Left vs right

[Harry Dresden]

Income tax like pens are obsolete.

PENS are OBSOLETE?.....what the hell do people use to sign for things on my route?.....they look like pens.....

 

[Harry Dresden]

And the fact that under that plan the inheritance taxes are evenly divided and given to EVERY CITIZEN is something you'll ignore, right?

Yourobjections to this plan are that government is corrupt and therefore cannot be anything BUT corrupt.

Understood and basically I agree. But that is the case under EVERY plan of taxation, isn't it?

Now, can you imagine and comment on this plan is that were not true?

Can you imagine how this plan would effect our society if the government did in fact evenly dvide all inheritences every quarter as I suggested that plan would work?

Would you STILL object to it, if it were done honestly?

And if you still object, if it were done honestly, tell me why you object.

ED...if your worth anything when you go....YOU give it to the Govt OK....ill give as much as i can to my son....Thank You.....

 

[raceright]

Income tax like pens are obsolete.

PENS are OBSOLETE?.....what the hell do people use to sign for things on my route?.....they look like pens.....

In a way you sort of helped with some of my points as post office still
uses pens to sign for something UPS (private not government)
uses mechanical devices

 

[Harry Dresden]

Income tax like pens are obsolete.

PENS are OBSOLETE?.....what the hell do people use to sign for things on my route?.....they look like pens.....

In a way you sort of helped with some of my points as post office still
uses pens to sign for something UPS (private not government)
uses mechanical devices

but pens are not obsolete Race.....when i go into office buildings people are jotting things down WITH PENS.....the guy at the bank had us sign our papers WITH PENS.....THE President signs his bills on camera....WITH A PEN.....they are not obsolete....

 

[DiamondDave]

And the fact that under that plan the inheritance taxes are evenly divided and given to EVERY CITIZEN is something you'll ignore, right?

Yourobjections to this plan are that government is corrupt and therefore cannot be anything BUT corrupt.

Understood and basically I agree. But that is the case under EVERY plan of taxation, isn't it?

Now, can you imagine and comment on this plan is that were not true?

Can you imagine how this plan would effect our society if the government did in fact evenly dvide all inheritences every quarter as I suggested that plan would work?

Would you STILL object to it, if it were done honestly?

And if you still object, if it were done honestly, tell me why you object.

Welcome to the collective

You have no inherent right to the results of the efforts and earnings of another... and with me having property rights, I can choose where that property goes during my life or in the event of my death...

If I, as a single father, die tomorrow, the assets I have are indeed left for the benefit of my children... my property, my choice... you, with this collectivism BULLSHIT, would rather have that property taken in whole by the government and redistributed amongst the collective?

No... I work hard for the benefit of my family. I work hard to take care of my family. Not so that you, some fucking crack addict, some woman in Oxnard, and octomom have an equal share of what I have accumulated thru my efforts in life...

Within your plan, by definition, all assets indeed would eventually become the property of the collective or government... hence we are slaves and all of our efforts only benefit the government/master

If this plan were true... I would start the revolution against the government of yours that would take this action....

nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation
That does not mean that they can take it to redistribute it upon my death and go against my property rights to be able to leave things to my children, grandchildren, or chosen loved ones

Take your confiscation collectivism and shove it up your ass

 

[editec]

Diamond Dave suggests

Take your confiscation collectivism and shove it up your ass

I gather that means you are not supportive of the editecian 100% inheritance tax system?

I am not entirely surprised.

Over the years, and on many boards, I find that not many people are supportive of that proposed system of taxation.

Understandable, really.

First of all, it negates something very fundamental in human nature...the urge most of us (myself included) have to want leave something for our kids so that they'll be better off than we were.

Secondly, this system depends on us having a HONEST GOVERNMENT, and since none of us has ever seen such a government, even if you could sign onto the concept in principle, you could still object to it as impractical.

It is an idea which depends on something that will likely never happen...a complete change in human nature.

Much as communism does, or objective libertarianism, my proposal won't work because human nature doesn't change.

