No Personal Tax. Only Consumption Tax

Only Consumption Tax. No Personal Tax

  • Yes

    Votes: 6 54.5%
  • No

    Votes: 5 45.5%

  • Total voters
    11

Bear12feet

Member
Aug 14, 2011
148
10
16
Paying Taxes in similar to giving a Gun to a monkey. The monkey will fire the gun anywhere.

The more tax revenue earned by the government, the more wasteful expenditure or wasteful expenses will be done by the government such as presidential plane air force one and other fleet of planes, 412 limousines for USA government, $200 million India vacation for Obama (not sure), excess security for world leaders who cannot think properly and many other wasteful expenses.

So minimum tax revenue should be received by the government so that world people have many times more money to spend for their family.

Money supply increases when the product and services final selling price increases.

What was money supply when Oil or petrol was $1 per gallon?

What is money supply when Oil or petrol is $4 per gallon?

Price rise = Inflation. Think about it.

In year 2007, nobody knew what is $1 Trillion. Today everybody knows $1 Trillion = $1000 Billion, thanks to Obama's $9 Trillion bailouts (whatever).

World richest man Carlos Slim has $75 Billion only. Think about it.

If "consumption tax only world society" is not implemented immediately then the world society will suffer in hell forever. Make your own decision.

Everyday we pay sales tax, value added tax (VAT) when we buy food and products. We pay tax on factory sales, custom duty, toll tax which are added to final selling price. Indirectly we pay many taxes.

The more a person consumes the more tax the person pays indirectly. Why should we pay tax on personal income (personal tax)?

I am saying that there should be consumption tax only. No personal tax.

Consumption tax = Sales tax + value added tax (VAT) + factory sales tax + custom duty + toll tax

Income and private property are good things and are essential to a free society, therefore it makes no sense what so ever to tax those two items. A sales tax and user tax is the way to go. It's fair because you only pay a tax if you choice to buy an item or freely spend your own money.

No taxes means no army. Somebody will build a strong army and attack the country.

Tax evasion or tax cheating will be eliminated completely when there is consumption tax only since everybody will pay tax immediately when they buy goods and services. I think Charted accountants (CA) are responsible for majority of tax evasion because they give suggestions to minimize and hide taxes and CA certifies the financial statements and accounts. No need for certifying your income from Charted accountants (CA) when there is consumption tax only.

Criminals with big spending habits would pay consumption tax even. Consumption tax is the best. There would be way less tax evasion and ways to evade taxes and way more taxpayers.

Let us assume consumption tax is 10%.

A person who earn $80,000 per year. If this person spends $50,000 per year, this person will pay $5000 as consumption tax.

A super-rich person spends $500 million per year, this person will pay $50 million consumption tax.

When there is consumption tax only, there will be no tax refunds and tax breaks because you pay tax when you buy goods and services.

Tax on profit from silver, gold and other investments, property tax gets included in consumption tax. No need for any other tax.

If a billionaire earns $5 Billion in a year, why should he pay 30% tax or $1.5 billion tax for that year. Understandably he will not spend $1.5 Billion in a year. If he is spending $500 million in a year he should pay consumption tax for $500 million.

Every person, every business, every entity pays taxes at exactly the same rate. A consumption tax with no exemptions, no exception. Plus the people that consume more (the corporations) are kept in check. This would also reduce hatred over taxes. The envy factor is reduced. and most importantly EVERYONE poor, middle, and rich pay taxes into the system.

I am saying why should we (rich and poor) pay tax twice. Indirect tax and direct tax.

Indirect tax = Sales tax + value added tax (VAT) + factory sales tax + custom duty + toll tax

Direct tax = Personal income tax.

Just pay consumption tax as per your consumption.

Value added tax or VAT should be eliminated completely. There is no need for VAT when we pay Sales tax.

This will reduced excess and wasteful consumption since the more a person consumes the more consumption tax the person will pay.

People who are paid less or meager salaries they should be paid 3 times more salaries and people who are paid high salaries their salaries should be reduced by 50% because these high paid professionals such as CEO, managers, MBA, CA and others are responsible (not everybody) for present never ending financial crisis. So consumption tax will benefit everybody.

If world leaders would have thought of "consumption tax only" 100 years back, then today world resources would not have been in serious trouble and world money would not have been exhausted/finished due to tax evasion and cheating (one of the main reasons).

If a billionaire earns $1 billion then he is risking $10 billion as investment. If his decisions go wrong he will be bankrupt. A "job person" does not invest any money so his investment risk is 0.

Majority of Tax evasion is from rich people. Tax evasion or tax cheating will be eliminated completely when there is consumption tax only since everybody will pay tax immediately when they buy goods and services.

You will have 25% more money to spend since you will not pay personal tax. Eliminate government greed once and for all.

