How much should we pay in taxes?

[HenryBHough]

Once the spending is high enough Xiden (or his sucksessors) will do the only thing that has historically worked:

Repudiate the currency.

Print new currency with a new name on cheap pulp paper so it won't hurt your ass when you use it in the only economically practical way.

Think "Argentina".

 

[Brain357]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

More until the debt is gone.

 

[kaz]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

No one should ever pay more than 10% of their income in all taxes combined, it should be an absolute max that government never take more than that and more than that is never necessary. That's plenty of money for government to defend us (military/police) and be a referee (courts)

I agree, and no one should ever pay more than $20 a week for gas, even if you have lots more driving than that to do. This setting arbitrary limits is fun. A new 56" TV shouldn't cost more than $50.00 -- No one should have to pay more than $7.50 to get drunk --- great idea you had there.

So you seriously thought I meant by limiting taxes that government should give you TVs and liquor as party of your taxes? You seriously thought taxes means your personal expenses? You drunk now? How stupid are you? Shit ...

 

[BULLDOG]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

No one should ever pay more than 10% of their income in all taxes combined, it should be an absolute max that government never take more than that and more than that is never necessary. That's plenty of money for government to defend us (military/police) and be a referee (courts)

I agree, and no one should ever pay more than $20 a week for gas, even if you have lots more driving than that to do. This setting arbitrary limits is fun. A new 56" TV shouldn't cost more than $50.00 -- No one should have to pay more than $7.50 to get drunk --- great idea you had there.

So you seriously thought I meant by limiting taxes that government should give you TVs and liquor as party of your taxes? You seriously thought taxes means your personal expenses? You drunk now? How stupid are you? Shit ...

Don;t blame me for your logic, dumb ass. I thought it was dumb when you first wrote it.

 

[kaz]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

No one should ever pay more than 10% of their income in all taxes combined, it should be an absolute max that government never take more than that and more than that is never necessary. That's plenty of money for government to defend us (military/police) and be a referee (courts)

I agree, and no one should ever pay more than $20 a week for gas, even if you have lots more driving than that to do. This setting arbitrary limits is fun. A new 56" TV shouldn't cost more than $50.00 -- No one should have to pay more than $7.50 to get drunk --- great idea you had there.

So you seriously thought I meant by limiting taxes that government should give you TVs and liquor as party of your taxes? You seriously thought taxes means your personal expenses? You drunk now? How stupid are you? Shit ...

Don;t blame me for your logic, dumb ass. I thought it was dumb when you first wrote it.

I wrote that TV's and liquor should be covered by your taxes? No I didn't, liar, you said that

 

[Rigby5]

I would not mind paying as much as we do in taxes if we actually got services for it, like free health care.
But almost all our taxes go either to pay off the national debt interest, or to the military, both of which do nothing at all for us.
No one has tried to invade us since 1812.
Beating up on Vietnamese, Grenadins, Panamanians, Afghans, Iraqis, Iranians, etc., does not make us more safe, but ensures we will get attacked because we will deserve it.

 

[BULLDOG]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

No one should ever pay more than 10% of their income in all taxes combined, it should be an absolute max that government never take more than that and more than that is never necessary. That's plenty of money for government to defend us (military/police) and be a referee (courts)

I agree, and no one should ever pay more than $20 a week for gas, even if you have lots more driving than that to do. This setting arbitrary limits is fun. A new 56" TV shouldn't cost more than $50.00 -- No one should have to pay more than $7.50 to get drunk --- great idea you had there.

So you seriously thought I meant by limiting taxes that government should give you TVs and liquor as party of your taxes? You seriously thought taxes means your personal expenses? You drunk now? How stupid are you? Shit ...

Don;t blame me for your logic, dumb ass. I thought it was dumb when you first wrote it.

