User Panel
User Panel
User Panel
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:51:17 PM EDT
[#1]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The PhD economists will tell you the same. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: An expert has spoken.  The PhD economists will tell you the same. Same experts that got us to where we are today? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:52:04 PM EDT
[#2]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Unfortunately yes. Stuff that never should have been stuff the federal government was involved with. Nor does it have any constitutional authority to do so. If such programs were going to be around they should have been from the state. And they aren’t going anywhere. Getting rid of them is such an unpopular proposition that no candidate with any hope of getting elected will take that position. The states would never create such programs because they would essentially encourage poor people to move there to take advantage. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:53:22 PM EDT
[#3]
The question ends up being a tax on what exactly?
If it is income, you still have to define income. People will still lie about it. They will not recognize some revenue, they will invent some expenses... So you want to be a sales tax... Sounds good. Sales are easy enough to identify. So here it goes. Manufacturer sells a widget to a wholesaler - so tax is paid on the widget. Wholesaler sells it to a distribution network, tax paid again on the same widget? They sell it to a retailer, got to pay tax on the same widget again? Then it is sold to a retail customer - do we have another taxable event? Now most countries that do this know they can not tax the same item that many times, so they have a value added tax. The wholesaler does pay tax on the widget, but then get's to claim a deduction of that tax when they sell it to the next business in line. So on and so forth. Only problem - you get a tax code as fucked up as our current one pretty quickly. Then we have not even gotten into the second reason for tax - it is also to modify the behavior of society. Once you add that in, the tax book becomes a tax library. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:53:32 PM EDT
[#4]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yes, that's what it's creating - what's your point? It's what we already have, largely. I don't know about you, but I don't pay sales tax on groceries. I just moved back to AZ... I do pay sales taxes on some groceries. I'm not sure how they decide which ones because some aren't taxed. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:54:30 PM EDT
[#5]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. They are not. Most of the middle class doesn't even pay income taxes and the only capital gain they have is when they sell their house, which is also not taxed. Wait, what? Please share your definition of middle class income, and show how "most of them" are falling into a zero pay bracket. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:55:12 PM EDT
[#6]
The IRS was invented to hassle the working class (and political rivals).
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:56:00 PM EDT
[#7]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You said that you would spend more if there was a sales tax than an income tax. I said that I would spend more if I had more disposable income and/or prices were lower. Do you know what an embedded tax is? It's something that's passed onto the consumer. It's a cost. An example is corporate income tax. The bonus is that the cost to comply with that tax is passed to the consumer. Guess what. If there's only a sales tax, then those don't exist. I'd also have more disposable income if I weren't taxed on income. Go figure. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:56:11 PM EDT
[#8]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Taxing profits is way less intrusive than taxing gross economic activity (sales tax), which would be a disaster. Income taxes have a higher excess burden, which is why economists push the VAT. But taxes on property and land are lower, so if your goal is to grow the economy, rather than shrink it, you want to get rid of payroll and income taxes and shift them onto economic rents (land, IP, etc). Other than that, we basically agree. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:58:13 PM EDT
[#9]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Wait, what? Please share your definition of middle class income, and show how "most of them" are falling into a zero pay bracket. 2021, like 57% of Americans didn't pay income taxes. If the middle 50% is the middle class... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:58:24 PM EDT
[#10]
The tax code is ridiculously complicated for several reasons. Easier to jam up people with if .gov deems them a threat, plus loopholes for the rich and powerful.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:59:02 PM EDT
[#11]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The IRS was invented to hassle the working class (and political rivals). No, it wasn't, the original income tax fell entirely on the top 1%. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 10:59:48 PM EDT
[#12]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Do you know what an embedded tax is? It's something that's passed onto the consumer. It's a cost. An example is corporate income tax. The bonus is that the cost to comply with that tax is passed to the consumer. Guess what. If there's only a sales tax, then those don't exist. I'd also have more disposable income if I weren't taxed on income. Go figure. Look up tax incidence. The corporate income tax isn't paid by consumers, but rather by capital and labor. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:01:01 PM EDT
[#13]
I'd also like to add (since I'm already on the list) that it's none of any government's business how much you make. That's between you and and if you have one, your employer.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:01:22 PM EDT
[#14]
Quote HistoryQuoted: I said that I would spend more if I had more disposable income and/or prices were lower. Do you know what an embedded tax is? It's something that's passed onto the consumer. It's a cost. An example is corporate income tax. The bonus is that the cost to comply with that tax is passed to the consumer. Guess what. If there's only a sales tax, then those don't exist. I'd also have more disposable income if I weren't taxed on income. Go figure. Corporate taxes are split between labor, capital and consumers. You’d spend less if there was a sales tax because with an income tax you have to make less to avoid paying taxes but with a sales tax you just have to spend less. And I guarantee you won’t buy your kids and many French fries when they double in price. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:07:58 PM EDT
[#15]
Those 87000 new brown shirts are not going to be accountants. It's FBHO's gestapo, it just took 3 terms to make it happen.
