After submitting my tax return this year, I started thinking again about the different alternatives out there that would be better than the current robbery.
ERRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
I mean “system”
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-289.html
What are some of your thoughts?
My only issue is if a National Sales Tax is implemented then the Income Tax must be repealed. I do not like the fact of having both. It gives the Government too many more ways to tax us. I live in a state with out income tax, and that is how I like it.
I am all for this, but how would you determine if a family is truely poor if they are getting paid cash under the table?
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
My only issue is if a National Sales Tax is implemented then the Income Tax must be repealed. I do not like the fact of having both. It gives the Government too many more ways to tax us. I live in a state with out income tax, and that is how I like it.
I am all for this, but how would you determine if a family is truely poor if they are getting paid cash under the table?[/quote]
I 100% agree the personal income tax has got to go.
And you do pose a very good question in regards to finding who is really deserving of aid?
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
[quote]dmaddox wrote:
My only issue is if a National Sales Tax is implemented then the Income Tax must be repealed. I do not like the fact of having both. It gives the Government too many more ways to tax us. I live in a state with out income tax, and that is how I like it.
I am all for this, but how would you determine if a family is truely poor if they are getting paid cash under the table?[/quote]
I 100% agree the personal income tax has got to go.
And you do pose a very good question in regards to finding who is really deserving of aid?[/quote]
I say we let the politicians figure it out. lawlz.
Let charity figure that out.
Move to a sales tax, and get rid of the Welfare system? That is a great idea. Serious
Interesting and worth considering.
One thing I don’t like about the methodology is that they use consumption as a proxy for lifetime earning. I’m not sure that’s a good choice. Consumption is much less unequal in the US than income. Economists aren’t in agreement as to why that is. Part of it is probably for the straightforward reasons that Cato cites – not all low-income people are poor in a lifetime sense, as some are students who will make more money in the future, and some are retirees who made more money in the past. But there’s also the possibility that some people who are poor in a lifetime sense have high consumption anyhow --they spend a lot, they just go into debt or save less. In which case, Cato is making the tax look less regressive than it is.
Politicians are avoiding this issue like the plague. They are too busy arguing over carry on fees charges by airlines and smokeless tobacco in baseball. They are hinting towards adding a VAT (value added tax) which is a tax on goods at every level of production. Europe has something like this now. There is no talk of doing away with income taxes, which 47% of Americans don’t pay. I like the “flat tax” concept, which is strictly based on consumption. I make decent money, but consume less than most. This also reduces the number of IRS employees. I read somewhere that the IRS has more employees than the FBI and CIA combined, which is over 100,000. I don’t have a source, just something I read once. It’s rediculous how big our government is getting.
I want to throw out a random question, still related to the topic, but in no means trying to hijack.
How many of you feel that you get an equal return in what you pay in taxes? What I mean is, how many people here think that what they pay in taxes is spent in a beneficial way that is obvious in your daily life? I ask this question because, I have consistently seen my taxes go up, mainly my state taxes, but do not feel I have seen an equal return in my quality of life from the state.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I want to throw out a random question, still related to the topic, but in no means trying to hijack.
How many of you feel that you get an equal return in what you pay in taxes? What I mean is, how many people here think that what they pay in taxes is spent in a beneficial way that is obvious in your daily life? I ask this question because, I have consistently seen my taxes go up, mainly my state taxes, but do not feel I have seen an equal return in my quality of life from the state. [/quote]
You’re not the one benefitting from the incremental tax increases, why would you see an equal return? No one who makes enough money to be taxed benefits equally to the incremental tax increase. As a matter of fact, economically speaking, taxes are generally known to decrease the overall standard of living.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I want to throw out a random question, still related to the topic, but in no means trying to hijack.
How many of you feel that you get an equal return in what you pay in taxes? What I mean is, how many people here think that what they pay in taxes is spent in a beneficial way that is obvious in your daily life? I ask this question because, I have consistently seen my taxes go up, mainly my state taxes, but do not feel I have seen an equal return in my quality of life from the state. [/quote]
I have not seen a return of my money either, and I do not pay a State Income tax.
