The Down Range Forum
Member Section => Politics & RKBA => Topic started by: Teresa Heilevang on March 26, 2010, 06:25:41 PM
-
In a recession, government receipts decline. And then you have this: an idiot of a President that signs into law a Health Care Bill that the American people don't want and will probably bankrupt the country in the long run. Trying to find revenues to support the HC program is going to become increasingly more difficult as time goes by, so Obama's policy makers will have to look to alternative forms of revenue and the number one choice will be a National Sales Tax. Now, if this is adopted, it would have both positive and negative effects that must be carefully considered. Lets face it, they need the money to pull this thing off, so get ready. It's comin' folks~~
National Sales Tax:
Function
At its core, a national sales tax would levy taxes on consumer items. Although legislators would ultimately decide what items would be included, most proposals of a national sales tax exclude necessities such as food, clothing and housing.
Theory
Proponents of a national sales tax argue that it would be relatively fair; that is, consumers choose to purchase products in excess of necessities, therefore consumers would be making a rational decision to pay the tax. A national sales tax might replace the current, relatively complex income tax system.
Benefits
The obvious pros of a national sales tax include a new government revenue stream and simplicity. New tax receipts could help fund national programs or agencies or help to repair bridges and roads, for example. Consumers already buy products, so implementing a national sales tax would not place reporting burdens on individual taxpayers.
Cons
Opponents of a national sales tax question the burden it would place on retailers, who would be required to collect and report the tax. Another con is the regressive nature of a national sales tax because the poor would potentially pay a much higher percentage of their income in taxes.
Conclusions
Any pros and cons of a national sales tax must ultimately be considered around actual proposed legislation. If, for instance, the tax included certain items of clothing not deemed necessities, then the possibility of increased revenues must be reexamined against any potential for regression.
Charles Krauthammer on the National Sales Tax:
-
National sales tax and / or a VAT. REAL soon!
-
Just like Europe.....I think Britain's VAT was recently raised to 27%, higher on specific "luxury items",....
They all started low, 3-5%, but Europeans never saw a tax they didn't like, and just keep raising it.
Gee, think the Left thinks the same way?
>:(
-
Bring on sales tax! I would love it ... If of course they Replaced rather than supplemented other taxes.
Income tax isn't bad if it fairly applied to all citizens. It is based on your income and ability to pay. Sales tax is the same. The tax we need to eliminate is property tax. There is no tie to ability to pay and the taxation. If I go buy $5,000 worth of materials, and use my spare time and talent over the next 10 weekends to add to and improve my home my valuation goes up by $20,000, and I take a 25% annual property tax hike >:(
-
National sales tax and / or a VAT. REAL soon!
we have that called GST 10% tax on just about everything
-
Not only is this grossly unfair, taxing spending rather than wealth, and shifting (even more) the burden of taxation to the working class rather than the wealthy, but it is also counter productive. We should call it the "National anti-small business tax". Every dollar you spend will go x percent less far. We are in a recession in a consumer based (don't even get me started on how we came to that) economy. Make every restaraunt meal I eat and every item I buy 10% more expensive, and I will probably buy 10% less as money is tight right now and credit has dried up. Its shooting yourself in the foot to pursue this in a time when we want to get people to spend more.
FQ13
PS those who disagree with my first statement? Ask yourselves why the GOP voted to eliminate capital gains taxes (an excessive, but good move), but never even considered cutting FICA (a less than good move). Then I'll listen.
-
we have that called GST 10% tax on just about everything
Canada is worse. In addition to the national GST of 7%, they also have provincial taxes of from 5-8%. So in some places, like Nova Scotia, a combined "sales" tax of 15%.
I think 1 province (Alberta?) does not have the provincial tax.
PS those who disagree with my first statement? Ask yourselves why the GOP voted to eliminate capital gains taxes, but never even considered cutting FICA. Then I'll listen.
Nice move, "libertarian". As the national ship of state sinks due to the new captain blasting holes in the hull, you keep kicking the former captain. Seems almost pathological with you.
Or, as an alternative, stay focused on the fight we have instead of fighting the last war.
-
First, I don't want any new taxes of any kind.
BUT, if you have to be subjected ton either a 'Sales Tax' or a 'V.A.T.' modeled on the British system of V.A.T. - go with the Sales Tax. It takes many thousands of extra government agents to police a V.A.T. system in which the tax is calculated at every stage of an items production.
