Why only a "progressive" income tax?

[Skull Pilot]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

Let me say it again

It doesn't ******* matter who pays more or less all that matters is the fairness of the tax

You don't give a shit if a so called poor person pays the same exact federal tax on his cell phone as a "rich guy" do you? Should he pay less?

Why on earth should he pay less on a dollar of income?

A poor person earning 10000 pays the same income tax rate as a rich person earning 10000.

A person with no kids making 10K pays more than a person making 10K who has kids

 

[Ravi]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

Let me say it again

It doesn't ******* matter who pays more or less all that matters is the fairness of the tax

You don't give a shit if a so called poor person pays the same exact federal tax on his cell phone as a "rich guy" do you? Should he pay less?

Why on earth should he pay less on a dollar of income?

A poor person earning 10000 pays the same income tax rate as a rich person earning 10000.

rich people don't only earn 10K

And if that 10K came from cap gains no he doesn't pay the same rate as the one who made 10k from a job be pays more

That's true, unless they are retired and work just for a hobby. A poor person could make 1 million dollars one year and would be taxed at the same rate as a rich person that same year.

Except for deductions. The only actual unfairness in the tax law is deductions.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

Let me say it again

It doesn't ******* matter who pays more or less all that matters is the fairness of the tax

You don't give a shit if a so called poor person pays the same exact federal tax on his cell phone as a "rich guy" do you? Should he pay less?

Why on earth should he pay less on a dollar of income?

A poor person earning 10000 pays the same income tax rate as a rich person earning 10000.

rich people don't only earn 10K

And if that 10K came from cap gains no he doesn't pay the same rate as the one who made 10k from a job be pays more

That's true, unless they are retired and work just for a hobby. A poor person could make 1 million dollars one year and would be taxed at the same rate as a rich person that same year.

Except for deductions. The only actual unfairness in the tax law is deductions.

and the fact that some dollars are taxed more than others

 

[NYcarbineer]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

 

[Skylar]

No one ever implied that, but simpler doesn't equal better which is a major selling point of you flat tax morons.

The major selling point is that it is fair.

Even though a dollar is worth a dollar, Dollars earned don't hold the same value all along the earning scale.

Look at it like this, imagine you're homeless and someone gives you a dollar. What is the first thing you do with that dollar? Buy food, maybe medicine, shelter or clothing. The basic life essentials. This is where mostly anyone would put their very first dollars towards. It's why you don't see homeless people saying "Will work for yachts". Those are items purchased with dollars further down the need scale. The first dollars anyone earns will be spent on basic life necessities.

This is why a progressive system that taxes these first dollars less and more heavily as the dollar has less value to basic life needs makes sense and doesn't put the poorest among us at a disadvantage. Is it perfect? No, but it's better than a mindless flat tax system that isn't fair to anyone but the richest among us.

Ok then why don't you answer the question in the OP

Why not make say the sales tax progressive as well after all that 3rd flat screen isn't worth as much to you as the first right? Why not make property taxes progressive and charge more for square footage you don't really need that is therefore worth less to you?

An earned dollar or any dollar of any type of income is nothing but a commodity like any other if we are going to have an income tax then we should tax income all income not some income not some dollars more than others

We do not do that for any other taxes levied on anything else

It's not the government's job to decide what people need

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

We tax at a higher percentage as there is more money to tax.

See, your premise makes no sense. You equate buying a new super yacht with struggling to pay the rent, insisting that we're not allowed to make any distinction in terms of the actual need of each because that's a subjective value judgment. And you're obviously wrong. As subjective value judgments are the basis of most every law. We not only can apply subjective value judgments in respect to our laws, we pretty much have to.

So the entire argument that the application of subjective value judgments invalidates progressive taxation is debunked. As we use the subjective value judgments on pretty much every law. And they're perfectly valid.

And while you personally may be incapable of recognizing the difference between say, a luxury yacht vs. paying the rent, a rational person could make that distinction. And rational people do. As progressive taxation is applied in pretty much every first world nation on earth.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Why is it I always have to repeat myself to you

I DO NOT GIVE A FLYING **** WHO PAYS MORE OR WHO PAYS LESS UNDER A FLAT TAX

The point of taxes is to raise money for the ******* government to do its job and its job is not equalizing income among the masses

 

[Skylar]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Oh, it totally would. The point is....so what? You'd either have to massively increase the tax rates for the poor and middle class, or see a massive drop in tax revenue as we drop rates for the wealthy.

