A modest proposal on taxes

[Flopper]

If we had a flat tax with no credits or deduction, it would not make it through a single session of congress without modifications.

I know almost everything there is to know, such as what causes quantum fluctuations, what you'd encounter in a black hole, how to cure cancer, how many angels can dance on the head of a pin... but I don't have the slightest understanding of what makes people so stupid. "If we just give rich people a tax cut (e.g. a "flat tax", the elimination of the higher tax brackets), then the tax code would be unalterably simple." Uh?

No. Having everyone pay the same tax rate does little or nothing to simplify taxes. The two things that makes taxes complicated are determining your income and handling deductions and credits.

 

[Ariux]

Many people that receive welfare pay taxes. If you hold a job during the year and you receive welfare, as many people do, you certainly may be required to pay taxes. The majority of families leave the welfare system after a relatively short period of time -- about half leave within a year; 70 percent within two years and almost 90 percent within five years. There are many people who are on welfare 3 to 6 months then get a job and go off welfare. If they lose the job, they go back on welfare. So within any one year there a lot people who receive both welfare and taxable income.

You may be right, only as far as "welfare checks" go, but the poor commonly receive a great deal of government financial assistance, other than "welfare" ($10,000 to $30,000 per year, tax-free, not counting public services like public education), and it's for at least the entire time that they have minor children, easily 20+ years.

 

[Skull Pilot]

For every complex problem there is a simple solution... and it's usually wrong.

The usual crap that complicated is best.

There is elegance in simplicity but then you'd probably rather a 70,000 page code that no one really understands.

If we had a flat tax with no credits or deduction, it would not make it through a single session of congress without modifications. Small businesses would be demanding deductions for the cost of doing business. Investors would be asking for tax cuts to stimulate investment. Churches and charitable organization would be asking for a deductions for charitable giving. The investment companies would lobbying for deductions for retirement contributions and health savings accounts. Banks, mortgage companies, and construction companies would be lobbying to restore tax deductions for mortgages. etc, etc.... You would have to live in LA LA land to believe that congress would not respond. Within 10 years, we would be well on our way to the same complex mess that we have today. The only way to accomplish what you propose would be to repeal and replace the 16 amendment and the associated laws. That certainly would not happen because congress would not give up their power to change taxes as needed.

Any idiot can come up with a simple tax system. Devising a simple system that would pass congress, satisfy the courts, and be supported by the American people, large corporations, and special interest groups is another matter.

You're right it should be 10% off the top.

 

[editec]

What if we taxed everyone the same? I know, the liberals are going to say low income people can't afford it. So, what if their welfare included consideration that they are paying taxes on their income? Rather then giving them low tax rates AND welfare then fighting endlessly over both, we just include their taxes in their welfare and tax them the same as everyone else? That way we eliminate the whole tax half of the battle and make it easier for us both by just fighting about how much welfare they get? Brilliant? Eh?

In this I'm not taking a position on what tax system we have. Just saying whatever it is we tax everyone the same. And I'm not taking a position on welfare, just saying whatever system it is includes consideration for their taxes.

What if we paid everyone the same? I know, the conservatives are going to say rich income people can't afford it.

Brilliant, eh?

 

[NYcarbineer]

You want poor people to pay their taxes with their welfare benefits?

Well, that would be nice if they gave back a little of what they have stolen from those that had to work for all that, wouldn't you agree? But, I suppose that's too much to expect of leeches and moochers, just like it's too much to expect them to ever get their shit together, huh? Lowlifes are the worst.

They haven't stolen it, unless you believe that the government in the US under the US constitution is a criminal enterprise.

 

[NYcarbineer]

This is the problem with those of you on the right. You want everything to be fair and equal at the federal level, but at the state level you are happy with the lowest income workers paying the bulk of the taxes while the wealthy pay next to nothing as a percentage of income

Actually I have said I'm not addressing in this discussion the following

1) our tax system
2) our welfare system
3) state taxes.

.

