What's new
US Message Board - Political Discussion Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Sales Taxes

Polishprince

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
30,812
Reaction score
16,755
Points
1,915
The reason why the form is so long is that the government uses tax policy to influence other economic actions by the taxpayers. There are credits for all sorts of things the government wants to encourage or discourage.

Its the “Golden Rule”
He who has the Gold makes the rules

Not many deductions or exemptions in there for regular working folk


Actually, there are quite a few.

IRA deductions, charitable deductions, union dues deductions, mortgage interest deductions, medical deductions, state and local tax deductions, etc.
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
52,252
Reaction score
9,290
Points
2,060
I‘m thinking of Government providing services like we used to before we sold out to Supply Side Economics
Modern infrastructure, low cost healthcare, affordable higher education
Only children and losers think the government should provide things that adults have historically done for themselves.
No people out of work and those vets that have disabilities and PSTD.
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
52,252
Reaction score
9,290
Points
2,060
The reason why the form is so long is that the government uses tax policy to influence other economic actions by the taxpayers. There are credits for all sorts of things the government wants to encourage or discourage.

Its the “Golden Rule”
He who has the Gold makes the rules

Not many deductions or exemptions in there for regular working folk


Actually, there are quite a few.

IRA deductions, charitable deductions, union dues deductions, mortgage interest deductions, medical deductions, state and local tax deductions, etc.
A couple of those deductions are only for people making enough money.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
4,961
Points
290
Working people spend a larger percentage of their income than the wealthy. They have to.
And the wealthy spend far more actual money than the poor, which equates to a far bigger portion of actual tax revenue under a consumption tax.



Working people spend a larger percentage of their income than the wealthy. They have to.
And the wealthy spend far more actual money than the poor, which equates to a far bigger portion of actual tax revenue under a consumption tax.
Orangecat, "business" expenditures reduce taxpayers' taxable incomes and there are many tax reduction items more available to wealthier taxpayers.
individuals' purchases rather than paid income taxes are more accurate indications of their incomes or wealth. Respectfully, Supposn
There are no extra deductions on the personal tax returns of the wealthy.
Then why is the form so fucking long?
The 1040 isn't that long
See the forms it refers you to?
still not that big of a deal.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
4,961
Points
290

They still end up paying a much smaller portion of their total income
Why is that such a problem?
These people think that if one person pays 75% of his income to live that everyone should have 75% of their income taken from them
Only in tax returns, do you agree?
Yes everyone should pay the exact same percentage of their income taxes.

So do you want everyone to pay 10% or 40%?
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
4,961
Points
290
The reason why the form is so long is that the government uses tax policy to influence other economic actions by the taxpayers. There are credits for all sorts of things the government wants to encourage or discourage.

Its the “Golden Rule”
He who has the Gold makes the rules

Not many deductions or exemptions in there for regular working folk
No just the ones that let 40% of people pay ZERO income taxes
 

Penelope

Diamond Member
Joined
Jul 15, 2014
Messages
52,252
Reaction score
9,290
Points
2,060

They still end up paying a much smaller portion of their total income
Why is that such a problem?
These people think that if one person pays 75% of his income to live that everyone should have 75% of their income taken from them
Only in tax returns, do you agree?
Yes everyone should pay the exact same percentage of their income taxes.

So do you want everyone to pay 10% or 40%?
No one pays 40's nowdays, beside the tax breaks for the lowest are set to raise.
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
4,961
Points
290

They still end up paying a much smaller portion of their total income
Why is that such a problem?
These people think that if one person pays 75% of his income to live that everyone should have 75% of their income taken from them
Only in tax returns, do you agree?
Yes everyone should pay the exact same percentage of their income taxes.

So do you want everyone to pay 10% or 40%?
No one pays 40's nowdays, beside the tax breaks for the lowest are set to raise.
So how much do you want everyone to pay?
 

rightwinger

Award Winning USMB Paid Messageboard Poster
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
226,248
Reaction score
51,942
Points
2,190
The reason why the form is so long is that the government uses tax policy to influence other economic actions by the taxpayers. There are credits for all sorts of things the government wants to encourage or discourage.

Its the “Golden Rule”
He who has the Gold makes the rules

Not many deductions or exemptions in there for regular working folk
No just the ones that let 40% of people pay ZERO income taxes

Mostly people who need their income to survive

But it also includes leeches like Trump who expect taxpayers to compensate for his poor business decisions
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
50,966
Reaction score
14,994
Points
2,190

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
50,966
Reaction score
14,994
Points
2,190
Stock Transactions are investments, not purchases.
Then stop buying and selling them.