Now becasue we have such wildly unequal incomes, we know that FLAT TAX won't work because the poorest among us (about 60% of us actually) areadly cannot afford to pay taxes.

And VAT taxes actually suffer from the same problem since they tax the stuff people need as a sales tax.

So what is left that serves the purpose of funding our government EXCEPT for progressive tax system?

I can't think of any better solution even though I am totally on board with those of you who think the system we have now totally sucks.

Bottom line?

No system of taxation will be just until our government is run by just men.

We can tinker, we can radically change the system, but as long as POWER CORRUPTS, we can except to see that corruption manifesting in our tax codes.

 

[DiamondDave]

Diamond Dave suggests

Take your confiscation collectivism and shove it up your ass

I gather that means you are not supportive of the editecian 100% inheritance tax system?

I am not entirely surprised.

Over the years, and on many boards, I find that not many people are supportive of that proposed system of taxation.

Understandable, really.

First of all, it negates something very fundamental in human nature...the urge most of us (myself included) have to want leave something for our kids so that they'll be better off than we were.

Secondly, this system depends on us having a HONEST GOVERNMENT, and since none of us has ever seen such a government, even if you could sign onto the concept in principle, you could still object to it as impractical.

It is an idea which depends on something that will likely never happen...a complete change in human nature.

Much as communism does, or objective libertarianism, my proposal won't work because human nature doesn't change.

Now becasue we have such wildly unequal incomes, we know that FLAT TAX won't work because the poorest among us (about 60% of us actually) areadly cannot afford to pay taxes.

And VAT taxes actually suffer from the same problem since they tax the stuff people need as a sales tax.

So what is left that serves the purpose of funding our government EXCEPT for progressive tax system?

I can't think of any better solution even though I am totally on board with those of you who think the system we have now totally sucks.

Bottom line?

No system of taxation will be just until our government is run by just men.

We can tinker, we can radically change the system, but as long as POWER CORRUPTS, we can except to see that corruption manifesting in our tax codes.

Nice try.. but not supporting your system does NOT automatically indicate that flat tax does not work...

You see... YOUR system is against what the country was set up to be... the flat tax is already in existence in many instances except in income tax... your sales tax is a flat tax... consumption taxes are flat taxes.. many usage taxes are flat tax..

If each person has equal burden taxation, it is inherently more about equality than the system that is in place now that is based on punishment of those who earn/achieve more

And do not forget that with a flat tax and the elimination of complicated systems and loopholes, governmental expense SHOULD go down, reducing tax burden need... and lord knows if we could actually have a government that would limit itself, other expenses would reduce, reducing tax need...

The thing is 10% or 15% of each dollar STILL has the wealthier paying more in TOTAL taxation... but the fairness comes in to place because it is the equal percentage on every dollar earned...

 

[DiamondDave]

The key is, edit... if you strive for equality... it should NOT be selective equality... you want equality, it comes in all forms, with all the positives and negatives associated with equal treatment

And the system in place now is being 'justified' by redistribution cronies, in it's unequal approach, out of sentiment, vote buying, feelings, etc.... not out of ANY basis of true equal treatment...

 

[jillian]

I have a better way.

The editecian 100% inheritance tax.

No taxes to be paid AT ALL during your lifetime, but a 100% taxation at death.

I'm afraid I think that's a pretty bad idea. People have the right to an expectation that their property will be passed on after their death. What we have isn't just a life estate. That said, I have no problem with a modest estate tax on the person who RECEIVES unearned wealth. But again, it can't be so large that people have no incentive to hold property. The wealthiest would only transfer their property before their death or put it into trusts or dispose of it in ways where there would be no benefit whatsoever to the state.

So I'm afraid I have to say... nope to your plan.

 

[editec]

Diamond Dave suggests

Take your confiscation collectivism and shove it up your ass

I gather that means you are not supportive of the editecian 100% inheritance tax system?

I am not entirely surprised.

Over the years, and on many boards, I find that not many people are supportive of that proposed system of taxation.

