It's Time For A Flat Tax.

[dblack]

"It is not "fair" that some people pay no income tax and others pay up to 30% or more."

If that is the case, then perhaps all such taxation should be abolished. No tax on income.
Tax purely on purchase.
With modern technology, one's purchasing power could be en-registered on her/his payment card. The 'sales tax' would be in proportion. That way, it would be simple, immediate and progressive at the same time.

As you note, even sales tax can be argued to be 'progressive'. The only truly 'fair' tax, if we're aiming at each of us taking equal responsibility for supporting the government, would be a head tax where we all pay the same amount every year. Pretty much every other taxing scheme is going to take more from some, and that will almost always - for pragmatic reasons if nothing else - be based on ability to pay.

That's why I'm not that emphatic about the 'flatness' aspect of the proposal. In my view, the elimination of incentives and loopholes would do much more to constrain the taxation power and return a sense of fairness to the tax code.

 

[there4eyeM]

It isn't taking more, it is taking proportionately.

Of course, what was offered as an example is not really workable as is. It was merely to clarify the justice and logic.
We aren't all equal when people who make hundreds of times more than the minimum wage pay the same absolute price.
If everything and everyone were fair, a system to achieve this end would not be necessary to impose because it would function already out of common sense.
The rich today are digging their own graves with golden shovels.

 

[dblack]

It isn't taking more, it is taking proportionately.

Of course, what was offered as an example is not really workable as is. It was merely to clarify the justice and logic.
We aren't all equal when people who make hundreds of times more than the minimum wage pay the same absolute price.
If everything and everyone were fair, a system to achieve this end would not be necessary to impose because it would function already out of common sense.
The rich today are digging their own graves with golden shovels.

Yeah. The whole discussion of 'fair' and 'equal' gets tedious - simply because there are so many different ways to define the terms, and everyone has their own. For what it's worth I noticed in your language above "We aren't all equal when ..." - which seems to suggest that people should all BE equal, rather than the idea that I assume informs the OP - that we should all take equal responsibility for supporting the government.

This alludes to the rather contradictory conceptions of the egalitarian ideal we hold. On one side are classical liberals and libertarians who focus in equal rights under the law and equal opportunity. And on the other are modern liberals who are concerned with equal outcomes and equal individual power - political, economic, social and otherwise.

 

[there4eyeM]

How I personally think people should be and how I see they really are do not completely jibe. Existential responsibility should be the measure, 'but it ain't'.
When one person suffers, it often affects others. Sometimes, those others cannot help themselves. Seeing them suffer makes the witness suffer. Often, a desire to provide help is born.
In society, a small percentage but large number of people may need aid at any given time. That is very important in some countries and the population is happy to pay high taxes to alleviate inhuman situations.
That is why in Europe this is called humanism, not socialism.
Aside from that, yes, equal before the law would be nice. There are also social and economic 'laws' that apply.

 

[Widdekind]

Entrepreneurship is working-class capitalism. Derivatives and other distorted forms of creating profit without wealth is capitalism on psychedelics.

Derivatives are "speculation". Purchasers of derivatives are speculating that the price of some (other) asset will increase / decrease. Yet, they do not actually themselves affect the price of that (other) asset, because they are not buying / selling that (other) asset. Instead, they buy / sell derivatives on that (other) asset.

Speculative price "bubbles" occur, when speculators buy the (original) asset. Then, speculative psychology actually affects the (underlying) price. Inexpertly, speculating via derivatives on assets, and speculating (directly) on assets, have different impacts on markets. Price "bubbles" result from the latter (only).

No tax on income. Tax purely on purchase... The 'sales tax' would be in proportion. That way, it would be simple, immediate

a flat-rate tax, on all goods & services ("parts & labor") could be taken from every "receipt & paystub". Billions to trillions of dollars could be raised effortlessly every year, with no need for further effort. Government would be funded continuously; everybody would see their taxes, on every receipt & paystub. Viewing wages as "sale of labor", such a flat-rate sales tax would be equitable, and easy and cost effective to implement.

 

[Rshermr]

Entrepreneurship is working-class capitalism. Derivatives and other distorted forms of creating profit without wealth is capitalism on psychedelics.

