For all you Wrongpublicans supporting the 'Fair Tax'

[nodoginnafight]

Personally, I support a progressive income tax. But I want EVERYONE to pay at least $1.
Everyone should have some skin in the game.

Is that before or after income tax refunds?

Doesn't matter to me. I understand that the accounting aspects are not ideal.

But every single American should have some ownership in how taxes are spent.

 

[g5000]

Personally, I support a progressive income tax. But I want EVERYONE to pay at least $1.
Everyone should have some skin in the game.

Is that before or after income tax refunds?

Doesn't matter to me. I understand that the accounting aspects are not ideal.

But every single American should have some ownership in how taxes are spent.

A consumption tax ensures that. No one can escape them except by reducing their consumption. That is why economists will tell you a tax on consumption (sales tax) is preferable to a tax on production (income tax). The more you tax something (consumption or production), the less of it you get. You would think lefties would be all excited about reducing consumption. But they are, in reality, more interested in reducing wealth.

Also, politicians can't sneak a tax hike in a tax on consumption. Any increase is immediately noticed and felt by everyone.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I disagree with a progressive income tax.

The idea of marginal utility when applied to income is stupid.

Marginal utility refers to the consumption of a good for example a hamburger. After your second or third burger any other burger you have in front of you has less utility since you are no longer hungry than the first couple when you were famished.

Income is another animal altogether. Who is to say you will have less use for money if you have more? In fact the more you have the more utility it provides. Which dollar has the most utility to you; the one that pays your phone bill or the one that buys a new car, or a vacation?

If we want to use marginal utility as a measure of what is taxed and what is not then shouldn't we tax the gallon of gas that you use to drive to work less than the gallon of gas you use to drive to the strip club?

Income is income no matter the source there is no qualitative difference between the first dollar you earn and the 1 million and first.

 

[g5000]

I disagree with a progressive income tax.

A flat tax is regressive. That is why the Fair Tax has a prebate built into it.

Hey, Thomas Jefferson believed in progressive taxes, so why shouldn't every Jefferson-worshipping American?

I would not mind a progressive income tax so much if we banned all tax expenditures.

 

[g5000]

Who is to say you will have less use for money if you have more? In fact the more you have the more utility it provides. Which dollar has the most utility to you; the one that pays your phone bill or the one that buys a new car, or a vacation?

If we want to use marginal utility as a measure of what is taxed and what is not then shouldn't we tax the gallon of gas that you use to drive to work less than the gallon of gas you use to drive to the strip club?

Income is income no matter the source there is no qualitative difference between the first dollar you earn and the 1 million and first.

A person who earns $10 million in one year does not spend all $10 million. So that last dollar does indeed have less utility than the first.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I disagree with a progressive income tax.

A flat tax is regressive. That is why the Fair Tax has a prebate built into it.

Hey, Thomas Jefferson believed in progressive taxes, so why shouldn't every Jefferson-worshipping American?

I would not mind a progressive income tax so much if we banned all tax expenditures.

Regressive is a subjective term.

The fair tax has too many moving parts. it makes no sense to charge people a higher rate only to incur the costs of cutting everyone a check each month.

Get rid of that ridiculous "prebate" and lower the rate and I'll give it a maybe.

And I don't worship any man.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Personally, I support a progressive income tax. But I want EVERYONE to pay at least $1.
Everyone should have some skin in the game.

Is that before or after income tax refunds?

Doesn't matter to me. I understand that the accounting aspects are not ideal.

But every single American should have some ownership in how taxes are spent.

In that case, pretty much everyone with any income at all already does pay income taxes. They're even withheld from welfare disbursements, payouts from pensions, Social Security payments, unemployment compensation, etc.

And you'd be fine with withholding a single dollar from all of those things, and then instituting a 100% tax on income over $1,000,000? That's very progressive.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Is that before or after income tax refunds?

Doesn't matter to me. I understand that the accounting aspects are not ideal.

