User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:32:05 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
If I drive 50 miles a year and you drive 12,000 miles a year, why should I pay the same amount to the government for roads? if you drive on the interstates 10,000 miles a year and I never drive on the interstate, why should I pay the same as you for the highways? this is your argument. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
because if I work 35 hours and you work 40 hours both of us at the same wage why should you have to pay more than me just because you work harder? If I drive 50 miles a year and you drive 12,000 miles a year, why should I pay the same amount to the government for roads? if you drive on the interstates 10,000 miles a year and I never drive on the interstate, why should I pay the same as you for the highways? this is your argument. as pointed out by others you would use a "Toll" system for that... but your point is taken |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:32:19 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, but now that everyone pays the same tax rate, there is an impetus to get federal spending in control. It would be far better if the taxes were collected at one time, preferably the 1st Monday in November. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To keep the same tax revenue, a flat tax rate would need to be close to 40% That's hard to swallow for folks that don't make close to 100k. For people that make 7 figures, it's easier to handle. People in the top tax bracket now pay around 40% The only thing "fair" about a progressive tax rate is the amount of discomfort that it places on tax payers. 40% to some hurts as much as 10% does to others. There is no "good" way that is affordable for everyone that needs to pay taxes. The more I look into economics, the more I think that there is no workable answer at either end of the political spectrum. Too far to the right locks up too much money with the ultra rich, and the middle and lower classes suffer, too far left and people don't want to go work for less than they can get on welfare, and the middle and upper classes suffer. It can't be "fuck poor people" just like it can't be "fuck rich people" there has to be a spot where we're all getting "fucked" about equally. There can be no rich people without poor people, and to a certain point, rich people are better off if the poor people have more money in their pockets. The reality is that everyone can't be as rich as Bill Gates, because there isn't enough money in the system. And if everyone was that rich, it'd be effectively the same as everyone being poor. Yes, but now that everyone pays the same tax rate, there is an impetus to get federal spending in control. It would be far better if the taxes were collected at one time, preferably the 1st Monday in November. No one would pay. People can't manage their money that well, thanks to our miseducation system. Then we'd be faced with incarcerating half or more of the population. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:33:01 PM EDT
[#3]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
a rate is not a flat amount. a rate, is a percentage. Rate denotes change - as in tax rate, rate of increase, rate of travel. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
It is only fair if the flat rate is the same for everyone, regardless of income...rich OR POOR. agreed Actually if he is referring to rate as a % , then no, you do not agree he said flat rate not flat percentage rate. a rate is not a flat amount. a rate, is a percentage. Rate denotes change - as in tax rate, rate of increase, rate of travel. well we both now know my intent was flat amount rather than flat rate... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:35:32 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Yes, but a flat tax is still effectively a percentage. OP posits that everyone owes yearly xxx dollars, regardless of income. A stay at home wife could conceivably be on the hook for tat flat dollar amount even though she made $0. He isn't saying fair/flat tax, he's saying a fixed dollar amount that doesn't scale with income. How can someone who doesn't make money be on the hook for tax on income? Head tax is one of the major reasons the USA even exists.....lest we forget. OP is arguing for a frigging head tax. At what age doe we hit them with the amount? and do we factor in births and deaths? what about immigration? how do we get an accurate head count every year to make sure we aren't paying too much or too little? if you think the census sucks now... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:37:40 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
At what age doe we hit them with the amount? and do we factor in births and deaths? what about immigration? how do we get an accurate head count every year to make sure we aren't paying too much or too little? if you think the census sucks now... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Yes, but a flat tax is still effectively a percentage. OP posits that everyone owes yearly xxx dollars, regardless of income. A stay at home wife could conceivably be on the hook for tat flat dollar amount even though she made $0. He isn't saying fair/flat tax, he's saying a fixed dollar amount that doesn't scale with income. How can someone who doesn't make money be on the hook for tax on income? Head tax is one of the major reasons the USA even exists.....lest we forget. OP is arguing for a frigging head tax. At what age doe we hit them with the amount? and do we factor in births and deaths? what about immigration? how do we get an accurate head count every year to make sure we aren't paying too much or too little? if you think the census sucks now... That stuff would be no more complicated than the current tax code. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:38:31 PM EDT
[#6]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
[why do you keep insulting me....does it feel good? This is a question on what a person sees as "FAIR" We disagree on what is "FAIR" How is that not a philosophical discussion? I did not ask if a flat percentage tax or flat amount tax would work. I asked a question about fairness. 