Derivatives are "speculation". Purchasers of derivatives are speculating that the price of some (other) asset will increase / decrease. Yet, they do not actually themselves affect the price of that (other) asset, because they are not buying / selling that (other) asset. Instead, they buy / sell derivatives on that (other) asset.

Speculative price "bubbles" occur, when speculators buy the (original) asset. Then, speculative psychology actually affects the (underlying) price. Inexpertly, speculating via derivatives on assets, and speculating (directly) on assets, have different impacts on markets. Price "bubbles" result from the latter (only).

No tax on income. Tax purely on purchase... The 'sales tax' would be in proportion. That way, it would be simple, immediate

a flat-rate tax, on all goods & services ("parts & labor") could be taken from every "receipt & paystub". Billions to trillions of dollars could be raised effortlessly every year, with no need for further effort. Government would be funded continuously; everybody would see their taxes, on every receipt & paystub. Viewing wages as "sale of labor", such a flat-rate sales tax would be equitable, and easy and cost effective to implement.

Every objective study I have ever seen on flat tax shows that the wealthy get more so, the poor and middle class get hurt. What country is there out there that has done well with a flat tax over a couple decades or more??

 

[Skull Pilot]

Entrepreneurship is working-class capitalism. Derivatives and other distorted forms of creating profit without wealth is capitalism on psychedelics.

Derivatives are "speculation". Purchasers of derivatives are speculating that the price of some (other) asset will increase / decrease. Yet, they do not actually themselves affect the price of that (other) asset, because they are not buying / selling that (other) asset. Instead, they buy / sell derivatives on that (other) asset.

Speculative price "bubbles" occur, when speculators buy the (original) asset. Then, speculative psychology actually affects the (underlying) price. Inexpertly, speculating via derivatives on assets, and speculating (directly) on assets, have different impacts on markets. Price "bubbles" result from the latter (only).

No tax on income. Tax purely on purchase... The 'sales tax' would be in proportion. That way, it would be simple, immediate

a flat-rate tax, on all goods & services ("parts & labor") could be taken from every "receipt & paystub". Billions to trillions of dollars could be raised effortlessly every year, with no need for further effort. Government would be funded continuously; everybody would see their taxes, on every receipt & paystub. Viewing wages as "sale of labor", such a flat-rate sales tax would be equitable, and easy and cost effective to implement.

Every objective study I have ever seen on flat tax shows that the wealthy get more so, the poor and middle class get hurt. What country is there out there that has done well with a flat tax over a couple decades or more??

Read the first post in the thread.

 

[editec]

We have plenty of FLAT TAXES, folks, and people pay those every day. Those FLAT taxes are call SALES TAXes.

Income taxes ought not to be flat tax structured.

WE do need to reform our tax system though, I definitely agree with that sentiment.

 

[Widdekind]

[Every objective study I have ever seen on flat tax shows that the wealthy get more so, the poor and middle class get hurt.

Wealthy people would plausibly pay less. Others would not pay more. How does reducing taxes on some, "harm" others? Say somebody gets mugged, and loses their wallet. Then, a cop gives them their wallet (and money) back. How is anybody else, "on the other side of the street" or "in the next block", even affected, much less harmed?

A flat-rate sales tax, on all goods & services, parts & labor, would generate large revenues, fairly, without fuss.

 

[Widdekind]

hypothetically, complex US tax codes could be "suspended" for one year, during which time a flat-rate tax "trial run" could be implemented instead. That way, everybody would see the effects. Perhaps wealthy persons, businesses, and/or banks could indemnify the trial run, against loss of tax revenue (say).

 

[regent]

In the end what type of nation do we want?

A nation with a small upper and a large lower class? This is traditional.

A nation with a small upper class, a large middle class and small lower? Is it possible? American has tried at times but some people think it is not really possible.

Those might be our only choices, I have yet to hear of a nation with a large upper class
and a small lower or small middle. Seems most Americans, if we go by these boards, would prefer the small upper class and large lower.

 

[dblack]

In the end what type of nation do we want?

A nation with a small upper and a large lower class? This is traditional.

A nation with a small upper class, a large middle class and small lower? Is it possible? American has tried at times but some people think it is not really possible.

Those might be our only choices...