And math is irrelevant to them, just like consequence is irrelevant to them. These are ivory tower conceptions of 'fair', where the rich are the hapless victims of our system. So you already know you're not exactly going to be dealing with a real world perspective.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The major selling point is that it is fair.

Even though a dollar is worth a dollar, Dollars earned don't hold the same value all along the earning scale.

Look at it like this, imagine you're homeless and someone gives you a dollar. What is the first thing you do with that dollar? Buy food, maybe medicine, shelter or clothing. The basic life essentials. This is where mostly anyone would put their very first dollars towards. It's why you don't see homeless people saying "Will work for yachts". Those are items purchased with dollars further down the need scale. The first dollars anyone earns will be spent on basic life necessities.

This is why a progressive system that taxes these first dollars less and more heavily as the dollar has less value to basic life needs makes sense and doesn't put the poorest among us at a disadvantage. Is it perfect? No, but it's better than a mindless flat tax system that isn't fair to anyone but the richest among us.

Ok then why don't you answer the question in the OP

Why not make say the sales tax progressive as well after all that 3rd flat screen isn't worth as much to you as the first right? Why not make property taxes progressive and charge more for square footage you don't really need that is therefore worth less to you?

An earned dollar or any dollar of any type of income is nothing but a commodity like any other if we are going to have an income tax then we should tax income all income not some income not some dollars more than others

We do not do that for any other taxes levied on anything else

It's not the government's job to decide what people need

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

We tax at a higher percentage as there is more money to tax.

See, your premise makes no sense. You equate buying a new super yacht with struggling to pay the rent, insisting that we're not allowed to make any distinction in terms of the actual need of each because that's a subjective value judgment. And you're obviously wrong. As subjective value judgments are the basis of most every law. We not only can apply subjective value judgments in respect to our laws, we pretty much have to.

So the entire argument that the application of subjective value judgments invalidates progressive taxation is debunked. As we use the subjective value judgments on pretty much every law. And they're perfectly valid.

And while you personally may be incapable of recognizing the difference between say, a luxury yacht vs. paying the rent, a rational person could make that distinction. And rational people do. As progressive taxation is applied in pretty much every first world nation on earth.

I don't care what people use their money to buy it doesn't matter

We don't tax the gallon of gas used to drive to a strip club more than the gallon of gas used to drive to the supermarket do we?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Oh, it totally would. The point is....so what? You'd either have to massively increase the tax rates for the poor and middle class, or see a massive drop in tax revenue as we drop rates for the wealthy.

And math is irrelevant to them, just like consequence is irrelevant to them. These are ivory tower conceptions of 'fair', where the rich are the hapless victims of our system. So you already know you're not exactly going to be dealing with a real world perspective.

Funny I just did an example with 2011 income and tax numbers and a revenue neutral flat tax would have only been 8.4%

 

[Skylar]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Why is it I always have to repeat myself to you

I DO NOT GIVE A FLYING **** WHO PAYS MORE OR WHO PAYS LESS UNDER A FLAT TAX

The point of taxes is to raise money for the ******* government to do its job and its job is not equalizing income among the masses

And there we go. Flat taxers have no care for what the middle class or poor have to pay. Consequence, tax revenue, none of it matters to them.

It would matter to a rational person.

What we're seeing is the limits of ideologues. Where how well their approach works is irrelevant to them. Who it hurts, how it effects our nation, even mathmatics itself is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is pushing their ideology, no matter what.

Its what worries me about someone like Cruz. He'd gladly watch the nation burn if it meant he was able to enforce his ideology.

 

[NYcarbineer]

Even though a dollar is worth a dollar, Dollars earned don't hold the same value all along the earning scale.

Look at it like this, imagine you're homeless and someone gives you a dollar. What is the first thing you do with that dollar? Buy food, maybe medicine, shelter or clothing. The basic life essentials. This is where mostly anyone would put their very first dollars towards. It's why you don't see homeless people saying "Will work for yachts". Those are items purchased with dollars further down the need scale. The first dollars anyone earns will be spent on basic life necessities.

This is why a progressive system that taxes these first dollars less and more heavily as the dollar has less value to basic life needs makes sense and doesn't put the poorest among us at a disadvantage. Is it perfect? No, but it's better than a mindless flat tax system that isn't fair to anyone but the richest among us.

