What the hell is a fair tax?

[PMZ]

Pragmatist do not seek perfection. They seek the resolution of problems in the most practical means possible. Consumption taxes give people the option of regulating the amount of taxes they pay. We can probably never cover all of gorvernment costs with consumption taxes, but we can cover many of them. The less the percentage of taxes needed through a flat tax or a progressive tax, the fairer our tax system becomes because we give folks the ability to put themselve to a position of paying "no taxes".

The poor spend virtually every nickel of income on survival through consumption.

The wealthy, try as they might, cannot even put a dent in their wealth.

A flat consumption tax would vastly redistribute wealth upwards compared to progressive taxes on financial means be they income or wealth.

Just the opposite of what is necessary today.

Problem solved by not taxing certain products deemed as necessities. Taxes on some other products don't start until a certain level is reached. Everybody gets the same level of relief for certain things like heating oil, electricity and whatever else we decide is a necessity. It is fair because the rich guy gets the same amount of tax free electric, heating oil, whatever that the poor guy gets. The poor guy might be able to get by on $200 a month on an electric bill. If the rich guy wants to live in a huge house that uses two or three times that amount, or many times that amount, that is on him. He made the choice to load his home up with extra appliances, heated swimming pool, sauna, fancy outdoor lighting, whatever. He gets the same first $200 of usage as the poor guy, tax free. That makes it fair. Everyone is treated equal, down to the dollar, down to the cent. We can use this concept on all kinds of things.

If you have to use the word "fair" to support it, it's not a serious proposal. There is no such thing as universally fair.

It is rapidly getting as complicated as today's law. And too complicated appears to me to be the only reason for moving away from today's process.

And that's rapidly going good away by itself thanks to tax software.

 

[BobPlumb]

I think that it could be fairer, but never will be. To be fair it would have to be based on recovering all of, and only, the costs of each level of government associated with its use. Like the wars that we fight to maintain its supply, and the cost of AGW induced, extreme weather consequences.

Even then it would be more fair if it was levied in accordance to uses. A lawnmower gallon of gas doesn't impact road maintenance and repair.

But perfectly fair is impossible to even describe.

So, if there is no such thing as a real "fair tax", my question should be "what would be the fairest tax". I lean towards a national sales tax of some sort.

One recognized consequence of capitalism is its tendency to distribute wealth from some segments of the population to others. The longer it goes on, the richer the rich get, the poorer the poor get. That's the motivational aspects of it.

The most dysfunctional aspect of that is that in most societies wealth confers power and power tilts the playing field. It can become irreversible. And society can become unstable, a consequence that has no winners.

So one aspect of taxes on money, income or wealth, is to undue, to some degree, what capitalism does.

Fair? Depends. Some would say no, but would not like the consequences of not restoring some of what capitalism creates.

The people that capitalism benefits the most give back some of their winnings.

Capitalism's losers, win some back.

Society remains stable.

There is substantial evidence that we aren't doing enough correction these days. Many social ills on the rise these days correlate highly with extreme wealth inequality. We are among the most extreme in our inequity. The top 20% of us possess all but 15% of the wealth.

"Fair" is what works.

The point of capitalism is creating wealth, not distributing wealth.

 

[PMZ]

So, if there is no such thing as a real "fair tax", my question should be "what would be the fairest tax". I lean towards a national sales tax of some sort.

One recognized consequence of capitalism is its tendency to distribute wealth from some segments of the population to others. The longer it goes on, the richer the rich get, the poorer the poor get. That's the motivational aspects of it.

The most dysfunctional aspect of that is that in most societies wealth confers power and power tilts the playing field. It can become irreversible. And society can become unstable, a consequence that has no winners.

So one aspect of taxes on money, income or wealth, is to undue, to some degree, what capitalism does.

Fair? Depends. Some would say no, but would not like the consequences of not restoring some of what capitalism creates.

The people that capitalism benefits the most give back some of their winnings.

Capitalism's losers, win some back.

Society remains stable.

There is substantial evidence that we aren't doing enough correction these days. Many social ills on the rise these days correlate highly with extreme wealth inequality. We are among the most extreme in our inequity. The top 20% of us possess all but 15% of the wealth.

