Dismantle all welfare programs.

[uscitizen]

Aww I guess the economy would not miss a 3/4 of trillion or so per year reduction in intake.

 

[Immanuel]

Gilbert, the way I see the facts of the question in relationship to this is that the $15,000 stock investment is in fact the placing of that cash into a "savings" program. Eventually those stocks will be sold and the money spent on a taxable event thus taxes will be paid on the $15,000. For instance, those stocks were sold in order to provide the out of pocket medical expenses of the investors child?

I'm not sure that is a good enough answer for you, but it is the kind of answer that I think I remember from when I read about the Fair Tax years ago.

I hope that helps.

I like your answer because it presents a view I hadn't heard before and on the surface seems reasonable to me. It doesn't alleviate my concern that the system will be morphed by politicans who'll set tax rates based on their own discriminations, not much different than what we see now through "sin taxses" but on a grander scale.

The Fair Tax is set up so that every item is taxed at the same rate in order to prevent that from happening.

I actually like the idea of modifying the proposal and making certain things non-taxable at all. Necessary things like baby formula, bread and milk... things like that that the needy have to buy to survive. Everyone buys milk and bread and thus would benefit from this but only the rich can afford to pay for that luxury yacht and I don't think the rich are going to forgo the yacht in order to avoid paying taxes.

Such a modified version of the Fair Tax would (I believe) help those who really are in need.

edit: but I see and understand your concern about politicians morphing tax rates. In fact, that is one of the big reasons I am for the Fair Tax as it is, because that is exactly what today's politicians do to help the lobbyists who get them elected. "You scratch my back, I'll scratch yours".

Immie

 

[The T]

Aww I guess the economy would not miss a 3/4 of trillion or so per year reduction in intake.

Based upon WHAT exactly? Define your terms?

 

[csbarry]

You have to be a troll, nobody can be this stupid.

Hush up ya' little pussy ...

 

[csbarry]

Can someone else feed this troll ?

Just tell him you think his thread is stupid and that you are offended.

He will giggle and go away happy

Sounds like everyones a troll but you, ah? Oh, the irony!

 

[The T]

Gilbert, the way I see the facts of the question in relationship to this is that the $15,000 stock investment is in fact the placing of that cash into a "savings" program. Eventually those stocks will be sold and the money spent on a taxable event thus taxes will be paid on the $15,000. For instance, those stocks were sold in order to provide the out of pocket medical expenses of the investors child?

I'm not sure that is a good enough answer for you, but it is the kind of answer that I think I remember from when I read about the Fair Tax years ago.

I hope that helps.

I like your answer because it presents a view I hadn't heard before and on the surface seems reasonable to me. It doesn't alleviate my concern that the system will be morphed by politicans who'll set tax rates based on their own discriminations, not much different than what we see now through "sin taxses" but on a grander scale.

Once enacted? The Politicians can't touch it except by Amendment action...and THAT in of itself is HARD to do and why the Constitution isn't filled by hundreds of Amendments in our 200+ year History...and why we aren't wrecked by now. [Even now we are on the road to being wrecked by the current CODE(s), because they're punative, and practice Class Warfare for manipulation purposes].

 

[The T]

You have to be a troll, nobody can be this stupid.

Hush up ya' little pussy ...

Go easy on the DogBoy...he's a tender age in his teens and doesn't have Life experience to speak of. In 20 years or so he *MIGHT*, and hopefully when he's become productive, and WISE?

His tune will have changed. But for now? He's like *ANY* petulant childspeaking out of emotion in lieu of *LOGIC* and LIFE experience.

 

[GilbertArizona]

The Fair Tax is set up so that every item is taxed at the same rate

Well from my reading of the legislation that's not the situation. Consider a car dealer with a used Cadillac on his lot having a Blue Book value of $20,000. From what I read his tax liability could be either $0 or roughly $6000 based on the circumstances.

 

[uscitizen]

I prefer the pure flat tax on ALL income with no deductions. Set the rate at maybe 10% and prohibit the govt from spending any more than it takes in.
Require a 75% majority in both house and senate to increase the tax rate.

As long as we are stating pipe dreams.

 

[Modbert]

Go easy on the DogBoy...he's a tender age in his teens and doesn't have Life experience to speak of. In 20 years or so he *MIGHT*, and hopefully when he's become productive, and WISE?

His tune will have changed. But for now? He's like *ANY* petulant childspeaking out of emotion in lieu of *LOGIC* and LIFE experience.

I don't need to be in my 40's to see the problems with this country and yourself. Though I have to wonder where you were politically and political knowledge wise at my age Thomas? If you can still remember those times, that is.

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I think we should end all welfare...period.

Obama was just to much.

Why don't you just move to a country that doesn't have it?

 

[Immanuel]

I like your answer because it presents a view I hadn't heard before and on the surface seems reasonable to me. It doesn't alleviate my concern that the system will be morphed by politicans who'll set tax rates based on their own discriminations, not much different than what we see now through "sin taxses" but on a grander scale.