because you keep insulting everyone that offers an alternative and just tell them they are wrong - without being able to articulate why they are wrong. Everyone else has pointed out why they believe you are wrong and you simply dismiss them out of hand. This is what is frustrating some in their responses. I'm starting to think you may be trolling now even though that probably wasn't your original intent. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:42:33 PM EDT
[#7]
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? OP, no one in modern history has even proposed a flat dollar amount for each tax payer. A flat tax works like this: 1. Determine an amount that is untaxed--- Let's say the first $35k or so that everyone earns; 2. Determine a percentage on everything else after that first amount-- probably around 15 percent; 3. Consider a couple of deductions-- mortgage interest and charitable gifts would be my suggestion. 4. Sit back and watch money, jobs and prosperity flow into the united states at a rate unseen since the founding of this or any other country. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:42:58 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
because you keep insulting everyone that offers an alternative and just tell them they are wrong - without being able to articulate why they are wrong. Everyone else has pointed out why they believe you are wrong and you simply dismiss them out of hand. This is what is frustrating some in their responses. I'm starting to think you may be trolling now even though that probably wasn't your original intent. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
[why do you keep insulting me....does it feel good? This is a question on what a person sees as "FAIR" We disagree on what is "FAIR" How is that not a philosophical discussion? I did not ask if a flat percentage tax or flat amount tax would work. I asked a question about fairness.
because you keep insulting everyone that offers an alternative and just tell them they are wrong - without being able to articulate why they are wrong. Everyone else has pointed out why they believe you are wrong and you simply dismiss them out of hand. This is what is frustrating some in their responses. I'm starting to think you may be trolling now even though that probably wasn't your original intent. I am not calling anyone names or making fun of their intelligence. He did I might disagree.. but for the first few pages of this thread I was on a tablet and responding during deaths (was playing a FPS). I am not trolling. I am not trying to fix our tax laws I was trying to gauge what people thought of as fair. I think what they call fair is not what I believe to be fair (for most in this thread) No harm no foul. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:43:44 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good question. Imagine this: we have a cost of government. We divide that cost by the number of eligible taxpayers (assume all able adults age 18 to 60 - this is an illustration - don't get stuck on the numbers). That is the individual tax burden per taxpayer, no percentage required, and theoretically more "fair" than a percentage. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? How is giving 10% not equal? Good question. Imagine this: we have a cost of government. We divide that cost by the number of eligible taxpayers (assume all able adults age 18 to 60 - this is an illustration - don't get stuck on the numbers). That is the individual tax burden per taxpayer, no percentage required, and theoretically more "fair" than a percentage. This is so far out of the realm of possibility, I'm not sure why it is a point of discussion, unless you are doing it as an exercise. The number would exceed what many working people earn. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:44:23 PM EDT
[#10]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OP, no one in modern history has even proposed a flat dollar amount for each tax payer. A flat tax works like this: 1. Determine an amount that is untaxed--- Let's say the first $35k or so that everyone earns; 2. Determine a percentage on everything else after that first amount-- probably around 15 percent; 3. Consider a couple of deductions-- mortgage interest and charitable gifts would be my suggestion. 4. Sit back and watch money, jobs and prosperity flow into the united states at a rate unseen since the founding of this or any other country. