[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
Income Tax.
dermo wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Ok, then instead of changing to a flat tax system, how about just a flat tax rate?
Sales or income tax?
[/quote]
The problem with taxing only income is that the real wealthy don’t have jobs and don’t earn income as it is currently defined.
What about a small tax on income, with a larger tax on sales?
You’re misunderstanding, Zap Branigan.
I meant a Flat Tax rate on income tax which means everyone pays the same percentage no matter how much they make.
I didn’t mean to eliminate any type of taxes.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Income Tax.
dermo wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Ok, then instead of changing to a flat tax system, how about just a flat tax rate?
Sales or income tax?
The problem with taxing only income is that the real wealthy don’t have jobs and don’t earn income as it is currently defined.
[/quote]
Sales tax goes towards states, I do believe. Which is why some states simply don’t have sales tax.
[quote]grew7 wrote:
What about a small tax on income, with a larger tax on sales?[/quote]
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
You’re misunderstanding, Zap Branigan.
I meant a Flat Tax rate on income tax which means everyone pays the same percentage no matter how much they make.
I didn’t mean to eliminate any type of taxes.
Zap Branigan wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Income Tax.
dermo wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Ok, then instead of changing to a flat tax system, how about just a flat tax rate?
Sales or income tax?
The problem with taxing only income is that the real wealthy don’t have jobs and don’t earn income as it is currently defined.
[/quote]
Gotcha. Some people are discussing a flat income tax and eliminating other federal taxes. That would benefit the rich.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
You’re misunderstanding, Zap Branigan.
I meant a Flat Tax rate on income tax which means everyone pays the same percentage no matter how much they make.
I didn’t mean to eliminate any type of taxes.
Zap Branigan wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Income Tax.
dermo wrote:
JokerFMJ wrote:
Ok, then instead of changing to a flat tax system, how about just a flat tax rate?
Sales or income tax?
The problem with taxing only income is that the real wealthy don’t have jobs and don’t earn income as it is currently defined.
Gotcha. Some people are discussing a flat income tax and eliminating other federal taxes. That would benefit the rich.
[/quote]
Flat tax would benifit the wealthy for a number of reasons. First, the lower class typically have a negative effective tax rate and the middle class pay almost nothing. Second, tax law would still provide for deductions, the largest of which are typically used by high wealth individuals.
It will never pass. If it does, the entire welfare system will have to be reevaluated.
Someone posted about a 15% capital gain tax on inherritance taxes - here is my reply: I don’t know what the rate is off the top of my head, but it is really irrelevant because it is additional taxation on money that was already taxed when the earner filed on it.
Who said, “The ability to tax is the ability to destroy.” ? One of you guys may know.
Any rate of taxation is too high, the reason being that taxes are immoral. They are simply legalized looting. They have destroyed every civilisation know to man, yet we all say, “Oh, its unrealistic to imagine a world without taxation! How would we pay for this or that?”.
As soon as any citizenry gives a bunch of legalized thugs the ‘right’ to any portion of their wealth, that society is doomed. A revolution or war occurs, and then up pops another society quite prepared to make the same dumb mistakes of the previous ones.
Pathetic.
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but all the “middle class” people I know had to pay upwards of $10K this year and all the “upper-lower class” and down got just about all their money back…
But I don’t know what is technically considered the “lower class” and “upper class.”
[quote]JokerFMJ wrote:
I’m not saying you’re wrong, but all the “middle class” people I know had to pay upwards of $10K this year and all the “upper-lower class” and down got just about all their money back…
But I don’t know what is technically considered the “lower class” and “upper class.”[/quote]
How do you define the middle class? Do they have families? Kids? Two jobs? Married? Unmarried? All these factor and many more come into play.
[quote]nephorm wrote:
I have a real problem with the Inheritance Tax (and some others). Why should the government be allowed to tax the same money twice?[/quote]
WTF?
Each dollar we make is taxed several time already.
The only money that should be taxed is inheritance. Income while you are living should not be taxed at all.
When the GOP led congress removes AMT then I will rejoin the Republican party.
Until then I remain registered as ‘no affiliation’.
I thought “class” referred only based on your income, but apparently i’m wrong?
I don’t have strict definitions for them as honestly, i’ve never payed much attention to that whole thing.
So please, if you have true definitions, let me know.
I am currently reading The Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz and John Linder. I recommend it to anybody looking to learn about our current tax system, how it came into existence a person pays in taxes, and an alternative to the current system. Any further information you need to find for yourself, because the more Americans that read this the better.
FYI:
Neal Boortz http://boortz.com/
John Linder http://www.johnlinder.com/
“for death awaits you all with nasty, big, pointy teeth.”