|
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:18:21 PM EDT
[#16]
Quote HistoryQuoted: 2021, like 57% of Americans didn't pay income taxes. If the middle 50% is the middle class... Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Wait, what? Please share your definition of middle class income, and show how "most of them" are falling into a zero pay bracket. 2021, like 57% of Americans didn't pay income taxes. If the middle 50% is the middle class... No, that doesn't, "like", cut it. What's your definition of middle class, and in what scenario are most of them not paying federal income? Geesh... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:18:33 PM EDT
[#17]
Quote HistoryQuoted: If your major goal is having a smaller economy that’s a good one. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: National sales tax. Stop taxing productivity. If your major goal is having a smaller economy that’s a good one. On the contrary, it's the best method for boosting productivity. There was a reason why the most profitable companies are the ones who "eliminate the middleman". By setting up a tax structure that focuses on consumption rather than income, that generates investment in virtually all areas. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:20:46 PM EDT
[#18]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On the contrary, it's the best method for boosting productivity. There was a reason why the most profitable companies are the ones who "eliminate the middleman". By setting up a tax structure that focuses on consumption rather than income, that generates investment in virtually all areas. Investment only occurs when sales will result, and a 30% increase in the price of a sale will reduce sales. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:20:50 PM EDT
[#19]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Again, that’s the easy way to have a smaller economy. Quote HistoryQuoted: Again, that’s the easy way to have a smaller economy. No, it's the best way to get rid of a socialist income-tax system that penalizes success and is catered to lobbyists instead of productive people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:21:55 PM EDT
[#20]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No, that doesn't, "like", cut it. What's your definition of middle class, and in what scenario are most of them not paying federal income? Geesh... The scenario where only 40-some % of Americans pay $1 of income taxes. If you want to argue that the middle class is the fourth quartile then knock yourself out. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:22:10 PM EDT
[#21]
Quote HistoryQuoted: How are you going to reduce federal spending to 1/8th it’s current rate? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: National sales tax locked in forever at 8%. Nothing else, ever. How are you going to reduce federal spending to 1/8th it’s current rate? Because you are eliminating hundreds of thousands of useless jobs and the bureaucracies that go with them. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:22:24 PM EDT
[#22]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The tax code is ridiculously complicated for several reasons. Easier to jam up people with if .gov deems them a threat, plus loopholes for the rich and powerful. The tax code is complicated because the government uses it to control behavior. Providing beneficial tax treatment to behaviors the government thinks are good. The government could implement a progressive income tax with a much less complicated tax code. This is the standard deduction and these are the tax brackets…. the end. Corporate taxes with expense deductions and depreciation of property would require a few more words. Congress says “we think these things are good but we can’t mandate them but …. What if we gave out a tax credit or deduction to people who do these things? Brilliant!” |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:22:42 PM EDT
[#23]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Would you buy more things or fewer things with a 23% sales tax? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: National sales tax. Stop taxing productivity. If your major goal is having a smaller economy that’s a good one. No, not really. Would you buy more things or fewer things with a 23% sales tax? If my income taxes were eliminated, a hell of a lot more. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:23:22 PM EDT
[#24]
Quote HistoryQuoted: On the contrary, it's the best method for boosting productivity. There was a reason why the most profitable companies are the ones who "eliminate the middleman". By setting up a tax structure that focuses on consumption rather than income, that generates investment in virtually all areas. Yes, we know this from Europe where 20% VATs have ushered in unprecedented prosperity. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:23:36 PM EDT
[#25]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The scenario where only 40-some % of Americans pay $1 of income taxes. If you want to argue that the middle class is the fourth quartile then knock yourself out. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: No, that doesn't, "like", cut it. What's your definition of middle class, and in what scenario are most of them not paying federal income? Geesh... The scenario where only 40-some % of Americans pay $1 of income taxes. If you want to argue that the middle class is the fourth quartile then knock yourself out. Dude, you're using a number that includes children and retirees. If you want to have a real discussion, skip the games and use real numbers. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:24:02 PM EDT
