Who Pays the Taxes? Who Should?

[Foxfyre]

There should be laws on taxes. Should people that don't own property have to pay a property tax? Should the people that own more expensive property have to pay more property tax, or should it all be the same. If you don't own a boat should you have to pay a boat tax, a car tax, and so on. If there is a tax on income, should those with a greater income pay a higher tax?
Lincoln started it, and the Constitution was amended to make it all legal and shippy-shape, but it suddenly seems that a tax on income is unGodly, wrong, communistic, and every other Republican argument one can think of. Why has a tax on incomes seemingly suddenly become so unAmerican, so evil so unfair, while a tax on groceries is so fair and so American? When and who started the income tax battle?

Property taxes are a legitimate way for local governments/school systems, etc. to raise revenue and even those who don't own property pay it through rents that are higher than they would otherwise likely be if there were no property taxes. Make taxes too high, however, and you have people fleeing the system. Eventually that will bring property values down with corresponding loss of revenues. This is an incentive to keep taxes low enough to not be oppressive. Property ownership is also beneficial to federal revenues in the same way which makes the deduction for home mortgage interest, etc. reasonable and defensible. I would not support federal property taxes as there would be no way to escape them.

User fees are an honest and reasonable way to raise revenues as only those actually utiliing the resources pay. But again, make these too high and you discourage use with a resulting loss of revenues.

I can't support the fair tax as even with the pretax, it is the most regressive of taxes and the most susceptible to manipulation and dickering with potential for a tax code and bureaucracy as night marish as what we have now.

But if additional federal revenue is necessary, then a low and evenly applied flat income tax that gives everybody, rich and poor alike, equal skin in the game is the way to go. We should not look at the poor as perpetually poor but as going through a stage on their way to self reliance, and the best way to accomplish that is to apply the same rules to them as we apply to eveybody else. That gives them incentive to vote for people who promote policy that better encourage and allow the poor to become unpoor rather than for people who make them more comfortable in poverty.

But keep the flat tax low to generate private sector economic growth and require the federal government to balance its budget just as the states, counties, and cities are required to balance theirs. We might have fewer public services overall, but we will enjoy much greater choices, options, opportunity, and freedom.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Everyone is treated the same. Show me in the tax code where anyone is singled out by name.

When some can avoid the income tax altogether or even receive more in refunds than they pay in and others pay upwards of 20% of their income you cannot make the argument that everyone is treated the same.

Show me what is preventing you from "benefiting" in the same way that a poor person benefits from the tax code. Nothing is stopping you, just become poor. You'll get the same treatment that the poor receive.

See you just summed up the current philosophy.

Institute punitive tax rates on those who succeed while rewarding those who don't by allowing them to avoid the income tax.

Ovine logic at its best.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Are they corrupt?

Most likely which is why I also never vote for incumbents

I see. So even the people you choose to vote for are corrupt. And even they aren't proposing a flat tax system without exceptions.

The reason no politician wants a flat tax is that it takes away one of their most powerful bargaining chips used to keep themselves in power and money

 

[Foxfyre]

Most likely which is why I also never vote for incumbents

I see. So even the people you choose to vote for are corrupt. And even they aren't proposing a flat tax system without exceptions.

The reason no politician wants a flat tax is that it takes away one of their most powerful bargaining chips used to keep themselves in power and money

That is the absolute truth. Without class envy and/or victimization of certain groups, politicians would not be able to collect votes from the 'victims' or those goaded into class envy. Oh the horror if those elected were in a system that actually required them to focus on legislation and spend the people's money only on those things that would be profitable and strengthen the country for all. The fact is, many of those in Washington are only there because of empty promises to certain constituencies. If they actually had to pass good legislation, they wouldn't have the first idea how to go about it.

 

[regent]

A politician need the tax codes to reward those that support the politician's election. It is a two way street you help the politician with money and the politician helps you with the tax code. No way would a flat tax work, with that system, would work and that's why we'll never see one. To do that we would have to start with election systems that all use the same amount of money either from donors or govenment and that ain't gonna happen either. Next, I'll be suggesting that corporations aren't really people, people that work, have children, get abortions, watch TV, but the court has already ruled otherwise.

 

[Foxfyre]

A politician need the tax codes to reward those that support the politician's election. It is a two way street you help the politician with money and the politician helps you with the tax code. No way would a flat tax work, with that system, would work and that's why we'll never see one. To do that we would have to start with election systems that all use the same amount of money either from donors or govenment and that ain't gonna happen either. Next, I'll be suggesting that corporations aren't really people, people that work, have children, get abortions, watch TV, but the court has already ruled otherwise.

"Never"is a very long time. I am witnessing now things that at one time the American people assumed could never happen are in fact happening. And if negatives that 'could never happen' are happening, I have to keep hope that positive things that 'could never happen' could in fact happen. I do think we are most likely in the last generation with the ability to turn things around though.