I wrote that TV's and liquor should be covered by your taxes? No I didn't, liar, you said that

I asked this question once a few years ago and swore I would never ask it again, but in your case, I think I will ask it once more. ---

Is there anything I can do or say that would get you to STFU, and go away and leave me alone, bitch? Didn't work out well last time. Fingers crossed for this time

 

[kaz]

I wrote that TV's and liquor should be covered by your taxes? No I didn't, liar, you said that

I asked this question once a few years ago and swore I would never ask it again, but in your case, I think I will ask it once more. ---

Is there anything I can do or say that would get you to STFU, and go away and leave me alone, bitch? Didn't work out well last time. Fingers crossed for this time

You're so stupid it's hilarious

 

[my2¢]

I'm a believer in uniformity and have long favored a flat tax and elimination of the capital gains and inheritance taxes by folding both into the income tax.

I'd begin that uniformity with the definition of income which I would classify as any money a person (or couple) receives minus any costs they paid to secure that income. That's it. It wouldn't matter if the money comes from work, capital gain on investment, capital gain on sale of property, the lottery, welfare checks, inheritance, gambling, found money, etc. Expenses would be anything from steel toe shoes, cost of commuting to work, cost of the stock or other property for which there was a gain, dry cleaning, etc. To eliminate much of the headache of tax filing I'd keep a standard deduction to account for basic expenses a person pays that goes with having a job instead of accounting for most of this crap.

That uniformity I like also includes making the corporate tax rate the same as the personal tax rate which would be the same rate for head of households, singles, couples filing jointly, couples filing individually, and couples that anybody is outraged at why the government classifies them as couples.

Naturally the broader we include what is income the simpler the tax code, the less tax avoidance games people need to play, and the lower the fixed tax rate can be set.

 

[kaz]

I wrote that TV's and liquor should be covered by your taxes? No I didn't, liar, you said that

I asked this question once a few years ago and swore I would never ask it again, but in your case, I think I will ask it once more. ---

Is there anything I can do or say that would get you to STFU, and go away and leave me alone, bitch? Didn't work out well last time. Fingers crossed for this time

I decided to give you a serious answer to this question. WTF. You'll never do it, but at least I told you. This is to you and every other leftist who has the same mental condition you do.

How to end a discussion when you have to have the last word in three easy steps

1) Accept you have to have the last word. All leftists do. Just accept it. You'll never solve the problem if you don't accept the situation

2) Since you have to have the last word, NEVER say you don't care about a discussion. It's just too precious needling someone who obviously cares and tells you they don't

3) Now the critical part. Give me an out. AKA, don't make me back down. Leftists aren't content with having the last word, you have to make me (anyone) actually back down. We are to stop because you TOLD us to stop, like you kept doing to me. I won, kaz, you will stop now. I don't care, and you must give up.

So think about it, you won't agree by rule 1 to back down ever, would YOU back down to how you do step 3? Never, not in a million years.

So when you actually want a conversation to end, say something that is not arrogant, condescending or insulting. Like "well, we're not going to agree on that one." I'm not saying that doing that once will end any and every conversation, but your arrogant ass comments will NEVER work. Your strategy every time is to say you don't care, be an ass about it and still demand the last word. It's never going to work, that's why I just keep calling you stupid and laughing at you

 

[Rigby5]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

No one should ever pay more than 10% of their income in all taxes combined, it should be an absolute max that government never take more than that and more than that is never necessary. That's plenty of money for government to defend us (military/police) and be a referee (courts)

I agree, and no one should ever pay more than $20 a week for gas, even if you have lots more driving than that to do. This setting arbitrary limits is fun. A new 56" TV shouldn't cost more than $50.00 -- No one should have to pay more than $7.50 to get drunk --- great idea you had there.

So you seriously thought I meant by limiting taxes that government should give you TVs and liquor as party of your taxes? You seriously thought taxes means your personal expenses? You drunk now? How stupid are you? Shit ...

Don;t blame me for your logic, dumb ass. I thought it was dumb when you first wrote it.