Understandable, really.

First of all, it negates something very fundamental in human nature...the urge most of us (myself included) have to want leave something for our kids so that they'll be better off than we were.

Secondly, this system depends on us having a HONEST GOVERNMENT, and since none of us has ever seen such a government, even if you could sign onto the concept in principle, you could still object to it as impractical.

It is an idea which depends on something that will likely never happen...a complete change in human nature.

Much as communism does, or objective libertarianism, my proposal won't work because human nature doesn't change.

Now becasue we have such wildly unequal incomes, we know that FLAT TAX won't work because the poorest among us (about 60% of us actually) areadly cannot afford to pay taxes.

And VAT taxes actually suffer from the same problem since they tax the stuff people need as a sales tax.

So what is left that serves the purpose of funding our government EXCEPT for progressive tax system?

I can't think of any better solution even though I am totally on board with those of you who think the system we have now totally sucks.

Bottom line?

No system of taxation will be just until our government is run by just men.

We can tinker, we can radically change the system, but as long as POWER CORRUPTS, we can except to see that corruption manifesting in our tax codes.

Nice try.. but not supporting your system does NOT automatically indicate that flat tax does not work...

What?

My system does not uatomatically indicate the the flat tax will not work?

My system has nothing to do with why FLAT taxes are a bad idea.

Flat taxes are a bad idea because incomes are so wildly different.

You see... YOUR system is against what the country was set up to be...

My system runs counter to human nature AND what this nation stands for, in fact.

I apparently understand the problems associated with it far better than you do. Not surprising really, since I've given it a lot more thought than you have.

the flat tax is already in existence in many instances except in income tax...

Yup.

And that is, in fact, why the poor still end up paying a higher percentage of their incomes in taxes (although not Federal taxes) than most more affluent Americans do.

your sales tax is a flat tax... consumption taxes are flat taxes.. many usage taxes are flat tax..

Yes, true

If each person has equal burden taxation, it is inherently more about equality than the system that is in place now that is based on punishment of those who earn/achieve more

I would completely agree with you if incomes weren't so wildly different.

And do not forget that with a flat tax and the elimination of complicated systems and loopholes, governmental expense SHOULD go down, reducing tax burden need... and lord knows if we could actually have a government that would limit itself, other expenses would reduce, reducing tax need...

Yeah, I agree. That is the major benefit of a FLAT tax. Its simplicity.

The thing is 10% or 15% of each dollar STILL has the wealthier paying more in TOTAL taxation... but the fairness comes in to place because it is the equal percentage on every dollar earned...

Would it?

It would if the wealthy couldn't hide their money behind dubious expenses.

But nobody's FLAT TAX scheme ever bothers to address those problems.

The wealth shelter much of their income.

If a FLAT tax eliminated those shelters (like private jets which they claim ae business expenses) then your plan might make sense.

But FLAT TAX plan has the same problem EVERY TAX plan has...governments are the handmaidens of the wealthy.

They are that in the system of taxation we have now, and the'd be catering to the needs of the superwealthy if we had a FLAT TAX, too.

It's the upper middle class who are the worst victims of this government corruption.

Ironically, it is ALSO the upper middle class voters who keep putting in the people who are screwing THEM for the advantage of the superwealthy, too.

Of course I don't expect you to believe that.

But if you're a reasonably affluent working person, let's say you make a mere $150,000 a year, you are NOT wealthy...you are upper middle class.

And people like YOU are the people who are most screwed by the tax system which is DESIGNED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SUPERWEALTHY.


But let me guess...you object to taxing estate over $5,000,000, don't you?

You think THAT is unfair, don't you?

Now unless you think you are going to inherit more than $5 mil, or unless you think you'll be leaving your kids more than $5 mil, I find it hard to understand why you'd object to that modest taxation on estates.

YOU in that affluent class have to make up the money that is NOT taxed on those estates.

Not me.

But hye, keep supporting people who are causing your taxes to be higher.

No skin off my nose, sport.