You start a thread about the tax system and then proclaim in the same thread that you will not talk about the tax system?

 

[Flopper]

Many people that receive welfare pay taxes. If you hold a job during the year and you receive welfare, as many people do, you certainly may be required to pay taxes. The majority of families leave the welfare system after a relatively short period of time -- about half leave within a year; 70 percent within two years and almost 90 percent within five years. There are many people who are on welfare 3 to 6 months then get a job and go off welfare. If they lose the job, they go back on welfare. So within any one year there a lot people who receive both welfare and taxable income.

You may be right, only as far as "welfare checks" go, but the poor commonly receive a great deal of government financial assistance, other than "welfare" ($10,000 to $30,000 per year, tax-free, not counting public services like public education), and it's for at least the entire time that they have minor children, easily 20+ years.

You labor under the same misconception as many people. The vast majority of people on "welfare" do not remain on it for many years. Half are off welfare within a year, 70% in two years, and 90% in 5 years. However this varies by state. The welfare reform act of 1996 put limits on how long a person can be on welfare and allows each state to establish the amount of benefits and qualification requirements.

There is a huge amount of misconceptions about welfare as evidence by this discussion. To begin with there is no program called welfare. There are 6 basic separate programs, Medicaid, food stamps, childcare assistance, unemployment, cash aid, and housing assistance. In addition Temporary Assistance for Needy families (TANF) provides assistance for dependent children. The type and amount of aid available to individuals and dependent children varies greatly from state to state.

When the Federal Government gave control back to the states in 1996, there was no longer one source and one set of requirements. Each state determines the programs it will provide, the qualification requirements, and the benefits. Some programs such food stamps are funded entirely by the federal government other such child care for working mothers is funded mostly by the state. However, most of the programs are shared cost between the federal government and the states. All programs have limits on how long you can you can receive aid. For TANF, you may only receive cash assistance for a total of five years (60 months).

 

[kaz]

This is the problem with those of you on the right. You want everything to be fair and equal at the federal level, but at the state level you are happy with the lowest income workers paying the bulk of the taxes while the wealthy pay next to nothing as a percentage of income

Actually I have said I'm not addressing in this discussion the following

1) our tax system
2) our welfare system
3) state taxes.

.

You start a thread about the tax system and then proclaim in the same thread that you will not talk about the tax system?

My thread is not about the tax system as a whole, it's about one point within the tax system. Try re-reading the op.

 

[The Rabbi]

What if we taxed everyone the same? I know, the liberals are going to say low income people can't afford it. So, what if their welfare included consideration that they are paying taxes on their income? Rather then giving them low tax rates AND welfare then fighting endlessly over both, we just include their taxes in their welfare and tax them the same as everyone else? That way we eliminate the whole tax half of the battle and make it easier for us both by just fighting about how much welfare they get? Brilliant? Eh?

In this I'm not taking a position on what tax system we have. Just saying whatever it is we tax everyone the same. And I'm not taking a position on welfare, just saying whatever system it is includes consideration for their taxes.

Sounds like a great idea. Of course we also would have to change local and state taxes to reflect a fair system of taxation, because as it stands now, the lowest income earners pay two to four times the percentage of taxes based on income as the highest income earners at the state and local levels. It would be necessary to increase taxes on the highest income earners and reduce taxes on the lowest income earners. It would mean a massive change of the way taxes are collected at the state level. So what say you?

I dont know what the Federal tax system has to do with the state and local tax systems. Sounds like deflection.
What makes you think low income earners pay 2 to 4 times the percentage of taxes based on income as high earners? What does that even mean?

 

[NYcarbineer]

Actually I have said I'm not addressing in this discussion the following

1) our tax system
2) our welfare system
3) state taxes.

.

You start a thread about the tax system and then proclaim in the same thread that you will not talk about the tax system?

My thread is not about the tax system as a whole, it's about one point within the tax system. Try re-reading the op.

What's the point of taxing people who are eligible for food stamps? Or various other assistances?