Then again, they might not. We could just let everyone work out for themselves how rich they want to be. Maybe they'd rather take it easy and smell the roses, you know?
Or maybe they're really insecure and need lots of money in the bank to sleep easy. What's really so wrong with "to each his own"?

 

[regent]

In the end what type of nation do we want?

A nation with a small upper and a large lower class? This is traditional.

A nation with a small upper class, a large middle class and small lower? Is it possible? American has tried at times but some people think it is not really possible.

Those might be our only choices...

Then again, they might not. We could just let everyone work out for themselves how rich they want to be. Maybe they'd rather take it easy and smell the roses, you know?
Or maybe they're really insecure and need lots of money in the bank to sleep easy. What's really so wrong with "to each his own"?

As Obama and economists from day one have indicated there are a number of factors that decide our lot in life not just one single thing. If that were true one's life would be easy to map out. I'll work hard and be rich.
Traditionally, much of history is filled with nations that had a small elite and the rest of the people. America was one of the few that began to build a middle class and maybe that's what makes a democracy?

 

[Rshermr]

Derivatives are "speculation". Purchasers of derivatives are speculating that the price of some (other) asset will increase / decrease. Yet, they do not actually themselves affect the price of that (other) asset, because they are not buying / selling that (other) asset. Instead, they buy / sell derivatives on that (other) asset.

Speculative price "bubbles" occur, when speculators buy the (original) asset. Then, speculative psychology actually affects the (underlying) price. Inexpertly, speculating via derivatives on assets, and speculating (directly) on assets, have different impacts on markets. Price "bubbles" result from the latter (only).





a flat-rate tax, on all goods & services ("parts & labor") could be taken from every "receipt & paystub". Billions to trillions of dollars could be raised effortlessly every year, with no need for further effort. Government would be funded continuously; everybody would see their taxes, on every receipt & paystub. Viewing wages as "sale of labor", such a flat-rate sales tax would be equitable, and easy and cost effective to implement.

Every objective study I have ever seen on flat tax shows that the wealthy get more so, the poor and middle class get hurt. What country is there out there that has done well with a flat tax over a couple decades or more??

Read the first post in the thread.

Yup, I read them. So, based on the data from Taxfoundation.org, a flat tax of only 10% would increase taxes on:
The bottom 50% of americans by about 600%.
The 25th through 50th percent by about 80%

But it would decrease taxes on the upper 1% by about 60%

Great plan. How do you get blood from a turnip? You have the poor paying at a rate that will leave them unable to live. But, the wealthy will be very, very happy.

Confirms exactly what I said. Rich get richer, poor and middle class get poorer.

The conservative dream. Maybe we should have a vote on it!!

 

[Widdekind]

based on the data from Taxfoundation.org, a flat tax of only 10% would increase taxes on:
The bottom 50% of americans by about 600%.
The 25th through 50th percent by about 80%
But it would decrease taxes on the upper 1% by about 60%

According to the Center for Tax Justice, whilst the income tax is "progressive", most other taxes are "regressive":

It’s often claimed that the richest Americans pay a disproportionate share of taxes while those in the bottom half pay nothing. These claims ignore the many taxes that most Americans are subject to — federal payroll taxes, federal excise taxes, state and local taxes — and focus instead on just one tax, the federal personal income tax. The other taxes are mostly regressive, meaning they take a larger share of income from a poor or middle-income family than they take from a rich family

Including all forms of taxation, effective total tax-rates are moderately "progressive", increasing with income, from 17% for lowest income earners, to 30% for highest income earners. A flat-rate tax of 10% would cost everybody allot less.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Every objective study I have ever seen on flat tax shows that the wealthy get more so, the poor and middle class get hurt. What country is there out there that has done well with a flat tax over a couple decades or more??

Read the first post in the thread.

Yup, I read them. So, based on the data from Taxfoundation.org, a flat tax of only 10% would increase taxes on:
The bottom 50% of americans by about 600%.
The 25th through 50th percent by about 80%

But it would decrease taxes on the upper 1% by about 60%

Great plan. How do you get blood from a turnip? You have the poor paying at a rate that will leave them unable to live. But, the wealthy will be very, very happy.

Confirms exactly what I said. Rich get richer, poor and middle class get poorer.

The conservative dream. Maybe we should have a vote on it!!

