[quote]nephorm wrote:
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.
Of course, if you really have no income, you shouldn’t be taxed, no matter how rich you are.[/quote]
Why not? Even if I had $ 10 million stuffed in a mattress and never worked I should still pay taxes.
I drive on public roads and have numerous other public benefits.
[quote]MODOK wrote:
But that 10 million WAS taxed, once upon a time, right?
[/quote]
Exactly. Taxes aren’t, or shouldn’t be, a “subscription fee.” And when you take some money from under your mattress and buy food, or gas (to use those public roads), or clothes, or whatever else, you’re paying state and federal taxes to do so.
Zap:
What’s the difference between being taxed over a period of 30 years (at a total gross income of $10M) vs being taxed all at once for that $10M at the beginning (say you struck it rich somehow)? Other than the fact that the government would get access to the money earlier, which is financially preferable?
You would have it so that the man who made $10M over 30 years would have to pay less total taxes than the man who made $10M overnight. Why?
A consumer tax on all retail purchases is the only fair way to tax (import/export is another issue).
[quote]MODOK wrote:
Zap Branigan wrote:
nephorm wrote:
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.
Of course, if you really have no income, you shouldn’t be taxed, no matter how rich you are.
Why not? Even if I had $ 10 million stuffed in a mattress and never worked I should still pay taxes.
I drive on public roads and have numerous other public benefits.
But that 10 million WAS taxed, once upon a time, right?
[/quote]
All money is continually taxed.
If it was only taxed once the system wouldn’t work.
[quote]bigflamer wrote:
Does anyone see a tax that is missing??
[/quote]
One Flat rate tax. Too good to be true. Too simple.
Sorry to differ about the flat tax rate, but I am in favor of a sales tax.
Maybe I see it in a too naive way, but that way people who work under the table, who live off the proceeds of money laundering, or those who find ways to avoid paying taxes (loopholes, whatever) would still have to pay at the cash register.
I am not in favor of taxing the rich more than any other citizens. Either they spend their cash and it helps the economy turn (the multiplicator effect), or they stockpile it and pay taxes eventually when they die. Of course, those who find a way to stockpile $$ and spend it outside of the country where it was generated are not fair.
[quote]MrChill wrote:
Sorry to differ about the flat tax rate, but I am in favor of a sales tax.
Maybe I see it in a too naive way, but that way people who work under the table, who live off the proceeds of money laundering, or those who find ways to avoid paying taxes (loopholes, whatever) would still have to pay at the cash register.
I am not in favor of taxing the rich more than any other citizens. Either they spend their cash and it helps the economy turn (the multiplicator effect), or they stockpile it and pay taxes eventually when they die. Of course, those who find a way to stockpile $$ and spend it outside of the country where it was generated are not fair.[/quote]
I agree with both points.
for the sake of argument, look in to the laffer curve and supplyside economics… basic gist is lower taxes, spur growth in the economy, which then raises tax revenue… some swear by it, some say its a pipe dream… its what bush (the father) called voodoo economics and what ben stein is lecturing about in that scene in ferris beullers day off
[quote]MrChill wrote:
Sorry to differ about the flat tax rate, but I am in favor of a sales tax.
Maybe I see it in a too naive way, but that way people who work under the table, who live off the proceeds of money laundering, or those who find ways to avoid paying taxes (loopholes, whatever) would still have to pay at the cash register.
I am not in favor of taxing the rich more than any other citizens. Either they spend their cash and it helps the economy turn (the multiplicator effect), or they stockpile it and pay taxes eventually when they die. Of course, those who find a way to stockpile $$ and spend it outside of the country where it was generated are not fair.[/quote]
those who stockpile it may help the economy in a roundabout way… when they money is not circulating and is “out” of the economy, prices drop, in a slow and painful way, but they drop… not encouraging the practice, im just saying eventually, prices drop…
[quote]PsychoEconomist wrote:
those who stockpile it may help the economy in a roundabout way… when they money is not circulating and is “out” of the economy, prices drop, in a slow and painful way, but they drop… not encouraging the practice, im just saying eventually, prices drop…
[/quote]
Call it the yin to your yang, but doesnt that stockpiling increase the supply of money, therefore lowering its borrowing cost, and thus indirectly helping the free flow/investment of other peoples money?
(I know, the debate is potentially endless…)
[quote]MrChill wrote:
PsychoEconomist wrote:
those who stockpile it may help the economy in a roundabout way… when they money is not circulating and is “out” of the economy, prices drop, in a slow and painful way, but they drop… not encouraging the practice, im just saying eventually, prices drop…
Call it the yin to your yang, but doesnt that stockpiling increase the supply of money, therefore lowering its borrowing cost, and thus indirectly helping the free flow/investment of other peoples money?
(I know, the debate is potentially endless…)[/quote]
depends on how they stockpile it… if it is locked in a safe at home, under the matress, in the floorboards, then it doesnt increase the supply of money… if it is kept in a bank or in stocks, bonds, then yes it does increase the supply