Stopping class warfare

[bripat9643]

We know all about it. And we roundly dismiss it.

He wasn't talking to morons like you.

 

[bripat9643]

Read the bill HR.25. It is only 33 pages. You know it as the Fair Tax plan. The rich will still pay a higher percentage then the poor. Thus it is progressive.

Asking Joe to read something is like looking for an honest man driving a stolen car.

I don't need to read a bill to realize consumption taxes hurt working people.

They are also massively inefficient. For instance, IL has a 7% sales tax, and 1% of that goes back to the merchant for simply collecting it.

Then it effectively has a 6% sales tax. It costs almost nothing to collect a sales tax. it's a simple math operation.

 

[bripat9643]

I have seen how deep this class warfare has gotten and it makes me sad. We have stopped talking about what is best for the country and started talking about how to punish a few in the name of social justice. But this is not a solution....just a distraction.

How is making the rich pay their fair share a "distraction"?

The term "fair share" is meaningless. All it really means is "more than they are paying now."

The country had it's greatest prosperity when the workforce was mostly unionized and the wealthy paid a 93% top rate.

This fallacy is known as post hoc, ergo propter hoc

Look it up to understand why it proves that you're a moron.

 

[akelch]

Asking Joe to read something is like looking for an honest man driving a stolen car.

I don't need to read a bill to realize consumption taxes hurt working people.

They are also massively inefficient. For instance, IL has a 7% sales tax, and 1% of that goes back to the merchant for simply collecting it.

Then it effectively has a 6% sales tax. It costs almost nothing to collect a sales tax. it's a simple math operation.

Exactly...

Imagine...no more filing of tax returns or payroll taxes. That itself would save us billions.

 

[JoeB131]

I have seen how deep this class warfare has gotten and it makes me sad. We have stopped talking about what is best for the country and started talking about how to punish a few in the name of social justice. But this is not a solution....just a distraction.

How is making the rich pay their fair share a "distraction"?

The country had it's greatest prosperity when the workforce was mostly unionized and the wealthy paid a 93% top rate.

Seriously, fuck the rich. They'll be fine.

Show me a person that actually paid 93% and I'll agree with you.

Plus, I don't care about the rich, I care about the country and our economy.

Under the Fair Tax those "rich" will have to compete with one another to keep what they have. Thus, hire the best talent.

They'll do nothing of the sort. They'll hire who they think they can get away with exploiting.

Sorry, man, Supply Side doesn't work, nor does the magic power of Capitalism.

We were much more prosperous when they paid top marginal rates, and we invested that money in schools and roads instead of Dressage Ponies and Car Elevators.

 

[akelch]

How is making the rich pay their fair share a "distraction"?

The country had it's greatest prosperity when the workforce was mostly unionized and the wealthy paid a 93% top rate.

Seriously, fuck the rich. They'll be fine.

Show me a person that actually paid 93% and I'll agree with you.

Plus, I don't care about the rich, I care about the country and our economy.

Under the Fair Tax those "rich" will have to compete with one another to keep what they have. Thus, hire the best talent.

They'll do nothing of the sort. They'll hire who they think they can get away with exploiting.

Sorry, man, Supply Side doesn't work, nor does the magic power of Capitalism.

We were much more prosperous when they paid top marginal rates, and we invested that money in schools and roads instead of Dressage Ponies and Car Elevators.

In that time you talk about we had less regulation.......so you can make a argument that less regulation made us more prosperous. Thus, getting rid of 75,000 pages of the tax code and replacing it with Fair Tax which is only 33 pages would make us more prosperous.

 

[JoeB131]

In that time you talk about we had less regulation.......so you can make a argument that less regulation made us more prosperous. Thus, getting rid of 75,000 pages of the tax code and replacing it with Fair Tax which is only 33 pages would make us more prosperous.

Actually, we had more regulation back in the day... Look it up. the Government could seize whole industries, ration food and gasoline, etc.

Was there less words on pages detailing stuff. Um. Yeah. Less government control- not so much.