Once enacted? The Politicians can't touch it except by Amendment action...and THAT in of itself is HARD to do and why the Constitution isn't filled by hundreds of Amendments in our 200+ year History...and why we aren't wrecked by now. [Even now we are on the road to being wrecked by the current CODE(s), because they're punative, and practice Class Warfare for manipulation purposes].

Can you imagine what our Constitution would look like if they could add to it as easily as they pass laws in Congress?

Shoot! We would not be questioning whether or not Health Care Reform was Constitutional because by now it would be part of the Constitution.

Immie

 

[SpidermanTuba]

I prefer the pure flat tax on ALL income with no deductions. Set the rate at maybe 10% and prohibit the govt from spending any more than it takes in.
Require a 75% majority in both house and senate to increase the tax rate.

As long as we are stating pipe dreams.

So in other words, if we ever have to take on debt to fund a major war, say, like, I dunno, a world war, you'd rather just go ahead and surrender to the Nazis rather than have to borrow money?

 

[SpidermanTuba]

The Fair Tax is set up so that every item is taxed at the same rate

Well from my reading of the legislation that's not the situation. Consider a car dealer with a used Cadillac on his lot having a Blue Book value of $20,000. From what I read his tax liability could be either $0 or roughly $6000 based on the circumstances.

Used items would not be taxed.

Of course, the term "used" could be hard to define. If I build a car out of entirely used parts, for instance, is it a new car, since those parts are being combined in a new and functional way, or is it a used car, since all the parts have had the tax paid on them?


But the supporters of the national sales tax think it will simplify things.

 

[uscitizen]

I prefer the pure flat tax on ALL income with no deductions. Set the rate at maybe 10% and prohibit the govt from spending any more than it takes in.
Require a 75% majority in both house and senate to increase the tax rate.

As long as we are stating pipe dreams.

So in other words, if we ever have to take on debt to fund a major war, say, like, I dunno, a world war, you'd rather just go ahead and surrender to the Nazis rather than have to borrow money?

Yes unless 75% of congress agreed.

Or as an option everytime us troops inter combat a 20% war tax is invoked automatically on top of the regular tax for as long as they are deployed.

Or we could actually build up a money reserve for use in case of disaster or war?

It does not really matter much we could not make enough war machines anymore to fight a major war.

 

[Immanuel]

The Fair Tax is set up so that every item is taxed at the same rate

Well from my reading of the legislation that's not the situation. Consider a car dealer with a used Cadillac on his lot having a Blue Book value of $20,000. From what I read his tax liability could be either $0 or roughly $6000 based on the circumstances.

If I remember correctly, used items are not taxed and that is because they were taxed at the point of original purchase. The same applies to homes. If you buy a home from the builder you pay taxes on the purchase. When you sell that home (hopefully for a profit) the buyer does not have to pay taxes on that. And think about how thankful we all can be in that regards, because it would be a nightmare for you as a private seller of your home to have to submit those taxes to the government.

However, the real estate fees would be taxable as they should be.

Immie

 

[SpidermanTuba]

Or we could actually build up a money reserve for use in case of disaster or war?

Yeah, right, I'm sure the Republican party would allow that to happen. They proved in the 90's that the instant the government actually does get a surplus they'd rather hand it out to their rich buddies than actually pay down the fucking debt.

 

[uscitizen]

Or we could actually build up a money reserve for use in case of disaster or war?

Yeah, right, I'm sure the Republican party would allow that to happen. They proved in the 90's that the instant the government actually does get a surplus they'd rather hand it out to their rich buddies than actually pay down the fucking debt.

I referred to this concept as a pipe dream as is much of this thread.

But were I elevated to the dictators position....

 

[Immanuel]

Or we could actually build up a money reserve for use in case of disaster or war?

Yeah, right, I'm sure the Republican party would allow that to happen. They proved in the 90's that the instant the government actually does get a surplus they'd rather hand it out to their rich buddies than actually pay down the fucking debt.

I referred to this concept as a pipe dream as is much of this thread.

But were I elevated to the dictators position....

You know, if I were elevated to a dictator's position, I would only tax arrogant SOB's, racists and elite snobs.

Of course, I get to define those categories and if I say you fit in one of those categories, well, you fit and you pay the tax.

Immie

 

[The T]

Go easy on the DogBoy...he's a tender age in his teens and doesn't have Life experience to speak of. In 20 years or so he *MIGHT*, and hopefully when he's become productive, and WISE?

His tune will have changed. But for now? He's like *ANY* petulant childspeaking out of emotion in lieu of *LOGIC* and LIFE experience.

I don't need to be in my 40's to see the problems with this country and yourself. Though I have to wonder where you were politically and political knowledge wise at my age Thomas? If you can still remember those times, that is.

You are an arrogant fuck...aren't you? *YOU* have no fucking clue BOY. Keep assuming. It will be your undoing.