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? OP, no one in modern history has even proposed a flat dollar amount for each tax payer. A flat tax works like this: 1. Determine an amount that is untaxed--- Let's say the first $35k or so that everyone earns; 2. Determine a percentage on everything else after that first amount-- probably around 15 percent; 3. Consider a couple of deductions-- mortgage interest and charitable gifts would be my suggestion. 4. Sit back and watch money, jobs and prosperity flow into the united states at a rate unseen since the founding of this or any other country. I get that. but the question is one about "Fairness". |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:44:27 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Here is a peanut the peanut cost is based on how much you make rather than a fixed amount. this is a philosophical question I know in todays world some people use the government for more benefits than others. And as I have repeatedly have stated we need to do away with entitlements.. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You got it backwards... They both sould pay the same amount... Where do you guys come up with these responses. It is not that hard... apparently it is - why should I pay the same as someone that uses more resources or gets more benefit? that doesn't seem fair. what if the amount is more than I have? your premise is flawed for many of the reasons already laid out. Here is a peanut the peanut cost is based on how much you make rather than a fixed amount. this is a philosophical question I know in todays world some people use the government for more benefits than others. And as I have repeatedly have stated we need to do away with entitlements.. I gave a philosophical question that matches your question - you asked a question but cannot accept any answer other than your won. That is not asking a philosophical question. How about you answer the questions being put to you - or are you trolling? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:46:15 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
This is so far out of the realm of possibility, I'm not sure why it is a point of discussion, unless you are doing it as an exercise. The number would exceed what many working people earn. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? How is giving 10% not equal? Good question. Imagine this: we have a cost of government. We divide that cost by the number of eligible taxpayers (assume all able adults age 18 to 60 - this is an illustration - don't get stuck on the numbers). That is the individual tax burden per taxpayer, no percentage required, and theoretically more "fair" than a percentage. This is so far out of the realm of possibility, I'm not sure why it is a point of discussion, unless you are doing it as an exercise. The number would exceed what many working people earn. Maybe instead of "taxes" I should have used the term "piece of candy" why should you pay more or less for the same piece of candy based on how much money you make? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:47:47 PM EDT
[#13]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
That stuff would be no more complicated than the current tax code. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, but a flat tax is still effectively a percentage. OP posits that everyone owes yearly xxx dollars, regardless of income. A stay at home wife could conceivably be on the hook for tat flat dollar amount even though she made $0. He isn't saying fair/flat tax, he's saying a fixed dollar amount that doesn't scale with income. How can someone who doesn't make money be on the hook for tax on income? Head tax is one of the major reasons the USA even exists.....lest we forget. OP is arguing for a frigging head tax. At what age doe we hit them with the amount? and do we factor in births and deaths? what about immigration? how do we get an accurate head count every year to make sure we aren't paying too much or too little? if you think the census sucks now... That stuff would be no more complicated than the current tax code. except you would probably go to jail for being late or failing to fill out the annual or semiannual census. Then everyone would have to register on their 18th birthday for tax service - failure to do so means jail. oh and we'd have to create a police force that matched the census data with the tax service data to make sure we catch tax service evaders. This would get very ugly, very quickly... |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 3:59:12 PM EDT
[#14]
I did a thread like this a few years ago. Its going about the same, but i didnt see anyone mention taxing the states yet.