I read in a money magazine recently that the fair tax book was shown to use some faulty math. I will try to find links to it.
[quote]Killer Rabbit wrote:
I am currently reading The Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz and John Linder. I recommend it to anybody looking to learn about our current tax system, how it came into existence a person pays in taxes, and an alternative to the current system. Any further information you need to find for yourself, because the more Americans that read this the better.
FYI:
Neal Boortz http://boortz.com/
John Linder http://www.johnlinder.com/
“for death awaits you all with nasty, big, pointy teeth.”
[/quote]
[quote]Marmadogg wrote:
When the GOP led congress removes AMT then I will rejoin the Republican party.
[/quote]
AMT is an abomination.
Hey headhunter,
You should move to Afghanistan. No taxes. They don’t even like the concept of taxation. Of course there are almost no roads, hospitals, or schools in most places, There is no way to pay for police, so robbers set up illegal check points and steal stuff at will. But that is a small price to pay for your freedom to walk around with your goats, in your mud house, unmolested by the tax man.
I can’t think of a post iron age civilization that didn’t have taxes. Writing was probably invented to collect taxes. Therefore it would be more accurate to say the without taxes civilization cannot exist. However, excessive taxation has crippled many societies. I also think the death tax is just dumb.
[quote]Headhunter wrote:
Who said, “The ability to tax is the ability to destroy.” ? One of you guys may know.
Any rate of taxation is too high, the reason being that taxes are immoral. They are simply legalized looting. They have destroyed every civilisation know to man, yet we all say, “Oh, its unrealistic to imagine a world without taxation! How would we pay for this or that?”.
As soon as any citizenry gives a bunch of legalized thugs the ‘right’ to any portion of their wealth, that society is doomed. A revolution or war occurs, and then up pops another society quite prepared to make the same dumb mistakes of the previous ones.
Pathetic.[/quote]
[quote]terribleivan wrote:
Flat tax would benifit the wealthy for a number of reasons. First, the lower class typically have a negative effective tax rate and the middle class pay almost nothing. Second, tax law would still provide for deductions, the largest of which are typically used by high wealth individuals.
[/quote]
For a flat tax system to work, deductions would have to be eliminated, other than a standard salary deduction (the first x thousand dollars of income won’t be taxed).
I’m not sure where you get that the middle class pays almost nothing.
As a side note that doesn’t necessarily apply to terribleivan, it pisses me off when people talk about the “wealthiest Americans,” and then define that as anyone making 100K/year or over. No one spends any time to realize that there are all sorts of penalties for being “rich” with a salary of 100K.
[quote]Zap Branigan wrote:
The problem with taxing only income is that the real wealthy don’t have jobs and don’t earn income as it is currently defined.
[/quote]
Of course, if you really have no income, you shouldn’t be taxed, no matter how rich you are.
[quote]Flop Hat wrote:
Hey headhunter,
You should move to Afghanistan. No taxes. They don’t even like the concept of taxation. Of course there are almost no roads, hospitals, or schools in most places, There is no way to pay for police, so robbers set up illegal check points and steal stuff at will. But that is a small price to pay for your freedom to walk around with your goats, in your mud house, unmolested by the tax man.
I can’t think of a post iron age civilization that didn’t have taxes. Writing was probably invented to collect taxes. Therefore it would be more accurate to say the without taxes civilization cannot exist. However, excessive taxation has crippled many societies. I also think the death tax is just dumb.
Headhunter wrote:
Who said, “The ability to tax is the ability to destroy.” ? One of you guys may know.
Any rate of taxation is too high, the reason being that taxes are immoral. They are simply legalized looting. They have destroyed every civilisation know to man, yet we all say, “Oh, its unrealistic to imagine a world without taxation! How would we pay for this or that?”.
As soon as any citizenry gives a bunch of legalized thugs the ‘right’ to any portion of their wealth, that society is doomed. A revolution or war occurs, and then up pops another society quite prepared to make the same dumb mistakes of the previous ones.
Pathetic.
[/quote]
As I pointed out, we are so lacking in morals at our top-levels that we are unable to envision any other funding schemes other than by brute force. Have a pet project for which you couldn’t get VOLUNTARY funding? Get yourself in power and milk the populace. How civilized!!
Having been a paraplegic for the past 20 years, I could have depended on the government for food, shelter and medical needs. Instead I have been working full time and paying taxes. A (mostly)blind co-worker and I were complaining about paying taxes. Not only do we not receive government money (saving thousands of tax $ per year) but we have to pay taxes. That is a double whammy. Even if we were income tax exempt, we are still consumers paying sales tax and pumping more money into the economy.
… Time to contact one of the State Rep types.