Next.

If people stop investing in business, who will provide the money for manufacturing, farming, commerce, mining? Big government? Is a bureaucrat or politician better at determining what a good idea to risk money at than investors in the market.

The idea of punishing people for doing the right thing and saving for their retirement doesn't seem to be very wise. How do you think having millions more impoverished seniors living in the homes of their younger relatives going to work out?
Invest in business.

When you buy and sell stocks repeatedly you aren't investing in business, you buying and selling stocks. Pay sales tax.
It is pure speculation
Pay a fee on each transaction


I suppose that the millenials will have no problem supporting the old timers and having them in their homes when they are destitute?


To me, its best for people to save for their own retirement, instead of ending up as an indigent geezer.

I guess that's what libs want, however.
Kind of being hyperbolic aren’t you?
No, a small fee on transactions will not put old people in the poor house
It will keep the wealthy from protecting their riches

1% isn't a "small fee" at all. Its actually quite high will billions of shares of stock being traded on every business day.

Most pension funds trade stocks back and forth all the time, as checks are written, the formula gets out of balance and contributions are received. Stock purchases aren't a "one time " expense.
I think what's actually being discussed is 0.1%.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
50,966
Reaction score
14,994
Points
2,190
Stock Transactions are investments, not purchases.
Then stop buying and selling them.

Next.

If people stop investing in business, who will provide the money for manufacturing, farming, commerce, mining? Big government? Is a bureaucrat or politician better at determining what a good idea to risk money at than investors in the market.

The idea of punishing people for doing the right thing and saving for their retirement doesn't seem to be very wise. How do you think having millions more impoverished seniors living in the homes of their younger relatives going to work out?
Invest in business.

When you buy and sell stocks repeatedly you aren't investing in business, you buying and selling stocks. Pay sales tax.
It is pure speculation
Pay a fee on each transaction


I suppose that the millenials will have no problem supporting the old timers and having them in their homes when they are destitute?


To me, its best for people to save for their own retirement, instead of ending up as an indigent geezer.

I guess that's what libs want, however.
Kind of being hyperbolic aren’t you?
No, a small fee on transactions will not put old people in the poor house
It will keep the wealthy from protecting their riches

1% isn't a "small fee" at all. Its actually quite high will billions of shares of stock being traded on every business day.

Most pension funds trade stocks back and forth all the time, as checks are written, the formula gets out of balance and contributions are received. Stock purchases aren't a "one time " expense.
Exactly
Think of the revenue that would be generated

It will become the cost of doing business


The revenue wouldn't be nearly as much as you think. The number of people saving for retirement in stocks would decline precipitously.

People would look for other ways to invest, like lottery tickets, greyhound racing and beanie babies.
Don't be ridiculous. They might slow the trading rates a a bit but that's all.
 

Crepitus

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 28, 2018
Messages
50,966
Reaction score
14,994
Points
2,190
Stock Transactions are investments, not purchases.
Then stop buying and selling them.

Next.

If people stop investing in business, who will provide the money for manufacturing, farming, commerce, mining? Big government? Is a bureaucrat or politician better at determining what a good idea to risk money at than investors in the market.

The idea of punishing people for doing the right thing and saving for their retirement doesn't seem to be very wise. How do you think having millions more impoverished seniors living in the homes of their younger relatives going to work out?
Invest in business.

When you buy and sell stocks repeatedly you aren't investing in business, you buying and selling stocks. Pay sales tax.
It is pure speculation
Pay a fee on each transaction


I suppose that the millenials will have no problem supporting the old timers and having them in their homes when they are destitute?


To me, its best for people to save for their own retirement, instead of ending up as an indigent geezer.

I guess that's what libs want, however.
Kind of being hyperbolic aren’t you?
No, a small fee on transactions will not put old people in the poor house
It will keep the wealthy from protecting their riches

1% isn't a "small fee" at all. Its actually quite high will billions of shares of stock being traded on every business day.

Most pension funds trade stocks back and forth all the time, as checks are written, the formula gets out of balance and contributions are received. Stock purchases aren't a "one time " expense.
Exactly
Think of the revenue that would be generated

It will become the cost of doing business


I am thinking about the revenue it would generate. Do you really think its that smart to make Big Government even wealthier and more powerful than they are right now?
Yes. Republicans have starved the government to the point where they can't feed the needy.
 

Polishprince

Diamond Member
Joined
Jun 8, 2016
Messages
30,812
Reaction score
16,755
Points
1,915
Stock Transactions are investments, not purchases.
Then stop buying and selling them.