I think the idea has merit. The feds tax the states and the states decide how to pay it. So Alaska could tax the shit out of their oil industry, California can tax the rich, and Arizona could have a flat tax, etc. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 4:01:05 PM EDT
[#15]
Quote HistoryQuoted:Not to worry.....Lawyers and lobbyists will never let it happen.  Lawyers and lobbyists would be well behind lawmakers themselves in that fight. The ability to manipulate the tax code is probably the single most powerful tool lawmakers hold. They would never relinquish it. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 4:18:13 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
except you would probably go to jail for being late or failing to fill out the annual or semiannual census. Then everyone would have to register on their 18th birthday for tax service - failure to do so means jail. oh and we'd have to create a police force that matched the census data with the tax service data to make sure we catch tax service evaders. This would get very ugly, very quickly... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
At what age doe we hit them with the amount? and do we factor in births and deaths? what about immigration? how do we get an accurate head count every year to make sure we aren't paying too much or too little? if you think the census sucks now... That stuff would be no more complicated than the current tax code. except you would probably go to jail for being late or failing to fill out the annual or semiannual census. Then everyone would have to register on their 18th birthday for tax service - failure to do so means jail. oh and we'd have to create a police force that matched the census data with the tax service data to make sure we catch tax service evaders. This would get very ugly, very quickly... I don't see where that's more complicated than the current system of the Social Security registry and IRS Criminal Enforcement. I think it could be easier, actually. Can't show your tax fee receipt? No driver's license. No check cashing at FDIC-insured banks. No state or federal government services of any kind until you show that you've either paid the bill in cash, or reached a suitable arrangement to work it off. Obviously there are those who are legitimately destitute through no fault of their own. Catastrophic illness/injury, etc. Those should be handled via the same channels that handle any charity... which should also be independent of any federal government involvement. We need to pay our government for its services. It should not be in charge of self-administering and enforcing the system by which it is paid. And yah, I realize that's not the way the Constitution was written, and is unlikely anything like that will ever come to pass. But we're here talking theory, not activism. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 4:47:13 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Abolish the income tax. +1 If there is to be a tax, then let it be a consumption/sales tax. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 4:54:25 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Actually, the income tax was excruciatingly constitutional. They passed an amendment to the constitution, it sucks, but we should hold the government to that standard on a lot things. There would be a great number less of freedom stealing laws if that were the standard rather than "pass it and let them sue to stop us." Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Abolish the income tax. This. It was unconstitutional to begin with anyway. A consumption tax (fair tax) would be the way to go. For one, it's largely voluntary. You don't wanna pay tax on your food? Grow your own. You don't wanna pay tax to build a home? Harvest your own lumber. Etc. In addition, a fair tax gets paid by everyone. Whores, drug dealers, illegal immigrants, tourists, etc. You can't cheat the fair tax. Actually, the income tax was excruciatingly constitutional. They passed an amendment to the constitution, it sucks, but we should hold the government to that standard on a lot things. There would be a great number less of freedom stealing laws if that were the standard rather than "pass it and let them sue to stop us." Actually, sir, it wasn't ratified by the required 2/3 of the states. A proven fact in the Library of Congress. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 5:06:14 PM EDT
[#19]
Yea, I've never been able to rationalize the idea that someone's income defines their tax liability. It's an absolute joke.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 6:08:20 PM EDT
[#20]
Voted no, because taxation is theft. Doesn't matter how it's done.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 6:18:10 PM EDT
[#21]
Do away with the income tax, put a 5% sales tax on everything except food and healthcare.
Sales include all items including stocks. Capital gains at 5%. No corporate tax. Thats it. Watch companies uproot and come here in droves. But the other half is hollowing out government to its core functions which mainly consist of defense, roads and keeping the fuck out of people's lives. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 6:44:02 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
OP, no one in modern history has even proposed a flat dollar amount for each tax payer. A flat tax works like this: 1. Determine an amount that is untaxed--- Let's say the first $35k or so that everyone earns; 2. Determine a percentage on everything else after that first amount-- probably around 15 percent; 3. Consider a couple of deductions-- mortgage interest and charitable gifts would be my suggestion. 4. Sit back and watch money, jobs and prosperity flow into the united states at a rate unseen since the founding of this or any other country. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? OP, no one in modern history has even proposed a flat dollar amount for each tax payer. A flat tax works like this: 1. Determine an amount that is untaxed--- Let's say the first $35k or so that everyone earns; 2. Determine a percentage on everything else after that first amount-- probably around 15 percent; 3. Consider a couple of deductions-- mortgage interest and charitable gifts would be my suggestion. 4. Sit back and watch money, jobs and prosperity flow into the united states at a rate unseen since the founding of this or any other country. You get more of what you subsidize, and less of what you tax... As a nation we subsidize sloth, laziness, and promiscuity. We then tax innovation and achievement. Income tax is the tool that enslaves us. If we really wanted to fix this shit via an income tax, we would tax the ever living fuck out of those people who are too lazy or stupid to produce. Eliminate all subsidies, then tax 100% of the first $5k, 75% of the next $5k, 50% of the next $5k, and finally 25% of the next $5k. Anything made over $20k is completely tax free. Nobody would pay more than $12500.00 in taxes per year and the incentive to make as much money as you can would be through the roof. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 7:48:17 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
