The Tax Man

Discussion in 'Politics' started by shintao, Jun 4, 2011.

  1. shintao
    Offline

    shintao Take Down ~ Tap Out

    Joined:
    Aug 27, 2010
    Messages:
    7,231
    Thanks Received:
    320
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Ratings:
    +339
    Over the years I have noted the idiosyncrasies of how people approach taxes. In some minds no taxes are the only answer. Others would settle for some taxes for some items, but no taxes for other items. Others would like to punish various groups with taxes, as long as no taxes befall them. Some realize we need some taxes to run government, but want no taxes for the people.

    So I am wondering where do you stand on the Tax Man issue. No Taxes -to- Never Saw a Tax you didn't like, or somewhere in between.

    I see taxes as a necessary evil of running America. I support taxes that help "American" humanity, and oppose the corporate & warfare machine & foreign support.

    1.)I want an equal tax that everybody pays the same amount each year, 2.)based on what the poorest among us can pay. (3.)A no-deduction-no-return annual simple tax that 4.)government must work within an a budget.

    On the other hand, if the only way I can stop taxes going to corporations, rich, & warfare is demand NO TAXES, then I would give up any taxes to humanity, stop all government programs & tighten the nut on Congress & the President, with the power directly in the hands of the people.
     
  2. Immanuel
    Offline

    Immanuel Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    16,823
    Thanks Received:
    2,210
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +2,224
    I do not oppose taxes. I would prefer an idea like the Fair Tax, because I believe that it assists the poor keeping them from paying any taxes at all in some cases.

    I do not like our current tax system as it rewards dishonesty and allows Congress way too much power. If an equitable "Fair Tax" System could not be written, I would settle for a Flat Tax (percentage based).

    I have no problem paying taxes and supporting my country. I have no problem paying taxes and having some of those taxes go to the poor in the form of Welfare or other services. I think our major problem is too much pork and not enough concern for those in true need.

    I do have a problem with the tax code being written so that those with power and the means to coerce their representatives can arrange tax breaks for themselves.

    BTW: Good question, I hope this proves to be a good thread.

    Immie
     
  3. Ame®icano
    Offline

    Ame®icano Gold Member

    Joined:
    Jul 8, 2008
    Messages:
    9,814
    Thanks Received:
    1,624
    Trophy Points:
    245
    Location:
    Michigan
    Ratings:
    +4,249
    Flat tax for all on state level only. No loopholes, no exceptions, everyone pays the same percentage.

    No federal taxes at all. States would pay into federal budget. That way states would force feds to keep the spending under control.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  4. Oddball
    Offline

    Oddball BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Jan 3, 2009
    Messages:
    41,428
    Thanks Received:
    8,397
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Location:
    Drinking wine, eating cheese, catching rays
    Ratings:
    +8,409
    No unapportioned direct federal taxes...Period.
     
  5. Mr. H.
    Offline

    Mr. H. Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Aug 19, 2009
    Messages:
    44,104
    Thanks Received:
    9,264
    Trophy Points:
    2,030
    Location:
    A warm place with no memory.
    Ratings:
    +15,387
    The tax code is fine. We are in more need of honest taxpayers. Treasury loses $250 billion each year.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  6. Immanuel
    Offline

    Immanuel Gold Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2007
    Messages:
    16,823
    Thanks Received:
    2,210
    Trophy Points:
    183
    Ratings:
    +2,224
    The states are not doing a good job with their own budgeting why would they force the feds to do so?

    Immie
     
  7. elvis
    Offline

    elvis BANNED Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2008
    Messages:
    25,882
    Thanks Received:
    4,303
    Trophy Points:
    0
    Ratings:
    +4,303
    [ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Maz9ddxEQnM]YouTube - ‪The Beatles - Taxman‬‏[/ame]
     
  8. johnwk
    Offline

    johnwk VIP Member

    Joined:
    May 24, 2009
    Messages:
    1,565
    Thanks Received:
    151
    Trophy Points:
    85
    Ratings:
    +377
    With regard to taxation and allowing Congress to raise a federal revenue in a manner which preempted the very sufferings we now experience, our founders relied upon principles which are as valid today as when our Constitution went into effect. For example, our founders intended that Congress use taxes at our water’s edge as a first means to fill our national treasury which not only had foreigners filling our national treasury for the privilege of doing business on American soil, just as one pays for a ticket to set up a booth at a flea market to sell one’s goods and wares, but restricting Congress to raising its revenue from taxes imposed on judiciously selected articles of consumption which are imported, not only does such a system allow the market place to determine the allowable limit of tax on each article selected, but when Congress is compelled to raising its revenue by taxing consumption as our founders intended, it becomes in Congress’ self interest to encourage a healthy and vibrant economy which in turn leads to a productive consumption and thus a healthy flow of revenue into the federal treasury. This too applies to internal excise taxes imposed upon articles of consumption which our founders intended to be used as an additional, but second means to fill the national treasury. In the end our founders rightfully chose the market place to limit the amount of tax on each article selected. Hamilton explains taxing consumption in the following manner, they:

    ---may be compared to a fluid, which will in time find its level with the means of paying them. The amount to be contributed by each citizen will in a degree be by his own option, and can be regulated by an attention to his own resources. The rich may be extravagant, the poor can be frugal; and private oppression may always be avoided by a judicious selection of objects proper for such impositions