When I lived in U.K. the "Vatman" was the most vilified of officials.
-
Nice move, "libertarian". As the national ship of state sinks due to the new captain blasting holes in the hull, you keep kicking the former captain. Seems almost pathological with you.
Or, as an alternative, stay focused on the fight we have instead of fighting the last war.
Path as far as I am concerned there are not enough kicks in the world for W.. I rate him about as highly as Rush (and I) rate Clinton. Still, your point is well made about not fighting the last war. I would merely say that this absurd pretense that FICA is different than an income tax has been BS since the late lamented Claude Pepper's (blue dog D, Fl.) social security "lock box" was broken into from the early '90s till today. Its all part of the federal budget for all practical purposes. Any party that says they want to cut taxes yet ignores the tax that burdens the majority of Americans the most is full of something that ryhmes with wit as far as I'm concerned. The Dems are no better, its why I am a libertarian. As for your quote marks? Well, to quote Eric, you can fold them sideways and shove...., wait, I'm not Eric and I just want get your opinion on what I think is a valid point. ;D If you disagree, tell me why. I will listen.
FQ13
-
on what Constitutional basis???
not like that has stopped them lately....
-
on what Constitutional basis???
not like that has stopped them lately....
Actually a good point. The 16A allows for an income tax and Article I for tarriffs. There is no specific authority for a sales or VAT tax. Though this probably won't stop them. :P
FQ13
-
Yesterday, Caterpiller announced a huge accounting charge because of this healthcare idiocy. Late last night, AT&T announced a $1-billion charge-off due to the same thing. John Deere announced a mulit-million-dollar charge against profits to fund this horrendous, jobs-killing bill.
I have no idea how many of you have ever run companies, but one of the inescapable facts of corporate life is you need to factor in all the costs and charges to determine the price of your goods or services. Then, you need to determine if there is a market for those goods or services at your cost plus whatever margin of profit you include in your calculations. If there is no profit, then it's just not worth the effort. If it is too costly, you will have no buyers and will soon be out of business.
Now, AT&T was just told they need to charge the consumer $1-billion more for the services provided--just to stay at the same level as last year (which wasn't all that good). Caterpiller was told they need to charge hundreds of millions more for same things they sold this year at millions less.
Look for John Deere and Caterpiller and countless other manufacturers to relocate someplace out of the country--taking thousands of jobs with them. And look for a substantial increase in your phone bill. We have an a$$ in the White House who is determined to bankrupt this nation. And themasses (insert a space where you deem it most suitable) put him there.
I continue to weep for my country.
Crusader
-
..............
I continue to weep for my country.
Crusader
If the slugs put a sales tax out the conservatives need to think long term and force it heavily on food, medicine and other necessities...stay with me here. The people who support the looney left need to suffer or this is all good as far as they are concerned.
So what, the Repubs lose a few offices....it's the war of minds that needs to be won over time not a single election. Strategic planning is needed and the corrupt liberal socialist plans need to be seeded with pain for the masses....the masses who will not work or contribute need to be most uncomfortable in the largess that is given them without their appreciation or thanks.
-
Canada is worse. In addition to the national GST of 7%, they also have provincial taxes of from 5-8%. So in some places, like Nova Scotia, a combined "sales" tax of 15%.
what happened here was they pissed off all the sales taxes that where on some things and at a higher rate and also cut income tax for this flat tax
however the thieving Government has up excise on fuel and grog so it now costs us more to drink and drive ;)
in most ways it is easier however some of the extra BS that business have to go through is a PITA still however better than before
the whole tax thing is a crock if you ask me and needs re-doing
-
If the slugs put a sales tax out the conservatives need to think long term and force it heavily on food, medicine and other necessities...stay with me here. The people who support the looney left need to suffer or this is all good as far as they are concerned.
So what, the Repubs lose a few offices....it's the war of minds that needs to be won over time not a single election. Strategic planning is needed and the corrupt liberal socialist plans need to be seeded with pain for the masses....the masses who will not work or contribute need to be most uncomfortable in the largess that is given them without their appreciation or thanks.
Ahh Rastus, ever the good Christian. Sacrifice the poor in the interest of political expediency. Your piety and morality continue to amaze me.