 

[DiamondDave]

Funny ed... I support a system with the elimination of most deductions and all loopholes... a simplified system... and with a system of more simplicity and less deductions, the rate itself can inherently be lower (as long as govt don't continue to spend like an Obama)

I support equality, edit.... equal treatment if you earn 10K or 10BIL... same standards, same laws, same tax rate... not the liberal idea of selective equality

Do I think my system that I support will be seen in my lifetime?? Not likely... And definitely not from the DEMs/Liberals....

 

[editec]

Funny ed... I support a system with the elimination of most deductions and all loopholes... a simplified system... and with a system of more simplicity and less deductions, the rate itself can inherently be lower (as long as govt don't continue to spend like an Obama)

I support equality, edit.... equal treatment if you earn 10K or 10BIL... same standards, same laws, same tax rate... not the liberal idea of selective equality

Do I think my system that I support will be seen in my lifetime?? Not likely... And definitely not from the DEMs/Liberals....

I totally understand people wanting a sane tax system, DD.

And a FLAT tax has a simplitic appearance of being fair

Just so long as you ignore the wild difference in incomes, I mean.

But when you take that wild income inequity into account, it doesn't seem at all FAIR to me.

And since there appears to be no solution to the income inequality that stems from a capitalist system (especially this fixed capitalist system we have) imposing a FLAT TAX that might make sense in some more egalitarian (income wise) society jus doesn't make sense to me.

A family trying to make it on $21,000 a year (that the average family income here in Maine) is ALREADY not making it and is ALREADY on food stamps and other forms of working class welfare.

Now how is taxing them 10% or 15% of their incomes really going to fix anything?

And if you eliminate say anyone making less than $50,0000 from that flat tax, do you REALLY think that those who are still making enough will ONLY PAY 10 or 15% of their incomes?

I doubt that.

You see...I have no problem wih the concept of a FLAT TAX...I just don't think it will work in THIS society..

 

[DiamondDave]

Funny ed... I support a system with the elimination of most deductions and all loopholes... a simplified system... and with a system of more simplicity and less deductions, the rate itself can inherently be lower (as long as govt don't continue to spend like an Obama)

I support equality, edit.... equal treatment if you earn 10K or 10BIL... same standards, same laws, same tax rate... not the liberal idea of selective equality

Do I think my system that I support will be seen in my lifetime?? Not likely... And definitely not from the DEMs/Liberals....

I totally understand people wanting a sane tax system, DD.

And a FLAT tax has a simplitic appearance of being fair

Just so long as you ignore the wild difference in incomes, I mean.

But when you take that wild income inequity into account, it doesn't seem at all FAIR to me.

And since there appears to be no solution to the income inequality that stems from a capitalist system (especially this fixed capitalist system we have) imposing a FLAT TAX that might make sense in some more egalitarian (income wise) society jus doesn't make sense to me.

A family trying to make it on $21,000 a year (that the average family income here in Maine) is ALREADY not making it and is ALREADY on food stamps and other forms of working class welfare.

Now how is taxing them 10% or 15% of their incomes really going to fix anything?

And if you eliminate say anyone making less than $50,0000 from that flat tax, do you REALLY think that those who are still making enough will ONLY PAY 10 or 15% of their incomes?

I doubt that.

You see...I have no problem wih the concept of a FLAT TAX...I just don't think it will work in THIS society..

But in a free society... you will have difference in income... and rightly so... you live and earn by the effort you put in and the decisions you make... by what you do, how you do it, etc...

But THAT does not make something inherently unfair if people are taxed the EXACT same rate

We are talking equal treatment here... you supposedly strive for equality... just as justice is blind as to age, sex, income, etc in terms of the law... so should taxation be...

if the rate is set at 10% (for example) and you make 21K... 2.1K is your tax... period.. of you make 210K, your tax is 21K, period...