 

[zeke]

I have seen how deep this class warfare has gotten and it makes me sad. We have stopped talking about what is best for the country and started talking about how to punish a few in the name of social justice. But this is not a solution....just a distraction.

What a bunch of happy horse shit.

If I make a net income (that's after taxes if you don't know what it is) of 65,000 dollars a month (or do you not believe there are people making that much?) and now because of a tax increase, I will only net 60,000 a month, why don't you explain just what the hardship/punishment is that this person will incur.

Cause if 60,000 a month aint enough, they don't have an income or a tax problem, they have a spending problem.

 

[akelch]

I have seen how deep this class warfare has gotten and it makes me sad. We have stopped talking about what is best for the country and started talking about how to punish a few in the name of social justice. But this is not a solution....just a distraction.

What a bunch of happy horse shit.

If I make a net income (that's after taxes if you don't know what it is) of 65,000 dollars a month (or do you not believe there are people making that much?) and now because of a tax increase, I will only net 60,000 a month, why don't you explain just what the hardship/punishment is that this person will incur.

Cause if 60,000 a month aint enough, they don't have an income or a tax problem, they have a spending problem.

I think your in the wrong thread. You are arguing a point that no one made.

 

[bripat9643]

How is making the rich pay their fair share a "distraction"?

The country had it's greatest prosperity when the workforce was mostly unionized and the wealthy paid a 93% top rate.

Seriously, fuck the rich. They'll be fine.

Show me a person that actually paid 93% and I'll agree with you.

Plus, I don't care about the rich, I care about the country and our economy.

Under the Fair Tax those "rich" will have to compete with one another to keep what they have. Thus, hire the best talent.

They'll do nothing of the sort. They'll hire who they think they can get away with exploiting.

Sorry, man, Supply Side doesn't work, nor does the magic power of Capitalism.

We were much more prosperous when they paid top marginal rates, and we invested that money in schools and roads instead of Dressage Ponies and Car Elevators.

You have never a read a single book about economics, have you?

Explain why my employer pays me many times the minimum wage if it can simply hire whoever "they can get away with exploiting."

 

[bripat9643]

I have seen how deep this class warfare has gotten and it makes me sad. We have stopped talking about what is best for the country and started talking about how to punish a few in the name of social justice. But this is not a solution....just a distraction.

What a bunch of happy horse shit.

If I make a net income (that's after taxes if you don't know what it is) of 65,000 dollars a month (or do you not believe there are people making that much?) and now because of a tax increase, I will only net 60,000 a month, why don't you explain just what the hardship/punishment is that this person will incur.

Cause if 60,000 a month aint enough, they don't have an income or a tax problem, they have a spending problem.

Your argument is that because a loser like you would still be envious of the person suffering the additional tax, then it must be "fair."

Taking money from someone, no matter how much they make, is a punishment. It isn't determined by how much you have leftover after they take something out of your hide. That's the kind of logic that only morons fall for.

 

[ilia25]

Read the bill HR.25. It is only 33 pages. You know it as the Fair Tax plan. The rich will still pay a higher percentage then the poor. Thus it is progressive.

It is not progressive enough -- even less so than the current code.

 

[bripat9643]

Read the bill HR.25. It is only 33 pages. You know it as the Fair Tax plan. The rich will still pay a higher percentage then the poor. Thus it is progressive.

It is not progressive enough -- even less so than the current code.

We understand that commies like you don't like any tax system that doesn't destroy the wealth producers in this society.

 

[tooAlive]

Seriously? Why do people even keep mentioning that our economy did so well under 94% top marginal rates?

Nobody paid those taxes. Look at the average income back then. And like Bripat already mentioned, all the deductions back then meant you paid a lower percentage than you probably pay today.

Jeez. And even if they did pay up; why would anyone want to keep earning past that bracket when you'd only see 6 cents on the dollar beyond that sum?

Who works for 6 cents on the dollar?