FQ13
PS Its spelled GOD, not GOP ::) >:(
PPS Rastus read, don't just thump, your Bible. I would highly reccomend the book of Amos. Spoken in truth and with love brother.
-
Just like Europe.....I think Britain's VAT was recently raised to 27%, higher on specific "luxury items",....
No, Britain's VAT is currently set at 17.5%. The government experimented for 13 months a couple of years ago and tried lowering it to 15% to encourage people to spend money but soon realized that it needed to go back to the previous 17.5% level. There is a belief presently that after Britain's general election the VAT will rise to 20%.
-
You load sixteen tons, what do you get?
Another day older and deeper in debt.
Saint Peter, don't you call me, 'cause I can't go;
I owe my soul to the company store.
-
Ahh Rastus, ever the good Christian. Sacrifice the poor in the interest of political expediency. Your piety and morality continue to amaze me.
FQ13
PS Its spelled GOD, not GOP ::) >:(
PPS Rastus read, don't just thump, your Bible. I would highly reccomend the book of Amos. Spoken in truth and with love brother.
Quaker,
Are you really advocating a theocracy here? I mean you are promoting using the government to execute part of "God's plan" for the poor, right? Come again about the separation of "Church and State".....
;)
-
Quaker,
Are you really advocating a theocracy here? I mean you are promoting using the government to execute part of "God's plan" for the poor, right? Come again about the separation of "Church and State".....
;)
Hardly. Just saying that if you use the Lord's name to push for a political position, as Rastus does, you shouldn't line the poor up as cannon fodder to further your agenda. Me, I prefer to leave religion out of politics and rely on logic. All men can agree with, and have their minds changed by, a well reasoned point. We will never agree on religion, so its a stupid thing to try to attain. I mean Rastus and I are both Born Again Christians and we're barely on speaking terms (if that). So what does that say about any government based on religion?
FQ13
-
Apparently it's OK to use government to circumvent teaching.
2 Thessalonians 3:10 (King James Version)
10 For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat.
Piety indeed.
Knowledge without understanding.
-
Food? Clothes, school supplies? All things you say we should tax to create a backlash against the dems. BTW, in case you haven't noticed, there are a lot of folks who would love to work, its that jobs are scace now. Look, I admire the goal, which is to kill this thing. What I don't admire is your methodology. As Christians, we don't take civilians as hostages to further a political agenda. That is exactly what you proposed in your post. You basically said to make the needy suffer in order to turn them against the dems. I don't disaree with the goal of small government, but as a Christian, I really don't think the plain text of Scripture (in whatever version you prefer) will back up your means, however hard you try to proof text the issue.
FQ13
-
If the slugs put a sales tax out the conservatives need to think long term and force it heavily on food, medicine and other necessities...stay with me here. The people who support the looney left need to suffer or this is all good as far as they are concerned.
So what, the Repubs lose a few offices....it's the war of minds that needs to be won over time not a single election. Strategic planning is needed and the corrupt liberal socialist plans need to be seeded with pain for the masses....the masses who will not work or contribute need to be most uncomfortable in the largess that is given them without their appreciation or thanks.
The problem here is that you give the "slugs" another majority, which allows them to remove the "unjust" taxes that the evil republicans put on "the shoulders of the poor", thereby giving them even more rabid support from the bottom dwellers and forcing the republican party into irrelevance.
-
If the slugs put a sales tax out the conservatives need to think long term and force it heavily on food, medicine and other necessities...stay with me here. The people who support the looney left need to suffer or this is all good as far as they are concerned.
Not sure it would work, Rastus. A goodly number of the Dem supporters don't have jobs, so this will not affect them as they will get everything on the dole.
As for the wealthier Dems, well, they'll just have the smug satisfaction that they "are doing good" with their taxes.
-
Ahh Rastus, ever the good Christian. Sacrifice the poor in the interest of political expediency. Your piety and morality continue to amaze me.
FQ13
PS Its spelled GOD, not GOP ::) >:(
PPS Rastus read, don't just thump, your Bible. I would highly reccomend the book of Amos. Spoken in truth and with love brother.
Christians are taught to seek peace, not capitulate to criminals.
And since Jesus overturned the demands of the Law while fulfilling their prophesies, why are you quoting Amos instead of something from the New Testament?