Scrap the income tax, and introduce a value added tax (VAT). VAT should only be applicable for luxuries, i.e. no VAT on food, education, home utilities (water, electricity, gas[methane]), but a fair amount of VAT on a playstation, 3d-tv, cars.
Obviously this is a basic reasoning, but hopefully you shouldn’t get penalized if you’re living a basic life and saving for something such as your children’s future college fees.
[quote]AlisaV wrote:
Interesting and worth considering.
One thing I don’t like about the methodology is that they use consumption as a proxy for lifetime earning. I’m not sure that’s a good choice. Consumption is much less unequal in the US than income. Economists aren’t in agreement as to why that is. Part of it is probably for the straightforward reasons that Cato cites – not all low-income people are poor in a lifetime sense, as some are students who will make more money in the future, and some are retirees who made more money in the past. But there’s also the possibility that some people who are poor in a lifetime sense have high consumption anyhow --they spend a lot, they just go into debt or save less. In which case, Cato is making the tax look less regressive than it is.[/quote]
The reason why consumption is not equal is because of time preference. Some people want their stuff now and are willing to get less for their payment, and others are willing to wait til later and receive more.
[quote]MaximusB wrote:
I want to throw out a random question, still related to the topic, but in no means trying to hijack.
How many of you feel that you get an equal return in what you pay in taxes? What I mean is, how many people here think that what they pay in taxes is spent in a beneficial way that is obvious in your daily life? I ask this question because, I have consistently seen my taxes go up, mainly my state taxes, but do not feel I have seen an equal return in my quality of life from the state. [/quote]
It depends on which type of return you are talking about, in the way of food stamps, welfare and housing? If so I have to say no since I do not qualify for any of those items.
Referring to bridges, roads and mass transit I have to admit yes. Also for Medicare since my wife is disabled she qualifies for part A medicare coverage. Oh yeah I can’t forget schools (with three kids all in grade school), we live in a pretty good school district.
[quote]huwwaters wrote:
Scrap the income tax, and introduce a value added tax (VAT). VAT should only be applicable for luxuries, i.e. no VAT on food, education, home utilities (water, electricity, gas[methane]), but a fair amount of VAT on a playstation, 3d-tv, cars.
Obviously this is a basic reasoning, but hopefully you shouldn’t get penalized if you’re living a basic life and saving for something such as your children’s future college fees.[/quote]
I have to say that I do not agree with the VAT. With this set up your basically doing the same thing we are currently with the income tax system in place. (at least the way I understand it)
[quote]lanchefan1 wrote:
[quote]huwwaters wrote:
Scrap the income tax, and introduce a value added tax (VAT). VAT should only be applicable for luxuries, i.e. no VAT on food, education, home utilities (water, electricity, gas[methane]), but a fair amount of VAT on a playstation, 3d-tv, cars.
Obviously this is a basic reasoning, but hopefully you shouldn’t get penalized if you’re living a basic life and saving for something such as your children’s future college fees.[/quote]
I have to say that I do not agree with the VAT. With this set up your basically doing the same thing we are currently with the income tax system in place. (at least the way I understand it)[/quote]
But if all you did was work, and buy some food, you’d pretty much pay no tax.
Taxing consumption is the fairest way to tax the people. 2 big advantages to this are: 1) everyone pays-illegals, drug dealers, people getting paid in cash under the table. The only way to escape it is by growing your own food or bartering, which are both good things imo. Americans need to return to creating goods and services themselves instead of going to Walmart when they need something. That is why this depression is so different from that of the 30s. People knew how to make and grow things back then and could still take care of themselves in times of trouble. Now we rely on unemployment. 2) Generally, consumption increases with income. Therfore, taxes are proportional to income. There are exceptions to this, grannies hiding millions in their mattress etc. None of this matters. Govt will get bigger and taxes will go up. I guess I have a defeatist attitude. With the mainstream media demonizing the Tea party movement which is simultaneously being taken over by the Republicans, can you blame me? i definitely don’t see a fair return on my taxes. I am young and healthy and that’s just the way it is. Cances are the money I have paid in won’t be around when I am the one that needs help.