Think about you and your family who will have 25% to 40% more money to spend. Forget the world. If your company is having less sales you will be fired from your job immediately. Nobody will think of your family.

IRS, lawmakers,lawyers,army of accountants can always start farming. They are rich from 100 years of their professional income. Also you will not have to save thousands of bills every year to show to the accountants and IRS when there is "consumption tax only". You will not be slaves to anybody.

No other tax. Only consumption tax. If you do not spend then no tax for you. You will be taxed only when you spend.

People who earn $5000 per month, pay them $12,000 per month. Reduce the salaries of high paid professionals such as CEO, managers, world leaders, politicions, MBA, CA and others by 50% who are responsible for present never ending financial crisis.

Salaries of government people such as federal reserve and bankers should be reduced by 75%. President and politicians should work for $0 salary.

Some corporations make so much money that advertising is only a Tax Write Off. Some of these products, at the SALE price level, have a GP of 100% up to 400%. This, again, is the SALE price GP. Not the RETAIL price GP which is more. Think of it this way, they buy an item for $25.00 with a retail of $200.00 and then put a sale price of $100.00. Wow, that's 50% OFF...what a bargain!

I think 25% of world companies add corporation tax to the final selling price of the products and services.

The Corporation tax or tax paid by companies for their profits is ultimately paid by the consumers/buyers because companies add this tax to the selling price of the product and services. This increases the product price which increases the inflation.

So there should be consumption tax only. No corporation tax and no personal income tax.

Only a person who is worth $10 Billion should be the President. He should pay for his president expenses. The same applies to other politicians. When you are serving the country why do you need salary. President job and politician job should be charity job.

Salaries of Secret Service, Army, Other FBI should be increased by 100%.

Salaries of police and financial FBI must be reduced by 50% because they blindly obey idiot politcians.

The Fed levies the Invisible Tax - Inflation. Inflation is a regressive tax, since it adversely affect the middle-class and poor the most.

Since the estimate is that the dollar has lost 95+% of it's value since the creation of the Federal Reserve, it seems the saying "America was built on the backs of the middle-class" is particularly true.

Inflation is an invisible tax that is used to spend more than gov't takes in. Inflation of fiat money is easy when there are no hard assets backing the money.

Inflation robs people of Purchasing Power (same as a tax). Inflation transfers productivity and assets of workers to those who sit in chairs and create the fiat money (or loan it out).

-------------------------

Taxing with Inflation

Most countries have a progressive income tax--that is, as income goes up, so does the tax rate. Thus if income doubles, taxes will more than double. With this system, inflation will push people into higher tax brackets. Suppose a person starts at an income of $10,000 and a tax rate of 10% or taxes of $1000. If prices and wages all rise by 20%, he will have an income of $12,000. If his tax bill were $1200, he would pay the same real purchasing power to the government. But if the tax rate at $12,000 is 11%, he will pay $1320 to the government. This means that the government can raise taxes by causing inflation, without ever formally acting to raise tax rates.

Inflation Tax

Inflation has been called "the hidden tax" and that is exactly what it is. When the Government "prints" extra money what do you think it does with it? It spends it of course!

Further deflation propaganda fraud is perpetuated by academics and the mainstream press by pushing the low core inflation argument.

Governments around the world are using inflation to reduce debt.This hidden tax is on pensions, through V A T and other stealth taxes.Government will no longer use RPI ,CPI will will be used for increase in state pensions.Why are there pension crisis?People live longer and governments create inflation to reduce debt, and fiddle inflation figures.If governments told you the true inflation rates, pay rises and pension rises would make it difficult for governments to deal with.The method of reporting inflation is changed regularly to show low inflation to the masses.

Goodbye M3- What is the Government hiding?

There are two obvious answers to the questions, esp regarding inflation. First our government is multi tiered and each tier independently funded. So they all need an independent revenue stream.

But another answer is that a tax is best that is most stealth. If you don't realize that you are being taxed you won't resent it. Which is why you only pay 1/2 of your FICA tax, your employer pays the other half.

In reality the employee is paying all of it, but by stealth is fooled into believing that he only pays half of it. All taxation, like lottery, is a tax on the mathematically impaired. If you are smart enough to figure it all out you can avoid paying most taxes, legally.

If not, well they have a tax trap waiting for you at every street corner.
 
Last edited:
A person who earn $80,000 per year. If this person spends $50,000 per year, this person will pay $5000 as consumption tax.

A super-rich person spends $500 million per year, this person will pay $50 million consumption tax.

That is your problem right there

The person earning $80,000 a year will spend a large proportion of his earnings on housing, electricity, gas, food, medical care, education, transportation

That super rich person can spend millions on the same and only touch a small percentage of their earnings/wealth

It automatically shifts more tax burden to those who have to spend more to stay alive
 
A person who earn $80,000 per year. If this person spends $50,000 per year, this person will pay $5000 as consumption tax.