But every single American should have some ownership in how taxes are spent.

In that case, pretty much everyone with any income at all already does pay income taxes. They're even withheld from welfare disbursements, payouts from pensions, Social Security payments, unemployment compensation, etc.

And you'd be fine with withholding a single dollar from all of those things, and then instituting a 100% tax on income over $1,000,000? That's very progressive.

Even though there is some money withheld from a paycheck that is not a measure of the taxes paid.

Have you never heard of a tax refund?

47% of filers pay zero income tax because they get everything that was withheld from their pay back. Some of those people because of ridiculous things like refundable tax credits get more in their refund checks than was withheld from their pay.

 

[LiberalMedia]

I disagree with a progressive income tax.

A flat tax is regressive. That is why the Fair Tax has a prebate built into it.

Hey, Thomas Jefferson believed in progressive taxes, so why shouldn't every Jefferson-worshipping American?

I would not mind a progressive income tax so much if we banned all tax expenditures.

Regressive is a subjective term.

The fair tax has too many moving parts. it makes no sense to charge people a higher rate only to incur the costs of cutting everyone a check each month.

Why not? Pyrsynylly, as a lybyryl, I like the idea of the prebate. Whereas the working poor have to wait all year long (plus a couple of months during tax season) to be refunded amounts the government knows it shouldn't be charging them, the prebate gives them the money beforehand. Why do you oppose the prebate? There's literally nothing wrong with that system.

 

[Skull Pilot]

A flat tax is regressive. That is why the Fair Tax has a prebate built into it.

Hey, Thomas Jefferson believed in progressive taxes, so why shouldn't every Jefferson-worshipping American?

I would not mind a progressive income tax so much if we banned all tax expenditures.

Regressive is a subjective term.

The fair tax has too many moving parts. it makes no sense to charge people a higher rate only to incur the costs of cutting everyone a check each month.

Why not? Pyrsynylly, as a lybyryl, I like the idea of the prebate. Whereas the working poor have to wait all year long (plus a couple of months during tax season) to be refunded amounts the government knows it shouldn't be charging them, the prebate gives them the money beforehand. Why do you oppose the prebate? There's literally nothing wrong with that system.

It's cumbersome , expensive and inefficient.

Do away with it and simply charge a lower tax.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Doesn't matter to me. I understand that the accounting aspects are not ideal.

But every single American should have some ownership in how taxes are spent.

In that case, pretty much everyone with any income at all already does pay income taxes. They're even withheld from welfare disbursements, payouts from pensions, Social Security payments, unemployment compensation, etc.

And you'd be fine with withholding a single dollar from all of those things, and then instituting a 100% tax on income over $1,000,000? That's very progressive.

Even though there is some money withheld from a paycheck that is not a measure of the taxes paid.

Have you never heard of a tax refund?

47% of filers pay zero income tax because they get everything that was withheld from their pay back. Some of those people because of ridiculous things like refundable tax credits get more in their refund checks than was withheld from their pay.

I'm well aware of all of that. The user I was discussing this with, however, said of the before refund/after refund issue that "[it] [d]oesn't matter to me" when considering whether or not someone is considered to have paid taxes. I thought this was a bit odd and out of character for him, hence I was asking more questions to ascertain his exact position.

 

[boedicca]

"hurr let's abolish taxes"

"durr repeal da sixteenf amendment"

"y my money gotta go 2 soshul securidy"

"we shud just hav a fair tax, thatll solve muh prollems"

Will it, conservatard? When conservatards and libertardians hear the phrase "fair tax," they naturally rally around whoever's speaking. But is this the smart thing to do? Let's investigate what exactly is meant when we hear a politician calling for a "fair tax".

Translation into Libtard: Gimme alls yuo moneys.

 

[g5000]

I disagree with a progressive income tax.

A flat tax is regressive. That is why the Fair Tax has a prebate built into it.