[#26]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The top 0.1%, and to an even more extreme degree the top 0.1% are not paying anywhere near that percentage of their wealth accumulation in taxes. They are heavily shield by foundations, trusts, off shores, alternative reimbursement, etc. The people getting absolutely raped are the rest of the top 1% below that. 40% of our income tax revenue comes from the top 1%. With a far more impactful cut taken from the bottom 90% of that. They are affluent, often on an employee model, and are far more likely to be working 80 plus hour weeks. The next 9% pay another 35%. The next 40% the remaining 25% of income tax revenue. 50% of the population is essentially along for the ride and subsidized or all supported. That tax structure is called "progressive." "Progressive" is just as bad a concept/word as "diversity," "common sense," "racist, "white privilege" etc. Screwing the upper earners is wrong. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:24:53 PM EDT
[#27]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Flat tax rate is wrong wrong wrong. Whenever you get away from everyone paying the same AMOUNT, you are embracing socialism. As it is, we need to cap the amount that people pay taxes on or at least reduce the rate with increasing income. No, this is wrong. Everyone paying the same PERCENTAGE is fair, paying the same amount is not. Spend more, pay more sales tax. Save and invest more, pay less. Capitalism at its best. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:25:41 PM EDT
[#28]
Quote HistoryQuoted: You pay most of those other taxes to state, county, municipality and other jurisdictions. They aren’t going away. We know from places that have the VAT that people reduce their consumer spending, increase their savings, and the economies tend to be smaller. So it 1% growth is for you, by all means. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: Quoted: National sales tax. Stop taxing productivity. If your major goal is having a smaller economy that’s a good one. No, not really. Would you buy more things or fewer things with a 23% sales tax? More, because I’d be paying less in income taxes, not to mention property taxes, existing sales taxes, capital gains taxes, etc. I’d come out ahead net net. You pay most of those other taxes to state, county, municipality and other jurisdictions. They aren’t going away. We know from places that have the VAT that people reduce their consumer spending, increase their savings, and the economies tend to be smaller. So it 1% growth is for you, by all means. Not a value-added tax, a national sales tax. Big difference in the way it is structured. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:26:52 PM EDT
[#29]
Quote HistoryQuoted: What hard choices are you willing to make and how are you going to keep the people who will literally starve to death from stopping you? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Mandatory balanced budget. If you don’t have the money, tuff shit. What hard choices are you willing to make and how are you going to keep the people who will literally starve to death from stopping you? Anything that isn't a specifically enumerated function of the Federal Government in the Constitution gets cut. Simple. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:28:23 PM EDT
[#30]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Because you are eliminating hundreds of thousands of useless jobs and the bureaucracies that go with them. That’s the dream but you’ll never pass cuts that deep. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:28:57 PM EDT
[#31]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s clear from this thread that people do not understand what the government spends money on. You get it but most don’t. Around 60% of the budget is social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the debt. Another 15% is defense spending. Entitlement reform, either through raising the payroll taxes, cutting benefits, or raising the eligibility age, is the key to reducing federal expenditures but such reforms are very unpopular. Yet you are unclear or misinformed. Lumping Medicaid with Social Security is a flawed position as in adding interest payments to get that percentage up. Cut welfare as in Medicaid, Section 8, food stamps etc for any bastard kids. Cut federal agencies like Education (100% gone) and major cuts to EPA, Energy departments and others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:30:04 PM EDT
[#32]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Bullshit. A 25% sales tax would hit about 90% of people harder and the only people that would benefit are people that invest their money rather than consume it. The IRS was only like $14B last year. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: This. The rich would pay more, the poor would pay less. Undocumented workers would pay taxes. Tourists would pay taxes. Drug dealers would pay taxes. Meanwhile, the IRS, which costs how many billions to keep running, would no longer be needed. Bullshit. A 25% sales tax would hit about 90% of people harder and the only people that would benefit are people that invest their money rather than consume it. The IRS was only like $14B last year. A 25% sales tax wouldn't be needed. Last time I saw the Fair Tax folks do the calculation, it was 17%. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:30:26 PM EDT
[#33]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Not a value-added tax, a national sales tax. Big difference in the way it is structured. Huge difference, but the end result is that sales of consumer goods are carrying a 20-30% weight around their necks and people spend less money, and the economy experiences less growth. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:31:45 PM EDT
[#34]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A 25% sales tax wouldn't be needed. Last time I saw the Fair Tax folks do the calculation, it was 17%. Heritage said 17% if you didn’t exclude things and kept payroll taxes. Congratulations you now have a 15% income tax and a 17% sales tax. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:32:34 PM EDT