-
Christians are taught to seek peace, not capitulate to criminals.
And since Jesus overturned the demands of the Law while fulfilling their prophesies, why are you quoting Amos instead of something from the New Testament?
For the same reason I thnk the Ten Commandments are still a good idea.
FQ13
-
For the same reason I thnk the Ten Commandments are still a good idea.
FQ13
Agreed. Do you think what's written in Leviticus and Deuteronomy still relevant today?
-
A VAT will fook the poor and middle class.
-
Agreed. Do you think what's written in Leviticus and Deuteronomy still relevant today?
Not all of it, and here's why. Some are mere cermonial laws (no wearing clothes of blended fabrics, women "cleansing" themselves after a period etc), some were based on practical matters, like not eating shell fish pre-refrigeration and some just made sense at the time when laying down the law (litterally) for a tough and poor people living in a cold hard world. When interpreting scripture, its key to remember that God was talking to a particular people, in a particular time and place for a particular reason. Our moral responsibility (IMHO) is to try to figure what parts of that apply to the here and now and how they do so. If you don't accept this responsibilty, you become like a fundamentalist muslim who wants to impose Sharia. It probably made sense in Arabia 1400 years ago, not so much today. God may not change but human society does. We have to figure out how what He said 2,000 plus years ago can be applied today.
FQ13
-
Bring on sales tax! I would love it ... If of course they Replaced rather than supplemented other taxes.
Income tax isn't bad if it fairly applied to all citizens. It is based on your income and ability to pay. Sales tax is the same. The tax we need to eliminate is property tax. There is no tie to ability to pay and the taxation. If I go buy $5,000 worth of materials, and use my spare time and talent over the next 10 weekends to add to and improve my home my valuation goes up by $20,000, and I take a 25% annual property tax hike >:(
These clowns in power now will raise income taxes by letting Bush tax cuts expire. Then they will add this VAT on top of the existing tax. It is the only way to slow the increasing debt. Notice I said slow. They will keep on spending and spending and spending and...
-
The problem here is that you give the "slugs" another majority, which allows them to remove the "unjust" taxes that the evil republicans put on "the shoulders of the poor", thereby giving them even more rabid support from the bottom dwellers and forcing the republican party into irrelevance.
For Republican relevency two things. First demographics unchecked as they are with criminals streaming in from the south is working pretty well for the Dems to increase their power base rapidly to overcome conservatives...and Reagan fell into the trap to reward them with citizenship instead of punishing the employers. Secondly, with Republicans becoming liberal all on their own and not standing for conservative values makes them decidedly less relevant by rot from within. So long as the majority that now elects liberals has none of the pain of paying taxes en masse, there is no pain. Everybody should pay something.
A national sales tax would ensure those who now pay nothing will get the opportunity to pay something. It's not just the unjustifiable welfare state, it's the people who work for cash who pay nothing. Tab should be familiar with competing with those guys. You have groups now who are insulated from taxation, or at least think they are.
For instance, in general renters love to see property taxes raised as demonstrated by their willingness nationwide to vote for such things. They pay rent not taxes in their minds...fallacy being they don't write the property tax check on their rental.
I grew up in a state that had, at the time, sales taxes and very little income tax and practically no property tax. People grumbled mightily when politicians wanted to spend because they were reminded with their sales taxes. As income taxes were increased the group clamoring for hand outs grew and grew and grew. Urban areas had the right to increase property taxes in their parish...and as the handout increased so increased the property taxes.
Newt & the Congress missed a golden opportunity, in my opinion, to help "bring people" into the fold from a tax misery standpoint. Laws that would require individuals to make their own FICA, SS & medicaid payments would have been a wonderful vehicle for people everywhere to feel what they are losing. Every tax the "employer paid" should have been given as income so that the taxpayer would not be so removed from the actual pain. The employer paid tax (not collected tax distribution to the government) institution nationally in the 60's was hailed as a great way to get into people's pockets without them actually realizing it.
-
In a recession, government receipts decline. And then you have this: an idiot of a President that signs into law a Health Care Bill that the American people don't want and will probably bankrupt the country in the long run. Trying to find revenues to support the HC program is going to become increasingly more difficult as time goes by, so Obama's policy makers will have to look to alternative forms of revenue and the number one choice will be a National Sales Tax. Now, if this is adopted, it would have both positive and negative effects that must be carefully considered. Lets face it, they need the money to pull this thing off, so get ready. It's comin' folks~~
National Sales Tax:
Function
At its core, a national sales tax would levy taxes on consumer items. Although legislators would ultimately decide what items would be included, most proposals of a national sales tax exclude necessities such as food, clothing and housing.