You get more of what you subsidize, and less of what you tax... As a nation we subsidize sloth, laziness, and promiscuity. We then tax innovation and achievement. Income tax is the tool that enslaves us. If we really wanted to fix this shit via an income tax, we would tax the ever living fuck out of those people who are too lazy or stupid to produce. Eliminate all subsidies, then tax 100% of the first $5k, 75% of the next $5k, 50% of the next $5k, and finally 25% of the next $5k. Anything made over $20k is completely tax free. Nobody would pay more than $12500.00 in taxes per year and the incentive to make as much money as you can would be through the roof. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? OP, no one in modern history has even proposed a flat dollar amount for each tax payer. A flat tax works like this: 1. Determine an amount that is untaxed--- Let's say the first $35k or so that everyone earns; 2. Determine a percentage on everything else after that first amount-- probably around 15 percent; 3. Consider a couple of deductions-- mortgage interest and charitable gifts would be my suggestion. 4. Sit back and watch money, jobs and prosperity flow into the united states at a rate unseen since the founding of this or any other country. You get more of what you subsidize, and less of what you tax... As a nation we subsidize sloth, laziness, and promiscuity. We then tax innovation and achievement. Income tax is the tool that enslaves us. If we really wanted to fix this shit via an income tax, we would tax the ever living fuck out of those people who are too lazy or stupid to produce. Eliminate all subsidies, then tax 100% of the first $5k, 75% of the next $5k, 50% of the next $5k, and finally 25% of the next $5k. Anything made over $20k is completely tax free. Nobody would pay more than $12500.00 in taxes per year and the incentive to make as much money as you can would be through the roof. With respect, I disagree. The sort of people who make real money aren't incentivized by a dollar here and there--they have an all consuming drive that's about more than dollars. What you're talking about may work in the working or lower middle class though. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 7:58:40 PM EDT
[#24]
Define "fair."
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 8:07:00 PM EDT
[#25]
No.
I don't think income should be taxed. A flat rate use/sales tax? Closer to being fair. Cheers! -JC |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 8:18:35 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Good question. Imagine this: we have a cost of government. We divide that cost by the number of eligible taxpayers (assume all able adults age 18 to 60 - this is an illustration - don't get stuck on the numbers). That is the individual tax burden per taxpayer, no percentage required, and theoretically more "fair" than a percentage. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? How is giving 10% not equal? Good question. Imagine this: we have a cost of government. We divide that cost by the number of eligible taxpayers (assume all able adults age 18 to 60 - this is an illustration - don't get stuck on the numbers). That is the individual tax burden per taxpayer, no percentage required, and theoretically more "fair" than a percentage. BINGO - total federal outlays divided by adult population = tax per person. It is the only EQUAL distribution of the tax burden. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 8:31:00 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
The average middle class family pays 29% right now. Fair tax spreads the burden out across the classes and it's a flat percentage of what's earned, no exemptions. Explain how that would destroy the middle class because your math isnt adding up? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Maybe fair but it's not realistic. Currently, the average middle class family works till the middle of April to pay their share of the taxes. A flat tax would wipe out the middle class and makes slaves of the poor. If the rich don't like paying percentage tax then they need to quit giving millions of dollars to the party elites. The average middle class family pays 29% right now. Fair tax spreads the burden out across the classes and it's a flat percentage of what's earned, no exemptions. Explain how that would destroy the middle class because your math isnt adding up? That might be their tax bracket but there is no way thats their affective tax rate. Those are 2 completely different things. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 9:19:10 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Define "fair." that is left up to the individual. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 9:50:32 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I think everyone should have skin in the game and those that don't...why are they allowed to vote? Some old customs are good customs, others not so much. Flat tax is so much more fair than a percentage based progressive tax it's not even in the same ballpark. This post nails it. When the Constitution was written only tax payers could vote. The only taxes were property taxes and you had to own property to vote. The founders realized the wisdom of only allowing those with skin in the game to vote. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/24/2016 10:24:33 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