If you are worried about making it... do more.. do what you have to.. move.. take a second job.. train.. get a degree.. get a certification.. join the Coast Guard Reserve... get good at poker... make porn... that choice is up to you.. but to run the government it will take X amount of dollars.. and the benefits of the government are equal for all, and hence the portion you pay of your income should be equal for all... if it's determined that 10% of all income in the US is necessary to run things like the courts, roads, defense, law enforcement, etc, then 10% from EVERYBODY... not 40% from some and 0% (with kickbacks) from others

 

[editec]

Funny ed... I support a system with the elimination of most deductions and all loopholes... a simplified system... and with a system of more simplicity and less deductions, the rate itself can inherently be lower (as long as govt don't continue to spend like an Obama)

I support equality, edit.... equal treatment if you earn 10K or 10BIL... same standards, same laws, same tax rate... not the liberal idea of selective equality

Do I think my system that I support will be seen in my lifetime?? Not likely... And definitely not from the DEMs/Liberals....

I totally understand people wanting a sane tax system, DD.

And a FLAT tax has a simplitic appearance of being fair

Just so long as you ignore the wild difference in incomes, I mean.

But when you take that wild income inequity into account, it doesn't seem at all FAIR to me.

And since there appears to be no solution to the income inequality that stems from a capitalist system (especially this fixed capitalist system we have) imposing a FLAT TAX that might make sense in some more egalitarian (income wise) society jus doesn't make sense to me.

A family trying to make it on $21,000 a year (that the average family income here in Maine) is ALREADY not making it and is ALREADY on food stamps and other forms of working class welfare.

Now how is taxing them 10% or 15% of their incomes really going to fix anything?

And if you eliminate say anyone making less than $50,0000 from that flat tax, do you REALLY think that those who are still making enough will ONLY PAY 10 or 15% of their incomes?

I doubt that.

You see...I have no problem wih the concept of a FLAT TAX...I just don't think it will work in THIS society..

But in a free society... you will have difference in income... and rightly so... you live and earn by the effort you put in and the decisions you make... by what you do, how you do it, etc...

Do you honestly think that we live in anything even remotely approaching a FREE society, DD?

Do you honestly believe that access to capital is FAIRLY open to every person is this society?

I don't.

But THAT does not make something inherently unfair if people are taxed the EXACT same rate

I AM interested in FAIR outcomes, rather that the appearance of FAIRNESS in PROCESSES.

Apparently you don't think that matters?

We are talking equal treatment here... you supposedly strive for equality... just as justice is blind as to age, sex, income, etc in terms of the law... so should taxation be...

Are they the same thing? No.

if the rate is set at 10% (for example) and you make 21K... 2.1K is your tax... period.. of you make 210K, your tax is 21K, period...

Yeah, we can both do the math.

If you are worried about making it... do more.. do what you have to.. move.. take a second job.. train.. get a degree.. get a certification.. join the Coast Guard Reserve... get good at poker... make porn... that choice is up to you.. but to run the government it will take X amount of dollars.. and the benefits of the government are equal for all, and hence the portion you pay of your income should be equal for all... if it's determined that 10% of all income in the US is necessary to run things like the courts, roads, defense, law enforcement, etc, then 10% from EVERYBODY... not 40% from some and 0% (with kickbacks) from others

So your suggestion is that everyone who is getting screwed should take the bull by the horns and make more money.

And you think that's a real possibility for solving the income inequity in this nation?

I mean do you REALLY think that is a solution that is doable for the say 150,000,000 people in American who are basically working poor?

I mean do you really think that is possible?!

 

[DiamondDave]

I totally understand people wanting a sane tax system, DD.

And a FLAT tax has a simplitic appearance of being fair

Just so long as you ignore the wild difference in incomes, I mean.

But when you take that wild income inequity into account, it doesn't seem at all FAIR to me.

And since there appears to be no solution to the income inequality that stems from a capitalist system (especially this fixed capitalist system we have) imposing a FLAT TAX that might make sense in some more egalitarian (income wise) society jus doesn't make sense to me.

A family trying to make it on $21,000 a year (that the average family income here in Maine) is ALREADY not making it and is ALREADY on food stamps and other forms of working class welfare.