I wrote that TV's and liquor should be covered by your taxes? No I didn't, liar, you said that

I asked this question once a few years ago and swore I would never ask it again, but in your case, I think I will ask it once more. ---

Is there anything I can do or say that would get you to STFU, and go away and leave me alone, bitch? Didn't work out well last time. Fingers crossed for this time

I can follow what each of you means, but just barely.
You both should consider repeating specifically what you are referring to and add a thesis statement to then carefully ensure what you mean is obvious, and not just imply sarcasm that requires the person to go back and read the context.
So what I am saying is that both of you are hard to read.
And just complaining about each other detracts from the point of the thread.
It would help if you both tried a bit harder to make reading easier.

 

[hadit]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

How much of your fair share did you pay in taxes last year?

How much public infrastructure did you use in comparison to the amount of tax you paid?

Amazon paid zero in taxes last year. The CEO is worth $180 Billion.

How much above zero would you consider a fair share for Amazon to pay?

How much infrastructure do they use in comparison to the amount of taxes they paid last year?

If you're going to doing calculations, add these in as well.

1. All the taxes paid by their employees, of whom there are many.
2. All the taxes paid on the goods they ship, of which there are many.
3. All of the taxes paid by the trucking companies they employ to ship their goods, one of which I spent 4 years working for.

IOW, consider the entire picture, not just the parts that seem to support a narrative.

 

[Rigby5]

I'm a believer in uniformity and have long favored a flat tax and elimination of the capital gains and inheritance taxes by folding both into the income tax.

I'd begin that uniformity with the definition of income which I would classify as any money a person (or couple) receives minus any costs they paid to secure that income. That's it. It wouldn't matter if the money comes from work, capital gain on investment, capital gain on sale of property, the lottery, welfare checks, inheritance, gambling, found money, etc. Expenses would be anything from steel toe shoes, cost of commuting to work, cost of the stock or other property for which there was a gain, dry cleaning, etc. To eliminate much of the headache of tax filing I'd keep a standard deduction to account for basic expenses a person pays that goes with having a job instead of accounting for most of this crap.

That uniformity I like also includes making the corporate tax rate the same as the personal tax rate which would be the same rate for head of households, singles, couples filing jointly, couples filing individually, and couples that anybody is outraged at why the government classifies them as couples.

Naturally the broader we include what is income the simpler the tax code, the less tax avoidance games people need to play, and the lower the fixed tax rate can be set.

I agree a flat tax has its appeal.
The problem comes in deciding what is profit to be taxed?
Somethings have a 100% mark up, like art, and something have only a 10% mark up, like milk in a grocery store.
So you can't tax gross, but only profits.
And then the problem is poor people actually have very little profit once you consider rent, food, gas, etc., as part of the costs of doing business.
But a way to deal with that is to just have a large flat personal exemption, like $15,000 for the household and another $5,000 per person exemption?
That way a family of 3 (2 parents and a child), would not pay any tax on the first $30,000.
And then anything after that could be taxed at a high flat rate, like 25%.
So then a millionaire would be getting only the same exemptions, and be paying 25% on almost everything, without writes off for mansion mortgages, depreciation, etc.

 

[initforme]

With all the loopholes for the rich I know people earning 100x middle class income pay less than the middle class worker.

 

[Rigby5]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

How much of your fair share did you pay in taxes last year?

How much public infrastructure did you use in comparison to the amount of tax you paid?

Amazon paid zero in taxes last year. The CEO is worth $180 Billion.

How much above zero would you consider a fair share for Amazon to pay?

How much infrastructure do they use in comparison to the amount of taxes they paid last year?

If you're going to doing calculations, add these in as well.

1. All the taxes paid by their employees, of whom there are many.
2. All the taxes paid on the goods they ship, of which there are many.
3. All of the taxes paid by the trucking companies they employ to ship their goods, one of which I spent 4 years working for.

IOW, consider the entire picture, not just the parts that seem to support a narrative.