"Fair" is what works.

The point of capitalism is creating wealth, not distributing wealth.

And it tends to be successful at that because of the way that it distributes wealth. Our problem is too much of a good thing.

 

[Listening]

One recognized consequence of capitalism is its tendency to distribute wealth from some segments of the population to others. The longer it goes on, the richer the rich get, the poorer the poor get. That's the motivational aspects of it.

The most dysfunctional aspect of that is that in most societies wealth confers power and power tilts the playing field. It can become irreversible. And society can become unstable, a consequence that has no winners.

So one aspect of taxes on money, income or wealth, is to undue, to some degree, what capitalism does.

Fair? Depends. Some would say no, but would not like the consequences of not restoring some of what capitalism creates.

The people that capitalism benefits the most give back some of their winnings.

Capitalism's losers, win some back.

Society remains stable.

There is substantial evidence that we aren't doing enough correction these days. Many social ills on the rise these days correlate highly with extreme wealth inequality. We are among the most extreme in our inequity. The top 20% of us possess all but 15% of the wealth.

"Fair" is what works.

The point of capitalism is creating wealth, not distributing wealth.

And it tends to be successful at that because of the way that it distrutes wealth. Our problem is too much of a good thing.

It's no longer capitalism when that happens.

We don't have capitalism today like I wish we had. To many big businessnes mixed in with an oversized federal government.

 

[PMZ]

The point of capitalism is creating wealth, not distributing wealth.

And it tends to be successful at that because of the way that it distrutes wealth. Our problem is too much of a good thing.

It's no longer capitalism when that happens.

We don't have capitalism today like I wish we had. To many big businessnes mixed in with an oversized federal government.

Tell us by what measure our government is oversized.

 

[FA_Q2]

Even percentage on all dollars earned. That is fair – plain and simple. Anything else is not as the system complicates itself with unnecessary garbage and political gerrymandering.

Completely flat without a single thing that can be written off or otherwise avoid the tax that is due.

You have never run a business, have you?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I have. That is rather irrelevant though. Wealth is not taxed, profit is. There is nothing impeding the running of business with a flat tax though I would eliminate business tax altogether. The end consumer pays that tax anyway and taxing business is simply a way to hide tax increases from the working people that actually pay them.

I know that you are aware of that but I would like to post a question that is very relevant in this vein of thought: the business owner is charged for the workers social security as they are required to match the workers tax. This is not placed in the workers check nor is the worker ever aware of it beyond actually educating themselves. Do you actually think that is the business that pays for that tax though?

Of course not – the worker pays through lower pay and/or the consumer pays through higher end item costs. This practice of hiding taxation is bullshit and needs to be ended so that the people are actually aware of exactly how much those government ‘services’ are truly costing them.

 

[FA_Q2]

Pragmatist do not seek perfection. They seek the resolution of problems in the most practical means possible. Consumption taxes give people the option of regulating the amount of taxes they pay. We can probably never cover all of gorvernment costs with consumption taxes, but we can cover many of them. The less the percentage of taxes needed through a flat tax or a progressive tax, the fairer our tax system becomes because we give folks the ability to put themselve to a position of paying "no taxes".

The poor spend virtually every nickel of income on survival through consumption.

The wealthy, try as they might, cannot even put a dent in their wealth.

A flat consumption tax would vastly redistribute wealth upwards compared to progressive taxes on financial means be they income or wealth.

Just the opposite of what is necessary today.

Problem solved by not taxing certain products deemed as necessities. Taxes on some other products don't start until a certain level is reached. Everybody gets the same level of relief for certain things like heating oil, electricity and whatever else we decide is a necessity. It is fair because the rich guy gets the same amount of tax free electric, heating oil, whatever that the poor guy gets. The poor guy might be able to get by on $200 a month on an electric bill. If the rich guy wants to live in a huge house that uses two or three times that amount, or many times that amount, that is on him. He made the choice to load his home up with extra appliances, heated swimming pool, sauna, fancy outdoor lighting, whatever. He gets the same first $200 of usage as the poor guy, tax free. That makes it fair. Everyone is treated equal, down to the dollar, down to the cent. We can use this concept on all kinds of things.