 

[akelch]

Read the bill HR.25. It is only 33 pages. You know it as the Fair Tax plan. The rich will still pay a higher percentage then the poor. Thus it is progressive.

It is not progressive enough -- even less so than the current code.

I don't think people understand...we all pay the taxes when we BUY now...not when we earn.

All the top 1% control how much them make...if their taxes go up then they pay themselves more to compensate by cutting cost in their business.

Companies add into the cost of their product or service ALL their taxes and their employees taxes....ALL TAXES are eventually paid by the consumer.

So what is the difference then? All the lost in productivity filling out tax forms and figuring how to work around the tax system. With the Fair Tax this would all be gone and a simpler system in place.

 

[ilia25]

Read the bill HR.25. It is only 33 pages. You know it as the Fair Tax plan. The rich will still pay a higher percentage then the poor. Thus it is progressive.

It is not progressive enough -- even less so than the current code.

I don't think people understand...we all pay the taxes when we BUY now...not when we earn.

All the top 1% control how much them make...if their taxes go up then they pay themselves more to compensate by cutting cost in their business.

You mean downsizing their business? That would be like refusing a raise to play less taxes.

Companies add into the cost of their product or service ALL their taxes and their employees taxes....ALL TAXES are eventually paid by the consumer.

Until some guy decides that he can pass on buying 200 feet yacht and can grab some market share by lowering his prices.

So what is the difference then? All the lost in productivity filling out tax forms and figuring how to work around the tax system. With the Fair Tax this would all be gone and a simpler system in place.

I'm not against consumption tax if you can make it sufficiently progressive. I just don't think it is possible.

 

[akelch]

It is not progressive enough -- even less so than the current code.

I don't think people understand...we all pay the taxes when we BUY now...not when we earn.

All the top 1% control how much them make...if their taxes go up then they pay themselves more to compensate by cutting cost in their business.

You mean downsizing their business? That would be like refusing a raise to play less taxes.

Companies add into the cost of their product or service ALL their taxes and their employees taxes....ALL TAXES are eventually paid by the consumer.

Until some guy decides that he can pass on buying 200 feet yacht and can grab some market share by lowering his prices.

So what is the difference then? All the lost in productivity filling out tax forms and figuring how to work around the tax system. With the Fair Tax this would all be gone and a simpler system in place.

I'm not against consumption tax if you can make it sufficiently progressive. I just don't think it is possible.

I agree...I don't think it will be possible without making another mess of the tax system by adding more layers of exempts and deductions.
Which is what we have now.

Personally...I don't care what the rich make as long as they follow the law. I want a strong economy so I will have a better chance to succeed in what I do.

 

[JoeB131]

You have never a read a single book about economics, have you?

Explain why my employer pays me many times the minimum wage if it can simply hire whoever "they can get away with exploiting."

You really think that I believe for a moment that you have a productive job that pays you to post hateful bile on the internet?

You posted this bit of bile at 11:27 AM. Why are you stealing from your employer like this?

 

[bripat9643]

You have never a read a single book about economics, have you?

Explain why my employer pays me many times the minimum wage if it can simply hire whoever "they can get away with exploiting."

You really think that I believe for a moment that you have a productive job that pays you to post hateful bile on the internet?

You posted this bit of bile at 11:27 AM. Why are you stealing from your employer like this?

You can't answer the question, can you?

 

[Mustang]

If conservatives and liberals are serious about tax fairness, creating jobs, reducing lobbyist influence in Washington, and growing the economy......then why do they not support getting rid of the current income tax code and replace it with a consumption tax?

Or are they serious at all?

The problem with a consumption tax is that it is class warfare. When you have people who spend everything they have on day to day expenses, as opposed to the rich, who put a lot away, that is shifting the tax burden onto to the working class more than it already is.

It also hurts business, because people will be less inclined to buy thing.

I mean, come on, people, this ain't brain surgery. We had our greatest prosperity when the rich paid hefty taxes for the privilage of being rich.

Otherwise known as a regressive tax.