A super-rich person spends $500 million per year, this person will pay $50 million consumption tax.

That is your problem right there

The person earning $80,000 a year will spend a large proportion of his earnings on housing, electricity, gas, food, medical care, education, transportation

That super rich person can spend millions on the same and only touch a small percentage of their earnings/wealth

It automatically shifts more tax burden to those who have to spend more to stay alive

I dare you to give us a in dept answer as to how you would make things "fair."

Or wait, you're that absolute partisan hack that that lives in the land of hypocrisy by supporting and voting for some of the richest people in the world as long as they are Democrat who manage to give themselves billions in Tarp/Stimulus money and extend tax cuts that they campain against... You know, their actual record VS the bullshit talking points they lure weak minded people in with?

Tell us all how you plan on taxing the rich, to pay for the middle class and the poor's entitlements when we currently run a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit a year deficit. How high do taxes have to be on the rich (and be specific) to pay for the GROWING entitlement programs consumption rate? This means ending wars along won’t answer the question, not that you support such an idea but how much more revenue will be needed this year AND how much will be needed in say ten years even without the wars?

Own up RW, it's all on you....
 
Last edited:
A person who earn $80,000 per year. If this person spends $50,000 per year, this person will pay $5000 as consumption tax.

A super-rich person spends $500 million per year, this person will pay $50 million consumption tax.

That is your problem right there

The person earning $80,000 a year will spend a large proportion of his earnings on housing, electricity, gas, food, medical care, education, transportation

That super rich person can spend millions on the same and only touch a small percentage of their earnings/wealth

It automatically shifts more tax burden to those who have to spend more to stay alive

So, in other words it's about making sure at the end of the day, the guy making $80,000 and the guy making $1,000,000 both end up with $10,000 after gubmint works their magic. You really need to stop obsessing over the "super rich".

And it doesn't shift any tax burdon if everybody pays the same rate.

:lol:
 
Sure if buying stock and futures is consuming.

Exactly

They tax everything a working man spends on.....food, housing, transportation, energy, communication, medical

Survival is taxable.........buying stock and business is investing
 
A person who earn $80,000 per year. If this person spends $50,000 per year, this person will pay $5000 as consumption tax.

A super-rich person spends $500 million per year, this person will pay $50 million consumption tax.

That is your problem right there

The person earning $80,000 a year will spend a large proportion of his earnings on housing, electricity, gas, food, medical care, education, transportation

That super rich person can spend millions on the same and only touch a small percentage of their earnings/wealth

It automatically shifts more tax burden to those who have to spend more to stay alive

I dare you to give us a in dept answer as to how you would make things "fair."

Or wait, you're that absolute partisan hack that that lives in the land of hypocrisy by supporting and voting for some of the richest people in the world as long as they are Democrat who manage to give themselves billions in Tarp/Stimulus money and extend tax cuts that they campain against... You know, their actual record VS the bullshit talking points they lure weak minded people in with?

Tell us all how you plan on taxing the rich, to pay for the middle class and the poor's entitlements when we currently run a 1.6 trillion dollar deficit a year deficit. How high do taxes have to be on the rich (and be specific) to pay for the GROWING entitlement programs consumption rate? This means ending wars along won’t answer the question, not that you support such an idea but how much more revenue will be needed this year AND how much will be needed in say ten years even without the wars?

Own up RW, it's all on you....

What is fair to me is the money someone earns working in a sewer is taxed at the same rate as money earned in the stock market

What is fair to me is returning to tax rates prior to the Bush/Obama tax cuts until we have paid off our debt

What is fair to me is ending wars in Afghanistan and Iraq before you start asking Americans to start sacrificing vital services
 
Politics aside, a consumption tax in the U.S. would be a motivating factor for people to spend less, and less spending by consumers is not what we need right now.

And before I get attacked, just think about it. If you could lower your tax burden by not spending as much, you would do it. You'd cut coupons and look for deals and do everything you could to spend as little as possible.
 
Politics aside, a consumption tax in the U.S. would be a motivating factor for people to spend less, and less spending by consumers is not what we need right now.

And before I get attacked, just think about it. If you could lower your tax burden by not spending as much, you would do it. You'd cut coupons and look for deals and do everything you could to spend as little as possible.

Black Market
 
That is your problem right there.It automatically shifts more tax burden to those who have to spend more to stay alive
The first post is self-explanatory and has all the information. Read it many times if you do not want world society to suffer in hell forever.
 
A person who earn $80,000 per year. If this person spends $50,000 per year, this person will pay $5000 as consumption tax.

A super-rich person spends $500 million per year, this person will pay $50 million consumption tax.

That is your problem right there

The person earning $80,000 a year will spend a large proportion of his earnings on housing, electricity, gas, food, medical care, education, transportation

That super rich person can spend millions on the same and only touch a small percentage of their earnings/wealth

It automatically shifts more tax burden to those who have to spend more to stay alive

Making it progressive would not be that challenging. Plus, you could not tax necessities.