Hey, Thomas Jefferson believed in progressive taxes, so why shouldn't every Jefferson-worshipping American?

I would not mind a progressive income tax so much if we banned all tax expenditures.

Regressive is a subjective term.

No, it is not. Perhaps you should study some economics before making such a boneheaded mistake.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Regressive is a subjective term.

The fair tax has too many moving parts. it makes no sense to charge people a higher rate only to incur the costs of cutting everyone a check each month.

Why not? Pyrsynylly, as a lybyryl, I like the idea of the prebate. Whereas the working poor have to wait all year long (plus a couple of months during tax season) to be refunded amounts the government knows it shouldn't be charging them, the prebate gives them the money beforehand. Why do you oppose the prebate? There's literally nothing wrong with that system.

It's cumbersome , expensive and inefficient.

Do away with it and simply charge a lower tax.

I don't see what's so hard to understand about that.

How is it cumbersome, expensive, and inefficient? The amounts are already calculated, and because almost all Americans who would receive the prebate have a bank account, the costs associated with printing and mailing will be almost completely removed due to the utilization of direct deposits. If a lower tax is charged, that throws all the math off--plus, we can't make as much money off of foreign tourists.

The current income tax refund system is much more cumbersome, expensive, and inefficient than the prebate system would be.

 

[g5000]

Most tax expenditures are also regressive, which is another reason to abolish them.

The wealthier you are, the bigger mortgage you can attain. The bigger mortgage you attain, the more money you get to deduct from your income taxes. That makes the interest rate deduction a hugely regressive tax.

There is nothing subjective about it. It is an objective fact.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

The only fair tax is a flat tax: whatever percent applied to gross, no deductions for anything.

Of course, the thread is an exercise in futility. The so-called fair tax would never fly, politically. Besides, it is, in many ways, rather rapacious and no less susceptible to the corruption that is the current income tax system. A flat tax system is far and away superior; however, I would that it retain two deductions: the home mortgage interest rate and charitable gifts deductions, in spite of the supposed regressive nature of them in the minds of some who fail to appreciate the benefits on the supply-side of the economic equation.

 

[g5000]

A sales tax, without exemptions or deductions or any other carve-outs, is the most transparent of all taxes.

It is also the most fair once you eliminate the regressive nature of it with prebates.

It is also the one which is the hardest to evade.

What's not to like?

 

[g5000]

The only fair tax is a flat tax: whatever percent applied to gross, no deductions for anything.

Of course, the thread is an exercise in futility. The so-called fair tax would never fly, politically. Besides, it is, in many ways, rather rapacious and no less susceptible to the corruption that is the current income tax system. A flat tax system is far and away superior; however, I would that it retain two deductions: home mortgage interest and charitable gifts.

Nope. No deductions.

As I just explained, the interest rate deduction is highly regressive.

 

[M.D. Rawlings]

A flat tax is regressive. That is why the Fair Tax has a prebate built into it.

Hey, Thomas Jefferson believed in progressive taxes, so why shouldn't every Jefferson-worshipping American?

I would not mind a progressive income tax so much if we banned all tax expenditures.

Regressive is a subjective term.

No, it is not. Perhaps you should study some economics before making such a boneheaded mistake.

Oh? Really? How about the economic and social benefits? I guess their nonexistent. And, indeed, your notion is the subjective meanderings of the zero-sum-game myth.

 

[LiberalMedia]

Regressive is a subjective term.

No, it is not. Perhaps you should study some economics before making such a boneheaded mistake.

Oh? Really? How about the economic and social benefits? I guess their nonexistent. And, indeed, your notion is the subjective meanderings of the zero-sum-game myth.

Quite right; the economic and social benefits of taxing the poor literally to death are nonexistent. I'm glad you have the sense to admit that.

Alternatively, if my suspicions of sarcasm in your post are correct, you may want to look up the definition of the term "regressive," as I do not think it means what you think it means.