 

[Ariux]

You labor under the same misconception as many people. The vast majority of people on "welfare" do not remain on it for many years. Half are off welfare within a year, 70% in two years, and 90% in 5 years.

Let me explain the players here. You're a shitbrained liberal spreading propaganda to defend parasitical behavior resulting from an immoral lifestyle. I'm the human being who knows what he's talking about. It is the norm for poor people to receive $10,000 to $30,000 in welfare, aside from formal welfare benefits, for 20+ years of their life. WIC, EITC, medicare, rent and gas assistance, free daycare, free school lunches, etc. Most of these have no time limits, as there may be for things like formal welfare and unemployment benefits.

Every single mom with children, earning some, and just some, money, collects thousands of dollars in EITC every year until she no longer has children in the home, or until she earns enough money to not be poor, or lower-middle class (which rarely happens).

 

[NYcarbineer]

What if we taxed everyone the same? I know, the liberals are going to say low income people can't afford it. So, what if their welfare included consideration that they are paying taxes on their income? Rather then giving them low tax rates AND welfare then fighting endlessly over both, we just include their taxes in their welfare and tax them the same as everyone else? That way we eliminate the whole tax half of the battle and make it easier for us both by just fighting about how much welfare they get? Brilliant? Eh?

In this I'm not taking a position on what tax system we have. Just saying whatever it is we tax everyone the same. And I'm not taking a position on welfare, just saying whatever system it is includes consideration for their taxes.

So Romney's 20th million would be taxed at the same rate as someone's unemployment check,

given that they are both income?

 

[inALIENable]

Taxing earned income is immoral. If I trade you an apple I grew for an orange that you grew, there is no gain, no loss, no income ~ it is a fair trade of agreed upon equal value. If I trade you an hour of my life for an hours wage, there is no gain, no profit, no loss ~ it is also an equal trade. Taxing earned income is slavery, immoral, wrong, evil.

 

[Flopper]

You labor under the same misconception as many people. The vast majority of people on "welfare" do not remain on it for many years. Half are off welfare within a year, 70% in two years, and 90% in 5 years.

Let me explain the players here. You're a shitbrained liberal spreading propaganda to defend parasitical behavior resulting from an immoral lifestyle. I'm the human being who knows what he's talking about. It is the norm for poor people to receive $10,000 to $30,000 in welfare, aside from formal welfare benefits, for 20+ years of their life. WIC, EITC, medicare, rent and gas assistance, free daycare, free school lunches, etc. Most of these have no time limits, as there may be for things like formal welfare and unemployment benefits.

Every single mom with children, earning some, and just some, money, collects thousands of dollars in EITC every year until she no longer has children in the home, or until she earns enough money to not be poor, or lower-middle class (which rarely happens).

I give you facts, and you give me bull shit.

"When one takes into account all of this movement on and off the welfare rolls, only a moderate fraction of recipients who ever turn to the welfare system for support end up spending relatively long periods of time on the welfare rolls. Over the course of their lifetimes, about one-third of women who ever use welfare will spend longer than five years on the welfare rolls and 60 percent will spend 24 months or longer receiving assistance."

Most recipients of welfare programs for over 5 years are either elderly or disabled with little chance of earning any significant amount of income.

Time on Welfare and Welfare Dependency: Testimony before the House Ways and Means Committee, Subcommittee on Human Resources

 

[Desperado]

I have always like the idea of a Federal Sales Tax..and eliminate the personal income tax.
The percentage would be limited to 4% or less. No deductions with food as the only exception.
This would be more than fair since the more you buy the more tax you would pay.
This would also increase the tax base to those not paying now. such as illegals, tourists, and people here on visas.

 

[The Rabbi]

I have always like the idea of a Federal Sales Tax..and eliminate the personal income tax.
The percentage would be limited to 4% or less. No deductions with food as the only exception.
This would be more than fair since the more you buy the more tax you would pay.
This would also increase the tax base to those not paying now. such as illegals, tourists, and people here on visas.