And BAM – you have just created the first special interest group and ‘class’ for the politicians to leverage in an effort to purchase their vote. How long before you get lobbyists in the cell phone industry to fight for the ‘necessary’ cell phone to be tax free? How about that candy bar – it is food after all? What about beds, everyone NEEDS one of those?

That is why the tax needs to be flat and on income – it gives the politicians NO purchase to rig the rules for their benefactors and friends at the cost of the rest of us. ONE rate, ONE system for all and NO special interests. The government can then get back to governing rather than trying to help their cronies.

 

[FA_Q2]

Even percentage on all dollars earned. That is fair – plain and simple. Anything else is not as the system complicates itself with unnecessary garbage and political gerrymandering.

Completely flat without a single thing that can be written off or otherwise avoid the tax that is due.

That doesn't sound fair to me. The only thing even is the percentage used to determime the flat tax. If it were 20% the person making 20 thousand a year would pay 4 thousand. The person making 100 thousand would pay 20 thousand. So what does the person paying the extra 16 thousand get in product (benifits and services)? The answer is nothing. We are supposed to get something when we pay someone for something. To pay more for a product just because you have more money is not fair.

Irrelevant. Each dollar is taxes at the exact same rate. Don’t want to pay more for the grater usage of those dollars, don’t earn ‘em. There is, however, no less incentive to earn the last dollar than the first – you get the exact same benefit from both. There is no cajoling you into doing things that you do not want to do in order to gain a better rate than your neighbor who might even make less than you. Right now, the rate has very little to do with your earnings once you reach the upper classes – you are going to make all of that tax burden essentially go away anyway.

 

[PMZ]

Even percentage on all dollars earned. That is fair – plain and simple. Anything else is not as the system complicates itself with unnecessary garbage and political gerrymandering.

Completely flat without a single thing that can be written off or otherwise avoid the tax that is due.

You have never run a business, have you?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I have. That is rather irrelevant though. Wealth is not taxed, profit is. There is nothing impeding the running of business with a flat tax though I would eliminate business tax altogether. The end consumer pays that tax anyway and taxing business is simply a way to hide tax increases from the working people that actually pay them.

I know that you are aware of that but I would like to post a question that is very relevant in this vein of thought: the business owner is charged for the workers social security as they are required to match the workers tax. This is not placed in the workers check nor is the worker ever aware of it beyond actually educating themselves. Do you actually think that is the business that pays for that tax though?

Of course not – the worker pays through lower pay and/or the consumer pays through higher end item costs. This practice of hiding taxation is bullshit and needs to be ended so that the people are actually aware of exactly how much those government ‘services’ are truly costing them.

Clearly you are in favor of richer rich and poorer poor.

 

[Listening]

Even percentage on all dollars earned. That is fair – plain and simple. Anything else is not as the system complicates itself with unnecessary garbage and political gerrymandering.

Completely flat without a single thing that can be written off or otherwise avoid the tax that is due.

You have never run a business, have you?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I have. That is rather irrelevant though. Wealth is not taxed, profit is. There is nothing impeding the running of business with a flat tax though I would eliminate business tax altogether. The end consumer pays that tax anyway and taxing business is simply a way to hide tax increases from the working people that actually pay them.

I know that you are aware of that but I would like to post a question that is very relevant in this vein of thought: the business owner is charged for the workers social security as they are required to match the workers tax. This is not placed in the workers check nor is the worker ever aware of it beyond actually educating themselves. Do you actually think that is the business that pays for that tax though?

Of course not – the worker pays through lower pay and/or the consumer pays through higher end item costs. This practice of hiding taxation is bullshit and needs to be ended so that the people are actually aware of exactly how much those government ‘services’ are truly costing them.

I like that.

You make a case for getting cost out in the open and making it more transparent so we can see what we are being taxed for....

And you get accused of wanting to see the rich get richer.

Somebody has the MSNBC talking points tattooed on their small foreheads.

I agree with you.

One thing I've pointed out to people is that sales taxes used to be 2.5 to 3%. In CA, they are now over 10%. Other places range drom 7.5 up.

