Mike Huckabee is the next president of the U.S.

[watermark]

The burden of Huckabee's plan comes down on the middle class. Being middle class, I object.

My reference would be a flat tax. Same percent for everyone across the board.

The fair tax is just as progressive as the current tax. The flat tax would certainly come down harder on the middle class.

 

[no1tovote4]

The fair tax is just as progressive as the current tax. The flat tax would certainly come down harder on the middle class.

That depends on the percentage and whether or not there were tax shelters. Instituting the tax could very well lower taxes for the middle and lower class while effectively raising them on the rich because they would no longer be able to avoid taxes or just pay the mandatory minimum.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Well, he wouldn't have the cojones to say it to my face... well, he might if his hood were out of the drycleaners.

LOL

Yeah, you could probably kick his ass. These nazis are brave saying this shit behind the anonymity of a keyboard. But, they'll never muster the courage to say it to someone's face in public.

It's pathetic really.

 

[Gunny]

That depends on the percentage and whether or not there were tax shelters. Instituting the tax could very well lower taxes for the middle and lower class while effectively raising them on the rich because they would no longer be able to avoid taxes or just pay the mandatory minimum.

My idea is flat tax, no shelters for anyone.

 

[no1tovote4]

My idea is flat tax, no shelters for anyone.

I prefer a consumption tax, so the government's nose isn't in the business of keeping track of how much you have, what you make, or what you own.

That being stated, flat tax would be the next in line for my support.

 

[pegwinn]

My idea is flat tax, no shelters for anyone.

I used to like that idea. But, ten percent of poverty = even less food. Ten percent of only the income you choose not to hide = about the same as today.

A consumption tax gets everyone, rich, poor, criminal, tourist.

It doesn't lend my money to the .gov at no interest yet impose a penalty on me if they didn't withold enough. And it doesn't require a gestapo to enforce.

 

[pegwinn]

The wealthy spend a much smaller percentage of their income and assets on goods and services than does the middle class. That would leave the middle class paying a much greater proportionate share than the rich.

So what? Where is it written that we are to be equal by proportion? Rich folks may not pop over to walmart and buy up the store, but the new 25000 square foot mansion would send a good chunk to uncle.

 

[no1tovote4]

I used to like that idea. But, ten percent of poverty = even less food. Ten percent of only the income you choose not to hide = about the same as today.

A consumption tax gets everyone, rich, poor, criminal, tourist.

It doesn't lend my money to the .gov at no interest yet impose a penalty on me if they didn't withold enough. And it doesn't require a gestapo to enforce.

It doesn't if you provide for those who are poor to request reimbursement.

 

[jillian]

So what? Where is it written that we are to be equal by proportion? Rich folks may not pop over to walmart and buy up the store, but the new 25000 square foot mansion would send a good chunk to uncle.

Right.... and if that person makes 5.6 million dollars a year but spends only 1 million? they aren't taxed on interest income. aren't taxed on dividends. It's designed to give the rich a free ride.

 

[no1tovote4]

All Huckabee is going to do is make it pointed that the main portion of the R Party is done with religious-only conservatives. We need to reinstate fiscal conservatism to the party as it currently has less credibility in that area than even the D party does.

 

[DeadCanDance]

Right.... and if that person makes 5.6 million dollars a year but spends only 1 million? they aren't taxed on interest income. aren't taxed on dividends. It's designed to give the rich a free ride.

bingo.

Its a transparent attempt to shift more of the tax burden onto the middle class and away from the affluent

 

[pegwinn]

It doesn't if you provide for those who are poor to request reimbursement.

explain

 

[no1tovote4]

The wealthy spend a much smaller percentage of their income and assets on goods and services than does the middle class. That would leave the middle class paying a much greater proportionate share than the rich.

Again, only if you didn't institute a reimbursement plan for the poor, and add luxury taxes to items that only the rich would purchase. This also leaves out that much things that they regularly use as legal services would also be taxed, as well as purchasing stocks.

The idea encompasses more than just what is currently paid for, and could be implemented as a Progressive tax.

 

[pegwinn]

Right.... and if that person makes 5.6 million dollars a year but spends only 1 million? they aren't taxed on interest income. aren't taxed on dividends. It's designed to give the rich a free ride.

Actually if he spends nothing he pays nothing.

Same as the poor.

But, both are a stretch. Paris Hilton currently pays no tax. She has "no income", and yet is likely the wealthiest brat in the world. But, she's also a consumer.

Why would someone incensed at the bush admin for violations of privacy advocate keeping a system far more intrusive and far more corrupt?

 

[jillian]

Again, only if you didn't institute a reimbursement plan for the poor, and add luxury taxes to items that only the rich would purchase. This also leaves out that much things that they regularly use as legal services would also be taxed, as well as purchasing stocks.

The idea encompasses more than just what is currently paid for, and could be implemented as a Progressive tax.

And doctors that the poor and middle class pay for would be taxed as well. I'm afraid you couldn't possibly place a high enough luxury tax on things like yachts and bentleys to make up for what they aren't paying.

Also, what's a luxury item? A Mcmansion? My Audi? An IPhone? A bottle of champagne?

It's a terrible system, IMO.

 

[no1tovote4]

There is also the bonus of the black marketers suddenly paying taxes as well. Especially on the luxury items. It costs a lot to pimp up your Cadi...

 

[Dr Grump]

Right.... and if that person makes 5.6 million dollars a year but spends only 1 million? they aren't taxed on interest income. aren't taxed on dividends. It's designed to give the rich a free ride.

You guys don't get taxed on interest income?? Really??

 

[no1tovote4]

And doctors that the poor and middle class pay for would be taxed as well. I'm afraid you couldn't possibly place a high enough luxury tax on things like yachts and bentleys to make up for what they aren't paying.

Also, what's a luxury item? A Mcmansion? My Audi? An IPhone? A bottle of champagne?

It's a terrible system, IMO.

Again, that would be reimbursed. And you can add such tax of luxury on any item you believe only the rich would own if it made you feel better.

The current system is far worse than the consumption taxes would be.

And yes a McMansion would certainly be, over a certain level of cost and size, be considered a luxury item.

 

[no1tovote4]

You guys don't get taxed on interest income?? Really??

She's trying to argue how a consumption tax would be bad. We are currently taxed on interest income.

 

[jillian]

Actually if he spends nothing he pays nothing.

Same as the poor.

But, both are a stretch. Paris Hilton currently pays no tax. She has "no income", and yet is likely the wealthiest brat in the world. But, she's also a consumer.

Why would someone incensed at the bush admin for violations of privacy advocate keeping a system far more intrusive and far more corrupt?

Actually, Paris Hilton is taxed on the income from her TV show and personal appearances (she gets paid to appear at these parties) and also for use of her image in certain circumstances. That said, you know I also believe in inheritance tax... because that is, in fact, income to her. What she consumes doesn't come close to even her dividend income... though that might well change with Grandpa now giving most of the Hilton money to charity.

Do I think the IRS is more invasive than warrantless searches of my phone records? No. Would I prefer not to have to pay taxes? D'uh! Do I think society requires those taxes to do the things I find important? Yes.