The consumption tax would also help with our savings deficiency since it would give the incentive to save and invest rather than consume.
 
Money supply increases when the product and services final selling price increases.

What was money supply when Oil or petrol was $1 per gallon?

What is money supply when Oil or petrol is $4 per gallon?

Price rise = Inflation. Think about it.
Whoa there! I was agreeing with you about lower taxes until this part.

Money supply DOES NOT increase when prices increase. You have it totally backwards. Prices increase when the money supply increases. The Federal Reserve controls the money supply of the United States. It literally creates money out of thin air. Generally, prices rise after more money enters the economy. You are confusing cause and effect.
 
Politics aside, a consumption tax in the U.S. would be a motivating factor for people to spend less, and less spending by consumers is not what we need right now.

And before I get attacked, just think about it. If you could lower your tax burden by not spending as much, you would do it. You'd cut coupons and look for deals and do everything you could to spend as little as possible.
I understand the argument that more spending is needed. It makes sense. People spend more, this gives businesses more profit, they can expand and create jobs. But spending money now will mean businesses have less savings from which to borrow from, necessitating an increase in the interest rate. If you try to keep spending high, savings low, and interest rates low, you will create serious malinvestment in the economy. This is exactly what happened with housing.

If individuals in an economy spend more than the save, more resources will be focused on later stages of production like retailing and services. If people spend more, they are signalling that they want goods now rather than the future. Businesses will try to produce consumer goods as fast as possible, focusing efforts on getting those goods sold. If savings is higher, then resources will be devoted to capital and earlier stages of production, such as mining or manufacturing. The reason for this is because people, through their saving rate, are signalling that they want to spend more in the future rather than the present. So companies respond by focusing more on the earlier stages of production, because they have more time.

It is all about time preferences. If people want more and more now, they will spend more and more. If they prefer more and more later, they will save, and companies will invest in areas of production that might take more time but end up being more productive.

We all know that people in the US have been spending nearly all of their money and saving next to nothing. This is precisely why there is less focus on manufacturing, which is an earlier stage of production. However, the creation of new money and the artificially lowering of the interest rate create the illusion that there are more savings in the economy than their actually are. This pushes production out of line with time preferences of consumers. People are demanding consumer goods, and producers focus more than they should on earlier stages of production. Because the expansion of the money supply leads to higher prices, these projects cannot be sustained, and you have a bust.

Prior to this recession, people were spending a lot yet businesses were focusing on earlier stages of production. For the economy to recover, the structure of production has to be corrected. This can be done in two ways: Businesses focus more on later stages of production, or individuals in the economy spend less and save more. The problem was caused because projects were pursued based on the illusion of savings. If the savings become real, recovery will be much less painful.

Less spending and more saving is exactly what we need. The recovery process necessitates saving more so time preferences are back in line with capital structure.
 
Politics aside, a consumption tax in the U.S. would be a motivating factor for people to spend less, and less spending by consumers is not what we need right now.

And before I get attacked, just think about it. If you could lower your tax burden by not spending as much, you would do it. You'd cut coupons and look for deals and do everything you could to spend as little as possible.

And the government would receive less so they would have to become responsible and accountable. Is there something wrong with that or did I miss something?
 
Less spending and more saving is exactly what we need.

Fascinating rant you had there and I'm sure your Econ teacher loved it. However, we live in the real world and in the real world, businesses are not hiring and not expanding due to low consumer demand. And with 9% unemployment, there is no wonder why we have low consumer demand.

Even less spending by consumers is not what we need.

Faltering consumer spending to weigh on growth | Reuters

The Commerce Department said on Tuesday consumer spending slipped 0.2 percent, the first decline since September 2009, after edging up 0.1 percent in May. Adjusted for inflation, spending was flat after a 0.1 percent decline.

Incomes rose just 0.1 percent.

"If the recovery is ever going to gain speed, it will have to come from households deciding they want to spend money again," said Joel Naroff, chief economist at Naroff Economic Advisors in Holland, Pennsylvania.

There are few signs that consumers are willing to do that just yet. Companies from a wide range of U.S. industries told stories on Tuesday of slowing sales and bleak outlooks.

But don't listen to those businesses or reports. Keep telling yourself even less consumer spending, and therefore less revenue to business, is just what we need more of.
 
The "consumption tax" or "fair tax" or "national sales tax", or whatever you want to cal it is a GREAT idea. Theoretically speaking.

The problem is, we live in the real world. IF we get a consumption tax, we can COUNT on our esteemed elected officials to do it in addition to the income taxes we already pay. Or AT LEAST for them to continue with income taxes on the "rich".

No thank you. I'll take LESS taxes with that...
 

Forum List

Back
Top