Now how is taxing them 10% or 15% of their incomes really going to fix anything?

And if you eliminate say anyone making less than $50,0000 from that flat tax, do you REALLY think that those who are still making enough will ONLY PAY 10 or 15% of their incomes?

I doubt that.

You see...I have no problem wih the concept of a FLAT TAX...I just don't think it will work in THIS society..

Do you honestly think that we live in anything even remotely approaching a FREE society, DD?

Do you honestly believe that access to capital is FAIRLY open to every person is this society?

I don't.



I AM interested in FAIR outcomes, rather that the appearance of FAIRNESS in PROCESSES.

Apparently you don't think that matters?




Are they the same thing? No.



Yeah, we can both do the math.

If you are worried about making it... do more.. do what you have to.. move.. take a second job.. train.. get a degree.. get a certification.. join the Coast Guard Reserve... get good at poker... make porn... that choice is up to you.. but to run the government it will take X amount of dollars.. and the benefits of the government are equal for all, and hence the portion you pay of your income should be equal for all... if it's determined that 10% of all income in the US is necessary to run things like the courts, roads, defense, law enforcement, etc, then 10% from EVERYBODY... not 40% from some and 0% (with kickbacks) from others

So your suggestion is that everyone who is getting screwed should take the bull by the horns and make more money.

And you think that's a real possibility for solving the income inequity in this nation?

I mean do you REALLY think that is a solution that is doable for the say 150,000,000 people in American who are basically working poor?

I mean do you really think that is possible?!

1) Yes.. I do believe we are set up as a free society... but those with socialist and extreme leftist principles drive us farther away from that
2) Yes.. access to capital IS open for all... you can start with nothing and be the richest person in this country.... but it is up to YOU, not the government, not up to others to give it to you because you currently make less or because you are starting out at the bottom
3) Fairness in the process and procedure is what the government is for.. NOT to ensure that everyone gets the same outcome or the same compensation or kickbacks at the expense of another... There government is not there to ensure you get the same compensation for scrubbing urinals as a person does for being a metallurgical engineer
4) The concept is the same thing between taxation and the justice system.. Both are a working part of the government.. Which should be based on equal treatment regardless of income, race, sex, etc... Not trying to redistribute or have different standards...
5) Everyone taking personal responsibility and doing what they have to to take care of their needs or to gain what they want... yep, I do think that is the key for those who really want more.. .there will ALWAYS be those who do, earn, and achieve more.. it is part of life... suck it up and drive on... but as long as everyone has the same FREEDOM and LIBERTY to try (success or failure) THAT is what is important.. not that every person who fails or does not achieve as much gets a share from those who succeed or achieve more

Remember.. I WAS working poor... I had nothing... I worked 40 hours a week starting at 16... I was collecting aluminum cans to have meat money for my grandmother and I.. .I worked 2 jobs til I was 22 and was barely scraping by.. I changed direction and joined the Army to change my life.. I trained on my own time.. I worked 2 jobs getting out... I did what I had to do to advance.. and I brought myself up o making what I used to consider rich....
So YES... your effort IS what is needed.. not a punishment tax system, not governmental redistribution

 

[raceright]

Diamond Dave suggests



I gather that means you are not supportive of the editecian 100% inheritance tax system?

I am not entirely surprised.

Over the years, and on many boards, I find that not many people are supportive of that proposed system of taxation.

Understandable, really.

First of all, it negates something very fundamental in human nature...the urge most of us (myself included) have to want leave something for our kids so that they'll be better off than we were.

Secondly, this system depends on us having a HONEST GOVERNMENT, and since none of us has ever seen such a government, even if you could sign onto the concept in principle, you could still object to it as impractical.

It is an idea which depends on something that will likely never happen...a complete change in human nature.

Much as communism does, or objective libertarianism, my proposal won't work because human nature doesn't change.

Now becasue we have such wildly unequal incomes, we know that FLAT TAX won't work because the poorest among us (about 60% of us actually) areadly cannot afford to pay taxes.