What do they do with THAT extra money. We're getting taxed at every turn (rich and poor alike...unless you are spending food stamp money...don't think that is taxed).

 

[PMZ]

The poor spend virtually every nickel of income on survival through consumption.

The wealthy, try as they might, cannot even put a dent in their wealth.

A flat consumption tax would vastly redistribute wealth upwards compared to progressive taxes on financial means be they income or wealth.

Just the opposite of what is necessary today.

Problem solved by not taxing certain products deemed as necessities. Taxes on some other products don't start until a certain level is reached. Everybody gets the same level of relief for certain things like heating oil, electricity and whatever else we decide is a necessity. It is fair because the rich guy gets the same amount of tax free electric, heating oil, whatever that the poor guy gets. The poor guy might be able to get by on $200 a month on an electric bill. If the rich guy wants to live in a huge house that uses two or three times that amount, or many times that amount, that is on him. He made the choice to load his home up with extra appliances, heated swimming pool, sauna, fancy outdoor lighting, whatever. He gets the same first $200 of usage as the poor guy, tax free. That makes it fair. Everyone is treated equal, down to the dollar, down to the cent. We can use this concept on all kinds of things.

And BAM – you have just created the first special interest group and ‘class’ for the politicians to leverage in an effort to purchase their vote. How long before you get lobbyists in the cell phone industry to fight for the ‘necessary’ cell phone to be tax free? How about that candy bar – it is food after all? What about beds, everyone NEEDS one of those?

That is why the tax needs to be flat and on income – it gives the politicians NO purchase to rig the rules for their benefactors and friends at the cost of the rest of us. ONE rate, ONE system for all and NO special interests. The government can then get back to governing rather than trying to help their cronies.

The wealthy wouldn't need "NO purchase to rig the rules for their benefactors and friends at the cost of the rest of us."

They'd already have everything that they could ever want. An American aristocracy.

 

[PMZ]

You have never run a business, have you?

Yes, as a matter of fact, I have. That is rather irrelevant though. Wealth is not taxed, profit is. There is nothing impeding the running of business with a flat tax though I would eliminate business tax altogether. The end consumer pays that tax anyway and taxing business is simply a way to hide tax increases from the working people that actually pay them.

I know that you are aware of that but I would like to post a question that is very relevant in this vein of thought: the business owner is charged for the workers social security as they are required to match the workers tax. This is not placed in the workers check nor is the worker ever aware of it beyond actually educating themselves. Do you actually think that is the business that pays for that tax though?

Of course not – the worker pays through lower pay and/or the consumer pays through higher end item costs. This practice of hiding taxation is bullshit and needs to be ended so that the people are actually aware of exactly how much those government ‘services’ are truly costing them.

I like that.

You make a case for getting cost out in the open and making it more transparent so we can see what we are being taxed for....

And you get accused of wanting to see the rich get richer.

Somebody has the MSNBC talking points tattooed on their small foreheads.

I agree with you.

One thing I've pointed out to people is that sales taxes used to be 2.5 to 3%. In CA, they are now over 10%. Other places range drom 7.5 up.

What do they do with THAT extra money. We're getting taxed at every turn (rich and poor alike...unless you are spending food stamp money...don't think that is taxed).

Obviously there is a better deal somewhere else in the world for you.

 

[arKangel]

I see two possible ways that are fair when it comes to taxation.

1. Everybody pays the exact same percentage of their income. Whether you make $10k or $10m, your tax is x percent. No write-offs, no deductions, no exclusions. Pay your x percent.

2. Everybody pays the exact same amount. Divide the federal budget by the number of people in the country and everybody pays the exact same amount.

You forgot number 3:
0%! NO TAX!

While the poor only benefit from such a rate. The usurer will not have it.
It is only the usurer who benefits from government.

It would be a dream come true to the moneylender if tax was a "percentage" or a "flat rate". All that matters to the parasite, is how much they can hurt honest people.

The usurer by far and away benefits the most from government... some may even go so far as to say they are the government.

 

[PMZ]

I see two possible ways that are fair when it comes to taxation.

1. Everybody pays the exact same percentage of their income. Whether you make $10k or $10m, your tax is x percent. No write-offs, no deductions, no exclusions. Pay your x percent.