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
Taxing consumption is the fairest way to tax the people. 2 big advantages to this are: 1) everyone pays-illegals, drug dealers, people getting paid in cash under the table. The only way to escape it is by growing your own food or bartering, which are both good things imo. Americans need to return to creating goods and services themselves instead of going to Walmart when they need something. That is why this depression is so different from that of the 30s. People knew how to make and grow things back then and could still take care of themselves in times of trouble. Now we rely on unemployment. 2) Generally, consumption increases with income. Therfore, taxes are proportional to income. There are exceptions to this, grannies hiding millions in their mattress etc. None of this matters. Govt will get bigger and taxes will go up. I guess I have a defeatist attitude. With the mainstream media demonizing the Tea party movement which is simultaneously being taken over by the Republicans, can you blame me? i definitely don’t see a fair return on my taxes. I am young and healthy and that’s just the way it is. Cances are the money I have paid in won’t be around when I am the one that needs help. [/quote]
Why should I lower my opportunity cost just so I can grow my own stuff? Recessions are created by Government Expansion of credit, maybe we do not need to worry about growing our own stuff and worry about the government expanding credit.
[quote]Brother Chris wrote:
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
Taxing consumption is the fairest way to tax the people. 2 big advantages to this are: 1) everyone pays-illegals, drug dealers, people getting paid in cash under the table. The only way to escape it is by growing your own food or bartering, which are both good things imo. Americans need to return to creating goods and services themselves instead of going to Walmart when they need something. That is why this depression is so different from that of the 30s. People knew how to make and grow things back then and could still take care of themselves in times of trouble. Now we rely on unemployment. 2) Generally, consumption increases with income. Therfore, taxes are proportional to income. There are exceptions to this, grannies hiding millions in their mattress etc. None of this matters. Govt will get bigger and taxes will go up. I guess I have a defeatist attitude. With the mainstream media demonizing the Tea party movement which is simultaneously being taken over by the Republicans, can you blame me? i definitely don’t see a fair return on my taxes. I am young and healthy and that’s just the way it is. Cances are the money I have paid in won’t be around when I am the one that needs help. [/quote]
Why should I lower my opportunity cost just so I can grow my own stuff? Recessions are created by Government Expansion of credit, maybe we do not need to worry about growing our own stuff and worry about the government expanding credit.[/quote]
Creating goods for ourselves and returning to a more self-sufficient lifestyle was a minor point in my post. It probably isn’t cost affective to do so right now, but the knowledge and ability will be handy if things evet get really bad. I agree with you on government’s expansion of credit. It is a hidden form of taxation.
[quote]AdamDrew wrote:
Taxing consumption is the fairest way to tax the people. 2 big advantages to this are: 1) everyone pays-illegals, drug dealers, people getting paid in cash under the table. The only way to escape it is by growing your own food or bartering, which are both good things imo. Americans need to return to creating goods and services themselves instead of going to Walmart when they need something. That is why this depression is so different from that of the 30s. People knew how to make and grow things back then and could still take care of themselves in times of trouble. Now we rely on unemployment. 2) Generally, consumption increases with income. Therfore, taxes are proportional to income. There are exceptions to this, grannies hiding millions in their mattress etc. None of this matters. Govt will get bigger and taxes will go up. I guess I have a defeatist attitude. With the mainstream media demonizing the Tea party movement which is simultaneously being taken over by the Republicans, can you blame me? i definitely don’t see a fair return on my taxes. I am young and healthy and that’s just the way it is. Cances are the money I have paid in won’t be around when I am the one that needs help. [/quote]
This would make taxation more voluntary than the government can allow. In a recession/depression, people reduce their consumption thus reducing government’s income. Thus government would have to reduce transfer payments. Too many people are bought off by the nanny state.
Consumption tax as the main source of government revenue went out in 1913. We can’t be super power, be a nanny stae, and have wars if we have a revenue stream that is in such flux.