And VAT taxes actually suffer from the same problem since they tax the stuff people need as a sales tax.

So what is left that serves the purpose of funding our government EXCEPT for progressive tax system?

I can't think of any better solution even though I am totally on board with those of you who think the system we have now totally sucks.

Bottom line?

No system of taxation will be just until our government is run by just men.

We can tinker, we can radically change the system, but as long as POWER CORRUPTS, we can except to see that corruption manifesting in our tax codes.

Nice try.. but not supporting your system does NOT automatically indicate that flat tax does not work...

What?

My system does not uatomatically indicate the the flat tax will not work?

My system has nothing to do with why FLAT taxes are a bad idea.

Flat taxes are a bad idea because incomes are so wildly different.




My system runs counter to human nature AND what this nation stands for, in fact.

I apparently understand the problems associated with it far better than you do. Not surprising really, since I've given it a lot more thought than you have.




Yup.

And that is, in fact, why the poor still end up paying a higher percentage of their incomes in taxes (although not Federal taxes) than most more affluent Americans do.




Yes, true



I would completely agree with you if incomes weren't so wildly different.

And do not forget that with a flat tax and the elimination of complicated systems and loopholes, governmental expense SHOULD go down, reducing tax burden need... and lord knows if we could actually have a government that would limit itself, other expenses would reduce, reducing tax need...

Yeah, I agree. That is the major benefit of a FLAT tax. Its simplicity.

The thing is 10% or 15% of each dollar STILL has the wealthier paying more in TOTAL taxation... but the fairness comes in to place because it is the equal percentage on every dollar earned...

Would it?

It would if the wealthy couldn't hide their money behind dubious expenses.

But nobody's FLAT TAX scheme ever bothers to address those problems.

The wealth shelter much of their income.

If a FLAT tax eliminated those shelters (like private jets which they claim ae business expenses) then your plan might make sense.

But FLAT TAX plan has the same problem EVERY TAX plan has...governments are the handmaidens of the wealthy.

They are that in the system of taxation we have now, and the'd be catering to the needs of the superwealthy if we had a FLAT TAX, too.

It's the upper middle class who are the worst victims of this government corruption.

Ironically, it is ALSO the upper middle class voters who keep putting in the people who are screwing THEM for the advantage of the superwealthy, too.

Of course I don't expect you to believe that.

But if you're a reasonably affluent working person, let's say you make a mere $150,000 a year, you are NOT wealthy...you are upper middle class.

And people like YOU are the people who are most screwed by the tax system which is DESIGNED FOR THE BENEFIT OF THE SUPERWEALTHY.


But let me guess...you object to taxing estate over $5,000,000, don't you?

You think THAT is unfair, don't you?

Now unless you think you are going to inherit more than $5 mil, or unless you think you'll be leaving your kids more than $5 mil, I find it hard to understand why you'd object to that modest taxation on estates.

YOU in that affluent class have to make up the money that is NOT taxed on those estates.

Not me.

But hye, keep supporting people who are causing your taxes to be higher.

No skin off my nose, sport.

Do none of you realize that the rich play both sides of the fence stop
blaming your lack of income on someone else and go to your library
and get a book written by a sucessfull business person and follow
this pattern to suceed your self, count on the Goverment and you will just get more food stamps( as for Maine go shoot and grow your food as your screwed before you start no industry there maybe fishing???)
Am I the only person who knows that the super rich gave Obama
the money (350,000,000.00) to win, get what your saying he had,more money than Mccain the rich win again fools.

 

[Harry Dresden]

Income tax like pens are obsolete.

PENS are OBSOLETE?.....what the hell do people use to sign for things on my route?.....they look like pens.....

In a way you sort of helped with some of my points as post office still
uses pens to sign for something UPS (private not government)
uses mechanical devices

but when he has to leave a notice for pickup ....he fills it out with A PEN

 

[k2skier]

SHOULD BE A FAIRER WAY
THERE IS AN OTHER CHOICE PROPOSED CALLED THE FAIR TAX
THAT EVERYONE WILL CONTRIBUTE BASED ON WHAT YOU SPEND AND THIS IS THE FAIREST IDEA I HAVE SEEN YET.

