverick basically replaced the Falcon in the Ford lineup.
The introduction of the Ford Pinto in 1971 seems to have hurt Maverick sales, which declined by 53% in 1971 compared to 1970, although, of course, the 1970 model year was longer than usual given the Maverick’s introduction date. (Did you know that Ford sold more than one and a half million Pintos from 1972 to 1974?!)
Although it wouldn’t be on any of my “must have” lists, the Maverick is not an ugly car, in my opinion. I have to face the fact that, for me, selecting Ultimate Garage cars is basically a beauty contest. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder.
If you like this blog please tell your friends and share the blog URL (https://disaffectedmusings.com). Thanks.