[#35]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It wouldn’t be. You’d still owe all your state and local taxes. Do you pay more than 23% of your income to the federal government? Very few people do. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: If that was the ONLY tax paid, I’d come out ahead It wouldn’t be. You’d still owe all your state and local taxes. Do you pay more than 23% of your income to the federal government? Very few people do. Most people do. Don't forget that most people pay SS and FICA and their employer pays SS as well. Further, income tax and other Federal taxes like on gasoline, airline tickets, and the like take that well above 23% for most people. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:32:58 PM EDT
[#36]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Yet you are unclear or misinformed. Lumping Medicaid with Social Security is a flawed position as in adding interest payments to get that percentage up. Cut welfare as in Medicaid, Section 8, food stamps etc for any bastard kids. Cut federal agencies like Education (100% gone) and major cuts to EPA, Energy departments and others. Those are not particularly deep cuts compared to where you’re trying to go, but you did cut nuclear weapons so you’re probably secretly a commie. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:36:33 PM EDT
[#37]
Quote HistoryQuoted: And they aren’t going anywhere. Getting rid of them is such an unpopular proposition that no candidate with any hope of getting elected will take that position. The states would never create such programs because they would essentially encourage poor people to move there to take advantage. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Unfortunately yes. Stuff that never should have been stuff the federal government was involved with. Nor does it have any constitutional authority to do so. If such programs were going to be around they should have been from the state. And they aren’t going anywhere. Getting rid of them is such an unpopular proposition that no candidate with any hope of getting elected will take that position. The states would never create such programs because they would essentially encourage poor people to move there to take advantage. I agree they aren't going anywhere but I stand by it isn't the federal governments business and they never should have gotten involved. It would at least be constitutional for the state to do similar programs on their own if they wanted too. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:37:08 PM EDT
[#38]
Quote HistoryQuoted: The PhD economists will tell you the same. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: An expert has spoken. The PhD economists will tell you the same. No, they will not. The competent ones will tell you that a simple national sales tax will eliminate hundreds of billions of dollars in misallocated resources owing to stupid tax structures that favor malinvestment. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:38:45 PM EDT
[#39]
Quote HistoryQuoted: We’ve had this discussion elsewhere. Businesses do. Usually a tax increase is almost evenly split between the owner, the worker, and the consumer. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Businesses do not pay taxes. We’ve had this discussion elsewhere. Businesses do. Usually a tax increase is almost evenly split between the owner, the worker, and the consumer. No, businesses do not. A tax is not paid by owner, worker, and consumer. It *must* come from the consumer because that's where revenue for the business comes from to begin with. It cannot be otherwise. It's the definition of a for-profit enterprise. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:38:51 PM EDT
[#40]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Or, instead of allowing people to own a license and transfer it, and pay most of the money to the bank for their loan for it, you could just sell it by the year, and the taxpayers get the value of it instead of the banksters and the government still collects the same amount of money on the transactions. I just told you how to cut liberals out (banksters) and most people missed it. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Fwiw, an economic rents tax is effectively already in place. The fair value of any asset, tangible or intangible, is the present value of future cash flows. To extent those cash flows are taxed, as earnings currently are, those assets bear the cost. If you shift from observable cash flows/earnings to some wholly subjective asset value you create a system even more rife for abuse than we have now. If you want to ensure those assets bear a share of taxes, simply end many of the deductions we currently have in place. Or, instead of allowing people to own a license and transfer it, and pay most of the money to the bank for their loan for it, you could just sell it by the year, and the taxpayers get the value of it instead of the banksters and the government still collects the same amount of money on the transactions. I just told you how to cut liberals out (banksters) and most people missed it. By whom and how would the rent be determined? |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:39:25 PM EDT
[#41]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Right now, tech companies like Amazon have most of their value in IP... what taxes are they paying? Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Fwiw, an economic rents tax is effectively already in place. The fair value of any asset, tangible or intangible, is the present value of future cash flows. To extent those cash flows are taxed, as earnings currently are, those assets bear the cost. If you shift from observable cash flows/earnings to some wholly subjective asset value you create a system even more rife for abuse than we have now. If you want to ensure those assets bear a share of taxes, simply end many of the deductions we currently have in place. Right now, tech companies like Amazon have most of their value in IP... what taxes are they paying? That is why the last sentence about deductions |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:42:07 PM EDT
[#42]