Next.

If people stop investing in business, who will provide the money for manufacturing, farming, commerce, mining? Big government? Is a bureaucrat or politician better at determining what a good idea to risk money at than investors in the market.

The idea of punishing people for doing the right thing and saving for their retirement doesn't seem to be very wise. How do you think having millions more impoverished seniors living in the homes of their younger relatives going to work out?
Invest in business.

When you buy and sell stocks repeatedly you aren't investing in business, you buying and selling stocks. Pay sales tax.
It is pure speculation
Pay a fee on each transaction


I suppose that the millenials will have no problem supporting the old timers and having them in their homes when they are destitute?


To me, its best for people to save for their own retirement, instead of ending up as an indigent geezer.

I guess that's what libs want, however.
Kind of being hyperbolic aren’t you?
No, a small fee on transactions will not put old people in the poor house
It will keep the wealthy from protecting their riches

1% isn't a "small fee" at all. Its actually quite high will billions of shares of stock being traded on every business day.

Most pension funds trade stocks back and forth all the time, as checks are written, the formula gets out of balance and contributions are received. Stock purchases aren't a "one time " expense.
I think what's actually being discussed is 0.1%.


That wouldn't be as bad as what others here on USMB suggested, 1% or even a full sales tax.

But it still wouldn't be good- although if we could get rid of the Death Tax in exchange, and it was 0.1%, maybe.
 
OP
S

Supposn

VIP Member
Joined
Jul 26, 2009
Messages
2,158
Reaction score
144
Points
85
Is there a Fair Tax Plan that doesn’t end up making the working class pay more and the rich pay less?
Yeah it's called the Fair Tax.
Look it up
Blue Man, there's a limit to what's an acceptable sales tax rate. I don't believe we can entirely replace federal income taxes with a federal sales tax. At some point increases of tax revenues less justify the economic consequences of the increases; those points differ for different tax schemes and their purposes. It's my opinion those points are of comparatively lesser rates for sales taxes rather than taxes on incomes or upon almost any other matters. Respectfully, Supposn
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
4,961
Points
290
The reason why the form is so long is that the government uses tax policy to influence other economic actions by the taxpayers. There are credits for all sorts of things the government wants to encourage or discourage.

Its the “Golden Rule”
He who has the Gold makes the rules

Not many deductions or exemptions in there for regular working folk
No just the ones that let 40% of people pay ZERO income taxes

Mostly people who need their income to survive

But it also includes leeches like Trump who expect taxpayers to compensate for his poor business decisions

If he lost money or had the write offs that's perfectly legal.

I suppose you don't want small business owners to be able to write off losses and expenses too
 

Blues Man

Gold Member
Joined
Aug 28, 2016
Messages
14,522
Reaction score
4,961
Points
290
Is there a Fair Tax Plan that doesn’t end up making the working class pay more and the rich pay less?
Yeah it's called the Fair Tax.
Look it up
Blue Man, there's a limit to what's an acceptable sales tax rate. I don't believe we can entirely replace federal income taxes with a federal sales tax. At some point increases of tax revenues less justify the economic consequences of the increases; those points differ for different tax schemes and their purposes. It's my opinion those points are of comparatively lesser rates for sales taxes rather than taxes on incomes or upon almost any other matters. Respectfully, Supposn
Look it up.

The Fair Tax plan is revenue neutral with the current tax system
 

bear513

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
66,184
Reaction score
13,702
Points
2,180
Sales Taxes:
individuals' annual purchases rather than their paid income taxes, are more accurate indications of their comparative proportional incomes and wealth.
Sales taxes are only regressive in comparison to income taxes, when levied upon those who do not otherwise pay income taxes, (i.e. upon those of much less or no taxable incomes).
[Depending upon the product purchased and the drafting of the law, sales taxes can to some extent be drafted to effectively be greater or lesser regressive].

At some point increases of tax revenues less justify the economic consequences of the increases; those points differ for different tax schemes and their purposes. It's my opinion those points are of comparatively lesser rates for sales taxes rather than taxes on incomes or upon almost any other matters. I also believe it's desirable for all while in the USA, and all USA citizens to the extent we're able, should be equitably required to contribute to our tax revenues.

Respectfully, Supposn
Sales taxes are regressive because poor people spend all or most of their money and wealthy folks do not.

Next.
Wow so that's why they're poor, and rich people are rich..

I was always wondering why
 

USMB Server Goals

Total amount
$350.00
Goal
$350.00

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top