To keep the same tax revenue, a flat tax rate would need to be close to 40% That's hard to swallow for folks that don't make close to 100k. For people that make 7 figures, it's easier to handle. People in the top tax bracket now pay around 40% The only thing "fair" about a progressive tax rate is the amount of discomfort that it places on tax payers. 40% to some hurts as much as 10% does to others. There is no "good" way that is affordable for everyone that needs to pay taxes. I don't know where you got your figures, but they are WAY off. Total gross personal income in US in 2014 (no corporate income counted) - $14,733,900,000,000 Total 2014 Federal Tax revenue, including Social Security - $2,900,000,000,000 Tax revenue as a percentage of gross personal income - 20% |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 3:49:48 AM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
No. I don't think income should be taxed. A flat rate use/sales tax? Closer to being fair. Cheers! -JC Sales/consumption taxes are just another income tax. Who buys the most stuff? Those with the most money. Who has the most money? Those who have the highest incomes. Taxes on goods, personal property, real estate, etc. aren't really a tax on the item itself as much as a convenient measure of wealth used to determine your "fair share" of the burden in what is still an income-based tax scheme. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 8:03:13 AM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
I don't know where you got your figures, but they are WAY off. Total gross personal income in US in 2014 (no corporate income counted) - $14,733,900,000,000 Total 2014 Federal Tax revenue, including Social Security - $2,900,000,000,000 Tax revenue as a percentage of gross personal income - 20% Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
To keep the same tax revenue, a flat tax rate would need to be close to 40% That's hard to swallow for folks that don't make close to 100k. For people that make 7 figures, it's easier to handle. People in the top tax bracket now pay around 40% The only thing "fair" about a progressive tax rate is the amount of discomfort that it places on tax payers. 40% to some hurts as much as 10% does to others. There is no "good" way that is affordable for everyone that needs to pay taxes. I don't know where you got your figures, but they are WAY off. Total gross personal income in US in 2014 (no corporate income counted) - $14,733,900,000,000 Total 2014 Federal Tax revenue, including Social Security - $2,900,000,000,000 Tax revenue as a percentage of gross personal income - 20% You forgot property, sales and state taxes. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 8:06:49 AM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Abolish the income tax. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 8:46:47 AM EDT
[#34]
Should be on items purchased only. Buy more stuff pay more taxes.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 9:09:31 AM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Should be on items purchased only. Buy more stuff pay more taxes. Why should how much stuff you buy determine your obligation to financially support our federal government? |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 9:14:10 AM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
except you would probably go to jail for being late or failing to fill out the annual or semiannual census. Then everyone would have to register on their 18th birthday for tax service - failure to do so means jail. oh and we'd have to create a police force that matched the census data with the tax service data to make sure we catch tax service evaders. This would get very ugly, very quickly... Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Yes, but a flat tax is still effectively a percentage. OP posits that everyone owes yearly xxx dollars, regardless of income. A stay at home wife could conceivably be on the hook for tat flat dollar amount even though she made $0. He isn't saying fair/flat tax, he's saying a fixed dollar amount that doesn't scale with income. How can someone who doesn't make money be on the hook for tax on income? Head tax is one of the major reasons the USA even exists.....lest we forget. OP is arguing for a frigging head tax. At what age doe we hit them with the amount? and do we factor in births and deaths? what about immigration? how do we get an accurate head count every year to make sure we aren't paying too much or too little? if you think the census sucks now... That stuff would be no more complicated than the current tax code. except you would probably go to jail for being late or failing to fill out the annual or semiannual census. Then everyone would have to register on their 18th birthday for tax service - failure to do so means jail. oh and we'd have to create a police force that matched the census data with the tax service data to make sure we catch tax service evaders. This would get very ugly, very quickly... You sir, have perfected the red herring. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 9:19:32 AM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
There is nothing "fairer" than a flat percentage. 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 9:33:56 AM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Why should how much stuff you buy determine your obligation to financially support our federal government? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Should be on items purchased only. Buy more stuff pay more taxes. Why should how much stuff you buy determine your obligation to financially support our federal government? So that government is incentivized to promote success. |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 9:51:39 AM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
So that government is incentivized to promote success. Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Should be on items purchased only. Buy more stuff pay more taxes. Why should how much stuff you buy determine your obligation to financially support our federal government? So that government is incentivized to promote success. Yeah, how's that working out? The quickest way to bleed efficiency from a business is to increase the level of government involvement. It's been operating on an income-based architecture since day one, and our prosperity is being sacrificed in favor of ever-increasing government entitlements and waste. The biggest mistake we've made as a nation was letting government define, administer and enforce its own source of revenue. The model needs to change from "here's how much you're going to give us" to "here's how much you're going to get". |
|
|
|
Posted: 5/25/2016 10:03:45 AM EDT
[#40]
I think "fair" is not a good descriptor word for what you're trying to describe.