    "It is a signal advantage of taxes on articles of consumption, that they contain in their own nature a security against excess. They prescribe their own limit; which cannot be exceeded without defeating the end proposed, that is, an extension of the revenue. When applied to this object, the saying is as just as it is witty, that, "in political arithmetic, two and two do not always make four .'' If duties are too high, they lessen the consumption; the collection is eluded; and the product to the treasury is not so great as when they are confined within proper and moderate bounds. This forms a complete barrier against any material oppression of the citizens by taxes of this class, and is itself a natural limitation of the power of imposing them.”
    ___ Federalist No 21


    And what was to happen if an emergency arises, such as war, and imposts, duties and miscellaneous excise taxes on consumption were found insufficient to meet public exigencies? Our wise founding fathers solved this problem by allowing Congress an additional power of taxation, the power to lay a general tax among the States to raise a specific sum needed. But in such cases the rule of apportionment was written into our Constitution and a very real movement of accountability would be created when laying this tax. Each State’s Congressional Delegation had to return home with a bill in hand for their State’s Governor and Legislature to deal with to extinguish the deficit created by Congress. Upon receiving its bill from a State’s Congressional Delegation the Governor and Legislature were then required to transfer its State’s apportioned share from the State’s treasury into the national treasury or raise additional taxes within the State and then transfer that money into the federal treasury to extinguish the deficit created by Congress. And it is also important to note that the rule of apportionment precludes the despotic use of class warfare when imposing the general tax among the states as each State’s share of the burden is determine by a fixed formula, and each state was intended to raise it’s share in it is own chosen way. The formula for this special tax to raise a specific sum to extinguish a deficit ties representation and taxation by the same standard, each state‘s population size, and its burden turns out to be an equal per capita tax if laid directly upon the people:


    States’ population

    ---------------------------- X SUM TO BE RAISED = STATE’S SHARE

    Total U.S. Population




    State`s Population
    _______________ X House membership (435) = State`s No.of Reps
    population of U.S.


    Unfortunately, instead of working to re-establish our founding father’s original tax plan and its honest money system, both of which paved the way for a free market system to work and flourish, and resulted in America becoming the economic marvel of the world, America’s political pundits prefer to incite partisan politics while the leadership of both political parties work in concert to corrupt our founder’s plan in order to lay claim to what America has produced, and they do so using a dishonest money system and dishonest taxation, both of which were specifically rejected by our founding fathers.



    So why is it that not one of our “conservative” talk show pundits will compare our founder’s constitutionally mandated honest money and their honest system of taxation to what is currently used by the Washington Establishment to seize what America has produced? Who among the following list has taken the time to discuss our Constitution’s original plan as our founding fathers intended it to operate: Rush Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, Glenn Beck, Laura Ingraham, Schnitt, Mark Levin, Dennis Prager, Bill O'rielly, Mike Gallagher, Lee Rodgers, Neal Boortz. Tammy Bruce, Monica Crowley, …. WHO? But isn’t it surprising the above do know how to fan the flames of political partisanship which causes a distraction from any meaningful focus and discussion about reforming the legislative powers used to cause our miseries?

    And who among those who are running for office advocate real reform by returning to the honest money and honest taxation as written into our Constitution by our founders, and was specifically designed by our founders to preclude our existing miseries and the plundering of America’s wealth now engaged in by our folks in Washington?

    Bottom line is, until Congress’ hands are rebound by our Constitution’s honest money system and honest taxation, the American People will continue to be the slaves of a government they created to be their servant.

    Is it not time to focus upon specific measures to remove the legislative powers now used to enslave us? How about starting with working to add the following 32 words to our Constitution?

    The Sixteenth Amendment is hereby repealed and Congress is henceforth forbidden to lay ``any`` tax or burden calculated from profits, gains, interest, salaries, wages, tips, inheritances or any other lawfully realized money

    These words, if added to our Constitution, would return us to our founding father’s ORIGINAL TAX PLAN as they intended it to operate! And, they would remove the existing chains of taxation which Congress now uses to enslave America‘s businesses, its industrial and manufacturing base, and they would end the slavish tax which now




    JWK

    If we can make the majority of America’s families dependent upon a federal government check, [the Herman Cain fair tax family consumption entitlement] we can then bribe them for their vote, keep ourselves in power and keep the remaining portion of America’s productive population enslaved to pay the bills ___Our Washington Establishment’s Marxist game plan, a plan to establish a federal plantation and redistribute the bread which America’s labor and business has produced.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 2
  9. AVG-JOE
    Offline

    AVG-JOE American Mutt Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    22,888
    Thanks Received:
    4,882
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Your Imagination
    Ratings:
    +7,017
    7% general sales tax on all retail transactions
    +
    7% income tax on individual income in excess of $3 million per year. EVERYONE earns their first $3 million tax free.

    No corporate tax other than on what they spend, no bullshit loopholes or special treatment, no huge IRS bureaucracy to support collecting at the retail level because consumption taxes are collected at the wholesale level.

    A consumption tax is inherently unfair to the lower incomes.
    An income tax is inherently unfair to the upper incomes.

    Simple taxes = fair taxes. A simple blend of consumption and income taxes is fair.
     
  10. AVG-JOE
    Offline

    AVG-JOE American Mutt Staff Member Gold Supporting Member

    Joined:
    Mar 23, 2008
    Messages:
    22,888
    Thanks Received:
    4,882
    Trophy Points:
    260
    Location:
    Your Imagination
    Ratings:
    +7,017
    This is a pretty good idea. The closer you are to the politician with his hand in your pocket, the more likely you are able to have a vote that counts for something.
     

Share This Page