Ok then why don't you answer the question in the OP

Why not make say the sales tax progressive as well after all that 3rd flat screen isn't worth as much to you as the first right? Why not make property taxes progressive and charge more for square footage you don't really need that is therefore worth less to you?

An earned dollar or any dollar of any type of income is nothing but a commodity like any other if we are going to have an income tax then we should tax income all income not some income not some dollars more than others

We do not do that for any other taxes levied on anything else

It's not the government's job to decide what people need

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

We tax at a higher percentage as there is more money to tax.

See, your premise makes no sense. You equate buying a new super yacht with struggling to pay the rent, insisting that we're not allowed to make any distinction in terms of the actual need of each because that's a subjective value judgment. And you're obviously wrong. As subjective value judgments are the basis of most every law. We not only can apply subjective value judgments in respect to our laws, we pretty much have to.

So the entire argument that the application of subjective value judgments invalidates progressive taxation is debunked. As we use the subjective value judgments on pretty much every law. And they're perfectly valid.

And while you personally may be incapable of recognizing the difference between say, a luxury yacht vs. paying the rent, a rational person could make that distinction. And rational people do. As progressive taxation is applied in pretty much every first world nation on earth.

I don't care what people use their money to buy it doesn't matter

We don't tax the gallon of gas used to drive to a strip club more than the gallon of gas used to drive to the supermarket do we?

So once you get rid of the gas tax, where do you make up that revenue?

 

[Skull Pilot]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Why is it I always have to repeat myself to you

I DO NOT GIVE A FLYING **** WHO PAYS MORE OR WHO PAYS LESS UNDER A FLAT TAX

The point of taxes is to raise money for the ******* government to do its job and its job is not equalizing income among the masses

And there we go. Flat taxers have no care for what the middle class or poor have to pay. Consequence, tax revenue, none of it matters to them.

It would matter to a rational person.

What we're seeing is the limits of ideologues. Where how well their approach works is irrelevant to them. Who it hurts, how it effects our nation, even mathmatics itself is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is pushing their ideology, no matter what.

Its what worries me about someone like Cruz. He'd gladly watch the nation burn if it meant he was able to enforce his ideology.

So then answer the question in the first post

If the so called progressive tax is so good and fair then why not have a progressive sales tax where for example the tax on your second car is more than the tax on the first and the tax on the third car is even more than the tax on the second?

After all you don't really "need " that 3rd car do you?

 

[Skylar]

Look at this chart of effective tax rates based on income quintiles.

Historical Average Federal Tax Rates for All Households

Federal income tax is the second chart down.

Now, anyone explain to me how you get from those rates, to flat tax rate across the board,

without raising taxes on the poorer and lowering taxes for the richer.

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Oh, it totally would. The point is....so what? You'd either have to massively increase the tax rates for the poor and middle class, or see a massive drop in tax revenue as we drop rates for the wealthy.

And math is irrelevant to them, just like consequence is irrelevant to them. These are ivory tower conceptions of 'fair', where the rich are the hapless victims of our system. So you already know you're not exactly going to be dealing with a real world perspective.

Funny I just did an example with 2011 income and tax numbers and a revenue neutral flat tax would have only been 8.4%

That is funny. Because virtually every economist to review even 10% plans finds them woefully inadequate to cover our current revenue.

But again, what does it matter to you? You've said you don't care what the middle class and poor have to pay. And if the rich are getting a massive discount on their taxes, where does the revenue have to come from even in your imaginary 'revenue neutral' tax plan?

The poor and middle class. Who you insist should be paying far, far more than they do now. Which you insist will be 'fair'.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Ok then why don't you answer the question in the OP

Why not make say the sales tax progressive as well after all that 3rd flat screen isn't worth as much to you as the first right? Why not make property taxes progressive and charge more for square footage you don't really need that is therefore worth less to you?

An earned dollar or any dollar of any type of income is nothing but a commodity like any other if we are going to have an income tax then we should tax income all income not some income not some dollars more than others

We do not do that for any other taxes levied on anything else

It's not the government's job to decide what people need

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

We tax at a higher percentage as there is more money to tax.

See, your premise makes no sense. You equate buying a new super yacht with struggling to pay the rent, insisting that we're not allowed to make any distinction in terms of the actual need of each because that's a subjective value judgment. And you're obviously wrong. As subjective value judgments are the basis of most every law. We not only can apply subjective value judgments in respect to our laws, we pretty much have to.