2. Everybody pays the exact same amount. Divide the federal budget by the number of people in the country and everybody pays the exact same amount.

You forgot number 3:
0%! NO TAX!

While the poor only benefit from such a rate. The usurer will not have it.
It is only the usurer who benefits from government.

It would be a dream come true to the moneylender if tax was a "percentage" or a "flat rate". All that matters to the parasite, is how much they can hurt honest people.

The usurer by far and away benefits the most from government... some may even go so far as to say they are the government.

Clearly you are free to live your life tax free.

Live in no country.

Live here, but keep your income under the taxable amount.

You're in complete control.

 

[BlackSand]

I see two possible ways that are fair when it comes to taxation.

1. Everybody pays the exact same percentage of their income. Whether you make $10k or $10m, your tax is x percent. No write-offs, no deductions, no exclusions. Pay your x percent.

2. Everybody pays the exact same amount. Divide the federal budget by the number of people in the country and everybody pays the exact same amount.

What About A Consumption Tax... No Loopholes?
If you purchase anything, you pay the tax ... Same rate across the board on all products and services.

.

 

[PMZ]

I see two possible ways that are fair when it comes to taxation.

1. Everybody pays the exact same percentage of their income. Whether you make $10k or $10m, your tax is x percent. No write-offs, no deductions, no exclusions. Pay your x percent.

2. Everybody pays the exact same amount. Divide the federal budget by the number of people in the country and everybody pays the exact same amount.

What About A Consumption Tax... No Loopholes?
If you purchase anything, you pay the tax ... Same rate across the board on all products and services.

.

Wealthy people can't spend their wealth no matter how much they consume.

Poor people have to spend all of their income surviving.

But, you already knew that.

 

[FA_Q2]

I see two possible ways that are fair when it comes to taxation.

1. Everybody pays the exact same percentage of their income. Whether you make $10k or $10m, your tax is x percent. No write-offs, no deductions, no exclusions. Pay your x percent.

2. Everybody pays the exact same amount. Divide the federal budget by the number of people in the country and everybody pays the exact same amount.

What About A Consumption Tax... No Loopholes?
If you purchase anything, you pay the tax ... Same rate across the board on all products and services.

.

A consumption tax, by its very nature, must have loopholes and that is one of the reasons that the advocates of the system here have not convinced me to join them. Some of the same questions come up like where the tax is applied. For instance: a sheet of plywood, when bought by you the consumer, would have that tax on it yet would the business that purchased such a product to build a house be taxed the same?

Almost all the consumption tax advocates say no but now they have just blown a hole a mile wide in the tax system and given politicians (and voters) another place to start demanding special interest tax breaks. It gets overly complicated from there as well.

 

[PMZ]

I see two possible ways that are fair when it comes to taxation.

1. Everybody pays the exact same percentage of their income. Whether you make $10k or $10m, your tax is x percent. No write-offs, no deductions, no exclusions. Pay your x percent.

2. Everybody pays the exact same amount. Divide the federal budget by the number of people in the country and everybody pays the exact same amount.

What About A Consumption Tax... No Loopholes?
If you purchase anything, you pay the tax ... Same rate across the board on all products and services.

.

A consumption tax, by its very nature, must have loopholes and that is one of the reasons that the advocates of the system here have not convinced me to join them. Some of the same questions come up like where the tax is applied. For instance: a sheet of plywood, when bought by you the consumer, would have that tax on it yet would the business that purchased such a product to build a house be taxed the same?

Almost all the consumption tax advocates say no but now they have just blown a hole a mile wide in the tax system and given politicians (and voters) another place to start demanding special interest tax breaks. It gets overly complicated from there as well.

I don't think that there is anyone working seriously on revising our federal taxation process. Despite that, the parade of nutballs trying to sell what's better for them at everybody else's expense is endless.

 

[BlackSand]

I don't think that there is anyone working seriously on revising our federal taxation process. Despite that, the parade of nutballs trying to sell what's better for them at everybody else's expense is endless.

That pretty much explains your entire view of things ... Thanks for the clarification.

.

 

[Indeependent]

There is no such thing as a "fair" tax as all civil services and product prices are tainted by human intervention.