"Fair" is a subjective term that relies on "feelZ" rather than an objective description of the economic exchange taking place in a transaction for goods or services based on cash values. I think, the concepts of taxation are daunting because they require some mathematical skills and thinking. Mathematical teachings for algebra and above, which would be used to graphically illustrate your example are not taught beyond middle school unless the students are in a curriculum track that requires deeper math development. Mathematics are not reinforced after middle school either. And now, they're attempting to totally eliminate traditional mathematics (the kind that put men into space and enable us to construct and operate advanced technologies) and allow a new generation to indulge in "common core" mathematics. Combine the decline in our abilities to comprehend math with unbridled bureaucratic meddling designed to sustain the flow of our earned income into government operations and we end up with an incomprehensible system of taxations. TLDR version: Taxes suck. Perhaps a simple flat tax based on consumption would be more fairer. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2016 7:28:13 PM EDT
[#41]
Everyone should pay zero tax up to, say, $30k or $40k a year, and then 10% on everything above that. This is the most fair way I can think of.
Well, other than completely abolishing income tax, which is even more fair. |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2016 7:30:04 PM EDT
[#42]
Quoted:
How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? 
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2016 8:49:03 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind?
From each according to his abilities to each according to his needs, komrad???? |
|
|
|
Posted: 6/2/2016 8:54:47 PM EDT
[#44]
Flat % of 0% for all is good.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2016 1:22:34 AM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind?
The government has an apple to sell pay $10 for the apple and I pay $1 for the same apple because you make more money than me? What is so about that?
|
|
|
|
Posted: 6/3/2016 10:13:37 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted:
How is giving 10% not equal? Quote HistoryQuoted:
Quoted:
Or do you think it should be a flat rate dollar amount? When speaking to income tax not sales tax. I have never liked percentage based taxes.. How is it fair if the tax is 10% and I male $10000 a year and only pay $1000 yet you make $100000 and pay $10000 in taxes? How is that not bullshit in your mind? How is giving 10% not equal? He didn't say it wasn't equal, just that it was bullshit. |
|
|
Win a FREE Membership!
Sign up for the ARFCOM weekly newsletter and be entered to win a free ARFCOM membership. One new winner* is announced every week!
You will receive an email every Friday morning featuring the latest chatter from the hottest topics, breaking news surrounding legislation, as well as exclusive deals only available to ARFCOM email subscribers.
AR15.COM is the world's largest firearm community and is a gathering place for firearm enthusiasts of all types.
From hunters and military members, to competition shooters and general firearm enthusiasts, we welcome anyone who values and respects the way of the firearm.
Subscribe to our monthly Newsletter to receive firearm news, product discounts from your favorite Industry Partners, and more.
Copyright © 1996-2024 AR15.COM LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Any use of this content without express written consent is prohibited.
AR15.Com reserves the right to overwrite or replace any affiliate, commercial, or monetizable links, posted by users, with our own.