So the entire argument that the application of subjective value judgments invalidates progressive taxation is debunked. As we use the subjective value judgments on pretty much every law. And they're perfectly valid.

And while you personally may be incapable of recognizing the difference between say, a luxury yacht vs. paying the rent, a rational person could make that distinction. And rational people do. As progressive taxation is applied in pretty much every first world nation on earth.

I don't care what people use their money to buy it doesn't matter

We don't tax the gallon of gas used to drive to a strip club more than the gallon of gas used to drive to the supermarket do we?

So once you get rid of the gas tax, where do you make up that revenue?

Where did I say get rid of the gas tax?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Oh, it totally would. The point is....so what? You'd either have to massively increase the tax rates for the poor and middle class, or see a massive drop in tax revenue as we drop rates for the wealthy.

And math is irrelevant to them, just like consequence is irrelevant to them. These are ivory tower conceptions of 'fair', where the rich are the hapless victims of our system. So you already know you're not exactly going to be dealing with a real world perspective.

Funny I just did an example with 2011 income and tax numbers and a revenue neutral flat tax would have only been 8.4%

That is funny. Because virtually every economist to review even 10% plans finds them woefully inadequate to cover our current revenue.

But again, what does it matter to you? You've said you don't care what the middle class and poor have to pay. And if the rich are getting a massive discount on their taxes, where does the revenue have to come from even in your imaginary 'revenue neutral' tax plan?

The poor and middle class. Who you insist should be paying far, far more than they do now. Which you insist will be 'fair'.

I did the math if you can't follow it that's your problem

 

[NYcarbineer]

No one ever implied that, but simpler doesn't equal better which is a major selling point of you flat tax morons.

The major selling point is that it is fair.

Even though a dollar is worth a dollar, Dollars earned don't hold the same value all along the earning scale.

Look at it like this, imagine you're homeless and someone gives you a dollar. What is the first thing you do with that dollar? Buy food, maybe medicine, shelter or clothing. The basic life essentials. This is where mostly anyone would put their very first dollars towards. It's why you don't see homeless people saying "Will work for yachts". Those are items purchased with dollars further down the need scale. The first dollars anyone earns will be spent on basic life necessities.

This is why a progressive system that taxes these first dollars less and more heavily as the dollar has less value to basic life needs makes sense and doesn't put the poorest among us at a disadvantage. Is it perfect? No, but it's better than a mindless flat tax system that isn't fair to anyone but the richest among us.

Ok then why don't you answer the question in the OP

Why not make say the sales tax progressive as well after all that 3rd flat screen isn't worth as much to you as the first right? Why not make property taxes progressive and charge more for square footage you don't really need that is therefore worth less to you?

An earned dollar or any dollar of any type of income is nothing but a commodity like any other if we are going to have an income tax then we should tax income all income not some income not some dollars more than others

We do not do that for any other taxes levied on anything else

It's not the government's job to decide what people need

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

Taxing by percentage of income isn't 'fair'. What if the sales tax on gas were based on a percentage of your income instead of a flat rate for all. Would that be fair?

 

[Skull Pilot]

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Oh, it totally would. The point is....so what? You'd either have to massively increase the tax rates for the poor and middle class, or see a massive drop in tax revenue as we drop rates for the wealthy.

And math is irrelevant to them, just like consequence is irrelevant to them. These are ivory tower conceptions of 'fair', where the rich are the hapless victims of our system. So you already know you're not exactly going to be dealing with a real world perspective.

Funny I just did an example with 2011 income and tax numbers and a revenue neutral flat tax would have only been 8.4%

That is funny. Because virtually every economist to review even 10% plans finds them woefully inadequate to cover our current revenue.

But again, what does it matter to you? You've said you don't care what the middle class and poor have to pay. And if the rich are getting a massive discount on their taxes, where does the revenue have to come from even in your imaginary 'revenue neutral' tax plan?

The poor and middle class. Who you insist should be paying far, far more than they do now. Which you insist will be 'fair'.

I just proved that for 2011 the flat rate of 8.4% on all income would have raised the exact same revenue so if you think a flat tax that is actually lower than the lowest current bracket of 10% is a "massive increase" then you and I speak different languages

 

[NYcarbineer]

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

We tax at a higher percentage as there is more money to tax.