Theory
Proponents of a national sales tax argue that it would be relatively fair; that is, consumers choose to purchase products in excess of necessities, therefore consumers would be making a rational decision to pay the tax. A national sales tax might replace the current, relatively complex income tax system.
Benefits
The obvious pros of a national sales tax include a new government revenue stream and simplicity. New tax receipts could help fund national programs or agencies or help to repair bridges and roads, for example. Consumers already buy products, so implementing a national sales tax would not place reporting burdens on individual taxpayers.
Cons
Opponents of a national sales tax question the burden it would place on retailers, who would be required to collect and report the tax. Another con is the regressive nature of a national sales tax because the poor would potentially pay a much higher percentage of their income in taxes.
Conclusions
Any pros and cons of a national sales tax must ultimately be considered around actual proposed legislation. If, for instance, the tax included certain items of clothing not deemed necessities, then the possibility of increased revenues must be reexamined against any potential for regression.
Charles Krauthammer on the National Sales Tax:
The solution to our "Tax problem" is the FAIRTAX! www.fairtax.org
Look it up, the basic jist is that it REPLACES all the "inclusive" taxes that are already imbedded into the price of an item or service with a 23% "Fairtax". You get a Pre-bate for the taxes you would pay on the basic neccessities and only pay tax on anything else that you would spend for your family. If the FAIRTAX is implemented, it would eliminate: all payroll taxes on the federal level. You would then receive your total paycheck (minus what your state takes from you). April 15th would be just another day in the month.
If you get a chance, pick up the book "The Fairtax" by Neal Boortz and John Linder... I have it and highly recommend it. It explains how the FAIRTAX would work and why it is better than the VAT tax.
Nothing is better than paying "NO TAXES", but at least with the FAIRTAX, I get to decide what I want to pay taxes on.
-
fair tax is anything but fair. Basicly the poor will pay a higher % thier income, then the rich will. Thats not what I call fair.
A progressive tax rate, is about as fair as it gets. Its the system we have now, its just there are too much other crap we have added too it.
-
Not all of it, and here's why. Some are mere cermonial laws (no wearing clothes of blended fabrics, women "cleansing" themselves after a period etc), some were based on practical matters, like not eating shell fish pre-refrigeration and some just made sense at the time when laying down the law (litterally) for a tough and poor people living in a cold hard world. When interpreting scripture, its key to remember that God was talking to a particular people, in a particular time and place for a particular reason. Our moral responsibility (IMHO) is to try to figure what parts of that apply to the here and now and how they do so. If you don't accept this responsibilty, you become like a fundamentalist muslim who wants to impose Sharia. It probably made sense in Arabia 1400 years ago, not so much today. God may not change but human society does. We have to figure out how what He said 2,000 plus years ago can be applied today.
FQ13
Ah, yes, just like the US Constitution, the Bible is a living, breathing, always changing entity, and can be freely interpreted any ol' way you want to. Is that what you're saying?
Sorry, FQ, you outdid yourself on this one. Obeying God's word is never about fundamentalism. You came close in that it is about learning how to apply the instructions in today's world and modern life, but not interpreting the Word to fit your modern sensibilities. And certainly not in picking and choosing which ones you can personally figure out and forget about the rest.
-
fair tax is anything but fair. Basicly the poor will pay a higher % thier income, then the rich will. Thats not what I call fair.
A progressive tax rate, is about as fair as it gets. Its the system we have now, its just there are too much other crap we have added too it.
What is so "unfair" about paying taxes on what you consume versus having the government confiscate a portion of your earnings to give to another group of people? Don't you understand that higher income earners tend to spend their money on higher priced items? The current system is a racket to take money from one group of people and transfer to another group of people. It is the classic example of the government picking the winners and losers and they have very poor judgment.
If you want to help the poor, which is a noble cause, then go help the poor yourself!
-
If I understand this correctly, both TAB and FQ are for taxing the hardworking fortunate at a higher rate ... not to penalize them, because only a liberal would do that, but rather to redistribute to those that are either unlucky or just not willing to put forth the effort to better themselves.
