Flat 10% income tax

[ba1614]

This year I want a flat 10% income tax with a single deduction of 85,000 so that anyone making below that will not pay any and any amount above that pays a single flat rate without any loopholes or complications.

If any republican or democrat wants my vote then they better do that.

I like it, but I'd get rid of the deduction and have it on every dollar of income, by everyone.

 

[xsited1]

This year I want a flat 10% income tax with a single deduction of 85,000 so that anyone making below that will not pay any and any amount above that pays a single flat rate without any loopholes or complications.

If any republican or democrat wants my vote then they better do that.

People who make less than $85,000 will not pay any income tax? I'm guessing you make $85,000 or less per year.

 

[code1211]

I agree with the concept as long as ALL income and profit is taxed at 10%. No deductions, no exemptions.

Watch the wealthy balk when they have to pay taxes on every cent they make

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

 

[rightwinger]

People who don't pay income tax still pay taxes.

Sales taxes, excise taxes, import taxes, fuel surcharges, telephone...

There are tons of taxes out there that you don't even see but are passed on to the consumer

 

[PeterS]

This year I want a flat 10% income tax with a single deduction of 85,000 so that anyone making below that will not pay any and any amount above that pays a single flat rate without any loopholes or complications.

If any republican or democrat wants my vote then they better do that.

I would prefer a revenue neutral flat tax. That way if people wanted a 10% tax, or no tax, they have to get off their butts and elect a majority to implement the policies that reduce government to that level. It's your government. If you want something do something about it otherwise pay your fricking taxes and shut up!

 

[PeterS]

And where is spending money on infrastructure in the Constitution?

Article I Section 8.

Could you quote for me the relevant clause?

If you want direct constitutional power to create infrastructure you have the eminent domain, the power to create postal roads, and regulation if commerce. I am leaving out defense because if you throw that in those righties would use government to control every aspect of our lives...

 

[The Rabbi]

I agree with the concept as long as ALL income and profit is taxed at 10%. No deductions, no exemptions.

Watch the wealthy balk when they have to pay taxes on every cent they make

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

 

[uscitizen]

I agree with the concept as long as ALL income and profit is taxed at 10%. No deductions, no exemptions.

Watch the wealthy balk when they have to pay taxes on every cent they make

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

People who are wealthy generate more wealth for themselves. Often at the expense of the little guy.

This is proven with empirical data.

 

[The Rabbi]

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

People who are wealthy generate more wealth for themselves. Often at the expense of the little guy.

This is proven with empirical data.

Only in Marxism.
In real life it doesn't work like that. Wealth is generated by investments in succesful businesses. Those businesses employ people and purchase goods and services from other people and businesses, adding to employemnt.
No surprise you would not understand this. Neither does Obama or anyone connected to him.

 

[PeterS]

I agree with the concept as long as ALL income and profit is taxed at 10%. No deductions, no exemptions.

Watch the wealthy balk when they have to pay taxes on every cent they make

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

So you turned down that job as a CEO because your taxes would go up?

 

[PeterS]

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

People who are wealthy generate more wealth for themselves. Often at the expense of the little guy.

This is proven with empirical data.

Only in Marxism.
In real life it doesn't work like that. Wealth is generated by investments in succesful businesses. Those businesses employ people and purchase goods and services from other people and businesses, adding to employemnt.
No surprise you would not understand this. Neither does Obama or anyone connected to him.

Wealth in a capitalistic system is created by the ownership of productivity and the less you pay for that productivity the more wealth you create for yourself.

 

[PeterS]

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

People who are wealthy generate more wealth for themselves. Often at the expense of the little guy.

This is proven with empirical data.

Whats your point? Wealth has always been created at the expense of others. That isn't an argument against wealth nor a proportional tax.

 

[DiamondDave]

I agree with the concept as long as ALL income and profit is taxed at 10%. No deductions, no exemptions.

Watch the wealthy balk when they have to pay taxes on every cent they make

I think that the wealthy should pay more. I think that everyone should pay something. Maybe 1% up to 50K, 2% up to 85K and then 10% for the "and up" guys.

May a less steeply graduated scale.

It doesn't seem right that those who are enjoying the benefits have none of the costs.

Would the no deductions, no exemptions apply to everyone?

So you are for selective equality.... what other areas to you wish selective equality for?? Voting? Legal rights?

 

[DiamondDave]

People who don't pay income tax still pay taxes.

Sales taxes, excise taxes, import taxes, fuel surcharges, telephone...

There are tons of taxes out there that you don't even see but are passed on to the consumer

And so do people who do pay income taxes

 

[uscitizen]

hy should the wealthy pay more? By doing so, you discourage people from becoming wealthy (in actuality earning high incomes, which isnt the same thing). People who are wealthy generate wealth for others. Why discourage this?

But I agree that everyone needs to pay income tax in order to vote. No representation without taxation!

People who are wealthy generate more wealth for themselves. Often at the expense of the little guy.

This is proven with empirical data.

Only in Marxism.
In real life it doesn't work like that. Wealth is generated by investments in succesful businesses. Those businesses employ people and purchase goods and services from other people and businesses, adding to employemnt.
No surprise you would not understand this. Neither does Obama or anyone connected to him.

So I get wealth from someone buying junk mortgage securities?
Or I get wealth from wealthy speculators driving oil to $150/bbl?
Or do they get richer from me paying $4/gal for gas?

Remember now our economy is 70% consumer spending based.

 

[logical4u]

This year I want a flat 10% income tax with a single deduction of 85,000 so that anyone making below that will not pay any and any amount above that pays a single flat rate without any loopholes or complications.

If any republican or democrat wants my vote then they better do that.

So you think a HUGE percentage of the population should be supported by others (the ones paying the taxes)?
That would be taxation without representation. If all citizens do not pay taxes, then all citizens will not have the motivation to keep the gov small and the taxes low (I know, that is where we are now). How would that be different? The gov would simply keep raising the percentage or dropping the deduction.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Yes.

So you're a fringe creature in a tiny minority. That probably has snob appeal to some degree, no?

Eisenhower championed the interstate highway system on the grounds of its value to national defense,
which even (I think) you would agree is constitutional.

I'm a snob because I'm in a minority? I'm not sure I see the logic behind that one.

National defense is certainly constitutional. However, the interstate highway system does not fall under the category of national defense, regardless of Eisenhower's original intentions.

So the military should build its own, separate, transportation system to move its resources from one part of the country to another? That's insane.

 

[NYcarbineer]

[So you think a HUGE percentage of the population should be supported by others (the ones paying the taxes)?
That would be taxation without representation. .

Given how much money influences elections and governmental decisions, that's a very odd statement.

 

[NYcarbineer]

And where is spending money on infrastructure in the Constitution?

Where is it prohibited?

In the Bill of Rights.

Try reading it sometime.

The Bill of Rights prohibits the federal government funding the interstate highway system?

hilarious.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Clause 1: The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States

Congress can tax who the fuck they want and when they want to do it. If the Constitution wanted to exempt anything from taxation, it would have.

Provide for the common defense and "General Welfare". If infrastructure is needed for the general welfare of the people, Congress is allowed to charge taxes and build infrastructure. They have been doing it for over 200 years

wow. If "to provide for the general welfare" included fucking you in the ass, you'd be all for that too?

Tell Me.

If that were true, then why did they need to pass the 16th Amendment?

The income tax was always constitutional, to some extent, and in some manner. The 16th Amendment only changed that extent and manner.