Interesting...

Can you give a little more information on this? Would it be in a way like a federal sales tax?

Americans For Fair Taxation: Americans for Fair Taxation it's been around forever.

I saw no hard data or info, just a "Fair" this and "Fair" that with no outline on what will happen, just hot air.

 

[k2skier]

It does not matter if you are Lib or Conserv. Black or White.Hate USA or Love USA,Rich or Poor. You live here and work here and reap the benefits of the USA you should pay for it. Like it or not you either pay with your wallet or your soul. (ask Bernie Madof,and now his wife too much greed does get punished)
So now some will say oh oh what about the poor--indigent is one thing poor is another we have no poor any more in the USA only people working the system. I have no problem helping the needy
but this is really a family thing..Class warfare is where we are today
The big fight is taking from one class to give to another I do not even have a personal problem with that its just how its done that is wrong INCOME TAXING IS WRONG SHOULD BE A FAIRER WAY
THERE IS AN OTHER CHOICE PROPOSED CALLED THE FAIR TAX
THAT EVERYONE WILL CONTRIBUTE BASED ON WHAT YOU SPEND AND THIS IS THE FAIREST IDEA I HAVE SEEN YET.
If you have a better one let us know.

Sure do. Since we are in two wars, let us reinstate the tax structure of WW2 until both are done.

Virtually every democratic capitalistic system in the world has a progressive income tax. It works. If you find it so objectionable, I suggest you go to a nation where it does not exist.

Income tax like pens are obsolete. Fairness is the best way rich will
pay more because they want things not just money. Give aways
are always abused and never appreciated so even the poor would have to pay something oh yea Rocks now your in my world I know
how to make money might not be able to recite all the bullshit you can but I know how to acquire wealth in the free market place..
Taxes only hampers growth--Tax me to much and I will roll up the carpet and wait 4 or 8 years to lay another carpet.. Just like most things you only check out part of the idea Americans For Fair Taxation: Americans for Fair Taxation and follow you nose if you can find it

Finally something with some numbers; is the Fair Tax an across the board 23% tax? That's what I read.

 

[amrchaos]

I have a better way.

The editecian 100% inheritance tax.

No taxes to be paid AT ALL during your lifetime, but a 100% taxation at death.

All money goes to the state to be totally distributed into the bank accounts into the National FED (that is actually a public bank) of the each citizen, every quarter.

How do our governments support themselves, you ask?

Excellent question. Same way they've been expecting education to do it....bake sales.

Just kidding..same way they did if for the first 150 years or so by imposing tariffs.

NOw I hear people bitch about taxes all the time.

But oddly, when I give them a surefire way to end all taxes, none of my wealthy scion chums buy into that.

Wonder why?

Oh, yeah, that's right...because they are already wealthy and know they don't really pay all that much in taxes.

And the thought of a meritocratic society where everyone REALLY has a chance of making it scares the hell out of them.

Although I do agree with reinstating the inheritance tax--100% is totally unacceptable.

In fact, I disagree with taxations of any kind that takes away 50% or more from an individual/corporation(yep, even with the Cigarette makers and the Bonus hogs over at AIG should not recieve over 50% taxation on their earnings.)

Do not forget, the deceased have family,friends and ceremonial preparations that could be paid for by the deceased. In fact, One could institute an inheritance tax in which the Government is treated like a step child(no kids, spouses, friends thought about--then Charities,Church, civic groups the individual were apart of in life recieve the bulk of the money, and government behaves like one such group. )


But government, nor the redistribution of the money into the general society(by the way, not everyone has a bank account, so not everyone will recieve the money) is a sensible approach.

I guess the thing is, you shouldn't be so pro-gov. Inheritance is characterized as an individual matter--Contributions to the collective should be small if any.