Not sure that is valid.
1. For example, if not for a company like Amazon, it could be those employees would be more productive working somewhere else, that Amazon helped put under.
2. Little tax is paid by internet goods. And it destroys local economies to have products bought from large distant companies that have no investment in the community.
3. Amazon spend more on shipping, but that means more pollution, traffic, road deterioration, accidents, etc.

 

[DrLove]

Yes I agree that thanks to Trumpy Bear tax cuts (86% to top 1%) should totally stand for the Trump Criminal Enterprise!
Also support one of the guys he hates the most paying NOTHING.

Amazon will pay $0 in federal taxes this year â and it's partially thanks to Trump

Amazon is one of the world's biggest companies, with $232 billion in 2018 revenue. But the company will not pay one cent in federal taxes this year thanks to friendly corporate tax rates and a mix of tax credits and deductions.

www.cnbc.com

 

[Rigby5]

With all the loopholes for the rich I know people earning 100x middle class income pay less than the middle class worker.

Agreed.
For example, the wealthy can pay themselves in stock options, which then only pays the capital gains rate.

 

[Dragonlady]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

How much of your fair share did you pay in taxes last year?

How much public infrastructure did you use in comparison to the amount of tax you paid?

Amazon paid zero in taxes last year. The CEO is worth $180 Billion.

How much above zero would you consider a fair share for Amazon to pay?

How much infrastructure do they use in comparison to the amount of taxes they paid last year?

I love to hear people or companies that pay zero in taxs,,

its a goal every american should strive for,,

Aren't you one of those people who decries welfare cases getting "free shit"? Yet here you are saying that no American should pay taxes. Who pays for your roads, your water treatment plants, your courts, your military bases, you sewage treatment plants, if American taxpayers all pay nothing?

You've had a government that wanted to do nothing for the American people for the past 4 years, and how did that work out for you?

Taxes are your share of the costs of living in a First World country. Those unwilling to pay those costs, or who thing they should live "tax free" fail to comprehend the concept of "paying your own way". That would be Republican voters.

Thanks for proving your just a lazy selfish fool who thinks that first world living should be free to all.

 

[progressive hunter]

I've always wondered, in a country that has produced a $30 trillion debt, why are we led to believe that paying increased taxes is needed to pay it off? The new democrat infrastructure bill is full of such taxes. And why give us a stimulus and then just take it all back in taxes?

View attachment 474844

Are taxes more or less a way to control people more than a way to generate revenue to pay for an unsurmountable debt that will never be paid down?

Or do some think that we need to keep a tax/debt ratio to keep it from all falling apart?

And what is our "fair share" of paying taxes? I hear this constantly from the government. What is fair?

One of my favorite quotes of all time comes from Ben Franklin

"It would be thought a hard government
that should tax its people one tenth part."

It makes me laugh every time I read it.

How much of your fair share did you pay in taxes last year?

How much public infrastructure did you use in comparison to the amount of tax you paid?

Amazon paid zero in taxes last year. The CEO is worth $180 Billion.

How much above zero would you consider a fair share for Amazon to pay?

How much infrastructure do they use in comparison to the amount of taxes they paid last year?

I love to hear people or companies that pay zero in taxs,,

its a goal every american should strive for,,

Aren't you one of those people who decries welfare cases getting "free shit"? Yet here you are saying that no American should pay taxes. Who pays for your roads, your water treatment plants, your courts, your military bases, you sewage treatment plants, if American taxpayers all pay nothing?

You've had a government that wanted to do nothing for the American people for the past 4 years, and how did that work out for you?

Taxes are your share of the costs of living in a First World country. Those unwilling to pay those costs, or who thing they should live "tax free" fail to comprehend the concept of "paying your own way". That would be Republican voters.

Thanks for proving your just a lazy selfish fool who thinks that first world living should be free to all.

SHUT THE FUCK UP YPOU CANADIAN SKANK,,,

its none of you business,,

 

[presonorek]

For the type of government we have today I would say 23% total for local, state, and federal. If we were to have only a necessary government I would say 6% total for local, state, and federal.

Whatever the case it should be clearly defined and never changed.