The rich don't get richer they just have less taken from them and everyone pays their "fair share"
A person making minimum wage would take home the same pay he does now.

Check out a pay check calculator and run the numbers yourself

https://www.paycycle.com/external/business/paycheckCalculators.jsp

All that would happen is that there would be no tax return to file and he wouldn't be giving the government an interest free loan every year.

We could get rid of the IRS and save billions of dollars a year which could be diverted to programs to help the truly needy. The IRS currently has an annual budget of over 13 billion a year and has more agents than the military has soldiers in Afghanistan.

The government would receive a nearly 50% increase in revenue which along with spending cuts could be used to pay down the debt.

All this can be done with the poorest of people not having their weekly pay change at all.

 

[Supposn]

I don't think anyone should be exempt from income taxes.

And 10% is not much to ask of anyone.

What's the point of forcing someone who is facing hardship to pay their pittance? The economy isn't built on the back of making poor people pay pennies. I'm fine with the flat tax once a person hits a certain mark. Also, all the other consumption taxes and social security already hit the poor the hardest.

Wage earners, (including the working poor) now directly and indirectly pay an excess of 10.26% to 11.62% of their ENTIRE wage incomes only for FICA payroll taxes.

I don’t have any statistics to offer but it’s unreasonable to believe that Labor imbedded within all final prices can possibly be less than 1/3 and I hope it doesn’t exceed ½ of those prices.
Thus employers’ portions of FICA are the equivalent to a general federal sales tax between 2.616% and 3.977%.

(Unlike a sales tax, employers’ FICA discourages hiring and thus is particularly detrimental to the median wage and thus to all labor compensation).

The 15.3% FICA payroll tax does not forefill its limited task.
I doubt “fair tax” proponents suggestion that a 23% sales tax could replace all federal taxes upon payroll and net incomes; (that 23% does not include the now existing state taxes).
It's less realistic to contemplate replacing it all with a 10% tax upon net incomes.

Respectfully, Supposn

 

[Widdekind]

Overall, the US Public pays nearly 20% Federal, and 10% State & Local, effective income tax rates. Those figures include implicit corporate taxes, passed onto consumers, in product prices. A flat-rate personal income tax would have to be in that "ballpark" to fund Government at current levels.

i want a flat-rate sales tax -- on all sales of all goods & services, parts & labor, retail & wholesale & after-market -- to replace both personal taxes, and corporate taxes. A flat-rate sales tax could be taken "at the cash register", off of every receipt & paystub. No person or business would have to file any tax returns. Government could be funded in real time, at no extra headache or hassle for Public citizens.

Conceptually, an "income" tax penalizes earning. Whereas, a "sales" tax penalizes spending. So, an income tax dis-incentivizes "working hard to get ahead", whereas a "sales" tax penalizes profligacy (and so promotes thrift).

http://www.ctj.org/pdf/taxday2012.pdf

 

[P@triot]

We have plenty of FLAT TAXES, folks, and people pay those every day. Those FLAT taxes are call SALES TAXes.

Income taxes ought not to be flat tax structured.

WE do need to reform our tax system though, I definitely agree with that sentiment.

Spoken like a true idiot. The fact that we even have a "sales tax" on top of our income being taxed is an outrage. They take from our income, then they take from our home/property, then they take from our investments, and then they take from our purchases.

Only the fucking idiot liberal doesn't want a flat tax, because the more complex the tax code, the more liberals can hide taxes and further their socialist ideology.

 

[Widdekind]

the more complex the tax code

On earth, from a human perspective, only human limb & life is more valuable, than money & property.

"i want my money (and property) to be subject, to tens of thousands of shelf-feet, of labyrinthine tax codes, i know i will never be able to take the time to understand"

"i want my money (and property) to be dispensed, according to complex legal structures, beyond my ability to comprehend"

"my tax lawyer tells me, 'we' can 'work the system', saving me money"

"lawyers "Robin Hood" US businesses, with class-action lawsuits, dispensing their money to millions of Americans, and i got my cut, so hey"

"and so, i want my money (and property) to be subject, to tens of thousands of shelf-feet, of labyrinthine tax codes, i know i will never understand, that will always mystify, befuddle, and intimidate me... but everybody everywhere seems to feel they get paid their pittance, so hey"