It's a great idea in theory. In practice it creates its own bureaucracy with a set of rules that companies rush to find loopholes for.
And if you dont eliminate income taxes then eventually both rise. That was the experience in Europe with the VAT.

 

[Ariux]

"When one takes into account all of this movement on and off the welfare rolls, only a moderate fraction of recipients who ever turn to the welfare system for support end up spending relatively long periods of time on the welfare rolls. Over the course of their lifetimes, about one-third of women who ever use welfare will spend longer than five years on the welfare rolls and 60 percent will spend 24 months or longer receiving assistance."

First your previous statements how quickly people get off welfare are, at best, misleading... because they get back on just as quickly. But, at least here you provide something a little better: Most people on welfare spend over two years on welfare. A third spend over five years.

I can't make that ball of shit in your skull understand is that there are a lot of government handouts other than AFDC ("welfare"), which are commonly often given out for much longer period than welfare.

I haven't even touched the subject of benefits the poor receive, that exist to help the poor, even though everyone gets them, like public school education. Nearly ever African kid in a big city gets over $15,000 worth of education per year (which is more than white kids get). We pay for that. They don't.

 

[Flopper]

I have always like the idea of a Federal Sales Tax..and eliminate the personal income tax.
The percentage would be limited to 4% or less. No deductions with food as the only exception.
This would be more than fair since the more you buy the more tax you would pay.
This would also increase the tax base to those not paying now. such as illegals, tourists, and people here on visas.

As they say, the only good tax is one you don't have to pay.

A sales tax is a regressive tax. It put's more of the tax burden on the poor because the poor spend essential all their income where the wealthy spend only a small par of their income. For a family trying to live off an income of $40K a year and spending ever cent just to stay alive, a 4% tax is a heavy burden. For a family earning $10 million a year who save and invest half their earnings, a 4% sales tax is no burden at all.

The other disadvantage is a sales tax reduces and discourages consumption which might be a bad idea for a consumer based economy such as ours.

 

[Ariux]

The other disadvantage is a sales tax reduces and discourages consumption which might be a bad idea for a consumer based economy such as ours.

Besides regressiveness and discouraging consumption, sales taxes have many more disadvantages.

Sales tax is inherently more prone to fraud and complexity than an income tax. Income tax is reported by both the payer and the payee, so if one person doesn't report it, the government knows. But sales tax is reported by only one person, the one person who can keep the money if he doesn't report it. Income tax is nominally collected once per pay period, and paid once quarterly. Sales tax is collected with every transaction, often several times per day.

Sales tax also allows the government to further conceal the tax burden from the public. If it's built into prices (such as with gasoline and value-added taxes), it's hidden. If if it's not, people still tend to associate sales tax with the cost of what they're buying, not with paying taxes. And, they never see the big number of what the taxes on those numerous transactions adds up to.

 

[Flopper]

"When one takes into account all of this movement on and off the welfare rolls, only a moderate fraction of recipients who ever turn to the welfare system for support end up spending relatively long periods of time on the welfare rolls. Over the course of their lifetimes, about one-third of women who ever use welfare will spend longer than five years on the welfare rolls and 60 percent will spend 24 months or longer receiving assistance."

First your previous statements how quickly people get off welfare are, at best, misleading... because they get back on just as quickly. But, at least here you provide something a little better: Most people on welfare spend over two years on welfare. A third spend over five years.

I can't make that ball of shit in your skull understand is that there are a lot of government handouts other than AFDC ("welfare"), which are commonly often given out for much longer period than welfare.

I haven't even touched the subject of benefits the poor receive, that exist to help the poor, even though everyone gets them, like public school education. Nearly ever African kid in a big city gets over $15,000 worth of education per year (which is more than white kids get). We pay for that. They don't.

If we are to include public education as a benefit for the poor, then we must include police and fire protection, parks and recreation, and a multitude of public services which service people of all income levels.