I had this discussion with our daughter this afternoon as I helped move some furniture and do a couple simple repairs ... and deliver the puppy to them. She asked the rhetorical question - Why did we work hard in school and college to get good jobs, and why do we bust our butts long hours and weeks just so we can get taxed to support the "single sl***s that keep having kids on my dime, or the guy that is too good to get a blister for his paycheck?"
-
If I understand this correctly, both TAB and FQ are for taxing the hardworking fortunate at a higher rate ... not to penalize them, because only a liberal would do that, but rather to redistribute to those that are either unlucky or just not willing to put forth the effort to better themselves.
I had this discussion with our daughter this afternoon as I helped move some furniture and do a couple simple repairs ... and deliver the puppy to them. She asked the rhetorical question - Why did we work hard in school and college to get good jobs, and why do we bust our butts long hours and weeks just so we can get taxed to support the "single sl***s that keep having kids on my dime, or the guy that is too good to get a blister for his paycheck?"
That's because both of them are to dumb to understand that the Govt has no authority to spend money that is not theirs on so called entitlements.
Do I have to post the Crockett speech again ?
-
What is so "unfair" about paying taxes on what you consume versus having the government confiscate a portion of your earnings to give to another group of people? Don't you understand that higher income earners tend to spend their money on higher priced items? The current system is a racket to take money from one group of people and transfer to another group of people. It is the classic example of the government picking the winners and losers and they have very poor judgment.
If you want to help the poor, which is a noble cause, then go help the poor yourself!
I have clients that have 10s millions in assets that drive 20 year old cars and live in 1500 sqft houses. I have 1 client that has 100 mill( yes thats hundred) million, makes about 5 mill a year, that lives in a home that was built in the 50s, has never had any major work done too it, drives a 70k car, wears old ripped up jeans and a well worn T shirt every day of his life. Your telling me he should pay less tax then say a family of 4 with a household income of say 60k? Please exmplain to me how thats fair.
Not all rich people spend, infact many are rich becuase they don't spend.
I'm not talking about who pays more tax, I'm talking about what % of thier income goes to tax. The poor are always going to spend more of thier income with it comes to a sales/VAT tax.
Then there are those like myself that consume Many times over what I actually make. I've spent well in excesse of 2 millon in the last 5 years on goods,( not services, just goods) yet I only made some where in the 250k range. Why should some one like me, pay more tax then some one that pushes paper all day for the same pay? There is no doubt about it, I did more financial good to the local area, then any office worker.
-
, but not interpreting the Word to fit your modern sensibilities. And certainly not in picking and choosing which ones you can personally figure out and forget about the rest.
You're right Path my bad here. After all, if the Bible required interpretation, there might be more than one church and folks would disagree on theology, and heck there might even have been something as bad a fist fight. ::)
FQ13
-
You're right Path my bad here. After all, if the Bible required interpretation, there might be more than one church and folks would disagree on theology, and heck there might even have been something as bad a fist fight. ::)
FQ13
Ah, so we're talking about religion here, not obeying God's word as a part of your personal relationship with Him? My bad.
I have clients that have 10s millions in assets that drive 20 year old cars and live in 1500 sqft houses. I have 1 client that has 100 mill( yes thats hundred) million, makes about 5 mill a year, that lives in a home that was built in the 50s, has never had any major work done too it, drives a 70k car, wears old ripped up jeans and a well worn T shirt every day of his life. Your telling me he should pay less tax then say a family of 4 with a household income of say 60k? Please exmplain to me how thats fair.
Not all rich people spend, infact many are rich becuase they don't spend.
I'm not talking about who pays more tax, I'm talking about what % of thier income goes to tax. The poor are always going to spend more of thier income with it comes to a sales/VAT tax.
Exactly! That's the same point that Ramsey makes - if you want to be rich, copy the habits of the rich people. Rich people - the self-made ones anyhow - don't join gangs, don't become "baby daddies", they don't boost cars, they don't hang on street corners running numbers or swilling Colt 45.
They are disciplined, they spend less than they make, they don't buy into the having to have the latest and greatest of anything. They are focused and typically highly industrious. One study also found that they are honest to a fault.