Quote HistoryQuoted: It’s clear from this thread that people do not understand what the government spends money on. You get it but most don’t. Around 60% of the budget is social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the debt. Another 15% is defense spending. Entitlement reform, either through raising the payroll taxes, cutting benefits, or raising the eligibility age, is the key to reducing federal expenditures but such reforms are very unpopular. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: The IRS is $13.4B a year. FY21 spending was $6.818T so congratulations you just found a way to cut a fraction of 1%. It’s clear from this thread that people do not understand what the government spends money on. You get it but most don’t. Around 60% of the budget is social security, Medicare, Medicaid, and interest on the debt. Another 15% is defense spending. Entitlement reform, either through raising the payroll taxes, cutting benefits, or raising the eligibility age, is the key to reducing federal expenditures but such reforms are very unpopular. Eliminating any .gov function that isn't specifically enumerated in the Constitution would cause our economy to boom. Remember that there is nothing the .gov can "give" to anyone without first taking it away from someone else. Government is a parasite. It should be made as small as possible and a Constitutional filter is the best way to make that happen. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:43:44 PM EDT
[#43]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Dude, you're using a number that includes children and retirees. If you want to have a real discussion, skip the games and use real numbers. Taxes are measured by "tax units" which includes married couples and single workers... as well as retirees since they pay income taxes on their SS. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:44:17 PM EDT
[#44]
Quote HistoryQuoted: This is like a wind up toy but instead of driving around the house when the pull the cord it shits out 1990s GOP talking points. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: balanced budget amendment, term limits, shrink the gov to bare minimum, no more world police. Every registered voter gets a rifle. This is like a wind up toy but instead of driving around the house when the pull the cord it shits out 1990s GOP talking points. So smaller, less expensive, less intrusive, freedom expanding .gov isn't what you believe in. Got it. Thanks for telling us where you stand. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:45:52 PM EDT
[#45]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Most people do. Don't forget that most people pay SS and FICA and their employer pays SS as well. Further, income tax and other Federal taxes like on gasoline, airline tickets, and the like take that well above 23% for most people. The average rate of income taxation for taxpayers filing in 50-100k is only 9.2%. Add 7.45% for payroll taxes and you’d better be buying a lot of concert tickets. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:46:10 PM EDT
[#46]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Now you are creating a progressive sales tax to replace a progressive income tax... The numbers are pretty clear, replacing the income tax alone would be like a 23% tax, and that's before dynamic scoring as the economy shrinks. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: You are the only one who said 25%, so I guess you are calling BS on yourself? It would need to have brackets, just like we have now. Food would be taxed less. Luxury items would be taxed more. It can be worked to be even keeled. And the only reason to invest money is so you can spend more later. Invested money that sees returns would increase tax revenue. Now you are creating a progressive sales tax to replace a progressive income tax... The numbers are pretty clear, replacing the income tax alone would be like a 23% tax, and that's before dynamic scoring as the economy shrinks. No, the numbers are clear that by eliminating all revenue generation tricks the .gov uses and limiting funding to the .gov to only that which would occur from a national sales tax, the percentage would be around 17% for everyone. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:47:57 PM EDT
[#47]
Quote HistoryQuoted: No. They are not. Most of the middle class doesn't even pay income taxes and the only capital gain they have is when they sell their house, which is also not taxed. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Between income tax, sales tax, capital gains tax, real estate taxes etc., the average middle class family is already paying in that neighborhood. No. They are not. Most of the middle class doesn't even pay income taxes and the only capital gain they have is when they sell their house, which is also not taxed. Yes, they do. You forget there are gasoline taxes, excise taxes on guns, and hundreds of others. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:48:16 PM EDT
[#48]
Quote HistoryQuoted: Taxes are measured by "tax units" which includes married couples and single workers... as well as retirees since they pay income taxes on their SS. Quote HistoryQuoted: Quoted: Dude, you're using a number that includes children and retirees. If you want to have a real discussion, skip the games and use real numbers. Taxes are measured by "tax units" which includes married couples and single workers... as well as retirees since they pay income taxes on their SS. When you break it down to ages 25-55, it's closer to 10% that don't pay income tax (in non-pandemic years, anyway). What income level do you consider middle class? Why can't you answer that? It's a simple question... |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:49:42 PM EDT
[#49]
Quote HistoryQuoted: A 25% sales tax wouldn't be needed. Last time I saw the Fair Tax folks do the calculation, it was 17%. The Fairtax proposal is 23% with a prebate, and it would eliminate the income tax and the employee side of the payroll tax. |
|
|
|
Posted: 8/14/2022 11:49:42 PM EDT
[#50]
Quote HistoryQuoted: By whom and how would the rent be determined? Auction. |
|
|
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.