See, your premise makes no sense. You equate buying a new super yacht with struggling to pay the rent, insisting that we're not allowed to make any distinction in terms of the actual need of each because that's a subjective value judgment. And you're obviously wrong. As subjective value judgments are the basis of most every law. We not only can apply subjective value judgments in respect to our laws, we pretty much have to.

So the entire argument that the application of subjective value judgments invalidates progressive taxation is debunked. As we use the subjective value judgments on pretty much every law. And they're perfectly valid.

And while you personally may be incapable of recognizing the difference between say, a luxury yacht vs. paying the rent, a rational person could make that distinction. And rational people do. As progressive taxation is applied in pretty much every first world nation on earth.

I don't care what people use their money to buy it doesn't matter

We don't tax the gallon of gas used to drive to a strip club more than the gallon of gas used to drive to the supermarket do we?

So once you get rid of the gas tax, where do you make up that revenue?

Where did I say get rid of the gas tax?

Where did you say you want to keep it?

 

[Skylar]

So no tries on the above?

Fair enough. So far so good. So far I've proven that the flat taxers want to increase the gap between rich and poor.

Just because some of us are offline when you post your crap doesn't mean you have proven anything

Then you show us by example how your tax plan would not increase the gap between rich and poor,

leaving all else aside and just showing us the tax rates for the poor and rich now and then.

You can't do it. The average effective tax rate for the lowest incomes in the US are currently at ZERO or less.

Those people's taxes HAVE to go up under your plan, for starters. That makes them poorer.

Why is it I always have to repeat myself to you

I DO NOT GIVE A FLYING **** WHO PAYS MORE OR WHO PAYS LESS UNDER A FLAT TAX

The point of taxes is to raise money for the ******* government to do its job and its job is not equalizing income among the masses

And there we go. Flat taxers have no care for what the middle class or poor have to pay. Consequence, tax revenue, none of it matters to them.

It would matter to a rational person.

What we're seeing is the limits of ideologues. Where how well their approach works is irrelevant to them. Who it hurts, how it effects our nation, even mathmatics itself is completely irrelevant. The only thing that matters is pushing their ideology, no matter what.

Its what worries me about someone like Cruz. He'd gladly watch the nation burn if it meant he was able to enforce his ideology.

So then answer the question in the first post

If the so called progressive tax is so good and fair then why not have a progressive sales tax where for example the tax on your second car is more than the tax on the first and the tax on the third car is even more than the tax on the second?

Because taxing income is simpler and works better.

Try as you may, you're not going to make a new super yacht and struggling to pay the rent equivalents. And your entire argument is based on the idea. Which is why you failed. And why virtually no nation on earth follows your assumptions.

 

[Skull Pilot]

The major selling point is that it is fair.

Even though a dollar is worth a dollar, Dollars earned don't hold the same value all along the earning scale.

Look at it like this, imagine you're homeless and someone gives you a dollar. What is the first thing you do with that dollar? Buy food, maybe medicine, shelter or clothing. The basic life essentials. This is where mostly anyone would put their very first dollars towards. It's why you don't see homeless people saying "Will work for yachts". Those are items purchased with dollars further down the need scale. The first dollars anyone earns will be spent on basic life necessities.

This is why a progressive system that taxes these first dollars less and more heavily as the dollar has less value to basic life needs makes sense and doesn't put the poorest among us at a disadvantage. Is it perfect? No, but it's better than a mindless flat tax system that isn't fair to anyone but the richest among us.

Ok then why don't you answer the question in the OP

Why not make say the sales tax progressive as well after all that 3rd flat screen isn't worth as much to you as the first right? Why not make property taxes progressive and charge more for square footage you don't really need that is therefore worth less to you?

An earned dollar or any dollar of any type of income is nothing but a commodity like any other if we are going to have an income tax then we should tax income all income not some income not some dollars more than others

We do not do that for any other taxes levied on anything else

It's not the government's job to decide what people need

Why make one person pay 1000 dollars a year for federal government while some other pays 100,000 for the same government?

What makes that fair?

You are not taxing the person you are taxing the dollars of income
Everyone pays the same percentage on every dollar of income

The fact that one has more income than another is neither fair nor unfair

Taxing by percentage of income isn't 'fair'. What if the sales tax on gas were based on a percentage of your income instead of a flat rate for all. Would that be fair?

So the flat tax on gas is fair but a flat tax on income isn't?