Do you also buy into the that whole "Da man be keepin' me down!" crap we hear so often? Or maybe it's more important for people to stay glued to the latest "reality" show, or wandering the mall babbling like an idiot into their friends' ears and their latest fancy cell phone at the same time, rather than
See, it's all about personal responsibility - and being able to keep the gummint thugs' hands off what you personally produce. You've lived in kalifornicated too long, you've been poisoned by the same entitlement crap and political forces that are wrecking this country as we speak.
Taxes should hurt, and they should hurt everyone. That way we are reminded of the value of small gummint.
-
I don't want a national sales tax in addition to what we have. I'd like to see taxes phased out and sales tax phased in. When the economy dips then the government income dips and they should spend less and cut back on grandiose plans to nowhere. It might provide the politicians an incentive to keep the economy going if they knew funding to stay in office would be cut in step with the pain of the people.
TAB, what in the heck are you talking about? Do you think that guy that has 100 mil and puts 5 mil a year away has not already paid taxes? Put it in gear man, what is right, in your example, about him being taxed again because he has money and doesn't want to spend it?
There are people in the world who hoard all they have without helping people and that will not change with the great socialist/communist world...look at Russia and China and the splendor their leaders live in and the abject poverty their people lived in...it's everywhere. China does a better job for some of their people..but I still would not want to live there and I certainly don't want that over here.
I know you paid the workers when you should not have to provide an income and that is commendable. You took it in the shorts to do that. But dude, it doesn't matter what kind of government there is there will be people at the top who hoard to the detriment of the little guy who works. Undeniably, our little guy over here is better off than the little guy in Europe, South America, Asia, etc.
There have over the last couple of centuries, been a number of economic collapses across the world. Fiat currencies fail, leaders overspend and enslave...the wrinkle factor of the people is what pulls the economies up (oft times in concert with overthrowing the government). Wrinkle factor....that of the belly, when you get hungry you will really work to find something to do. Things become more efficient after a collapse, simpler of sorts. Hoards of lawyers, accountants, politicians, etc. don't have a legal infrastructure that brings them work and a lavish lifestyle...people don't have the money and won't pay what they have when it means starvation. The guy who can fix a water leak or repair an electrical circuit or plant a garden is in demand and has value...all those value added people suck wind...maybe not a bad thing from time to time to get things in proper perspective.
Mark 14:7 (King James Version)
7 For ye have the poor with you always, and whensoever ye will ye may do them good: but me ye have not always.
-
Brother Rastus, please accept an Amen from Crusader.
-
TAB, what in the heck are you talking about? Do you think that guy that has 100 mil and puts 5 mil a year away has not already paid taxes? Put it in gear man, what is right, in your example, about him being taxed again because he has money and doesn't want to spend it?
you missed the context of my post. Some one brought up the fairtax.org. they want income tax to go away and just have a sales tax on every thing. I was showing how that system is flawed.
-
you missed the context of my post. Some one brought up the fairtax.org. they want income tax to go away and just have a sales tax on every thing. I was showing how that system is flawed.
Gee, get 100% of my paycheck, and do away with the IRS, take a considerable amount of power AWAY from gov't,. Freedom to invest in my retirement without the gov't holding a gun to my head?????
I'll take the flaws.... Plus TAB have you read the book?
The FairTax:
* Enables workers to keep their entire paychecks
* Enables retirees to keep their entire pensions
* Refunds in advance the tax on purchases of basic necessities
* Allows American products to compete fairly
* Brings transparency and accountability to tax policy
* Ensures Social Security and Medicare funding
* Closes all loopholes and brings fairness to taxation
* Abolishes the IRS
http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_main
-
Your telling me he should pay less tax then say a family of 4 with a household income of say 60k? Please exmplain to me how thats fair.
I'm saying with a flat sales tax one is paying taxes on things they consume, it's strictly based on their lifestyle or business model. The current system offers plenty of incentives to be NON-productive.
Why should some one like me, pay more tax then some one that pushes paper all day for the same pay? There is no doubt about it, I did more financial good to the local area, then any office worker.
Because you are consuming more to get more, TAB! And remember the extra costs due to the tax WILL be passed on to your customers and/or employees.
Following your logic: lower income people pay a greater proportion of their income for housing, transportation, clothing, medical care, etc. Why don't we rig the system to make you and I pay an excise tax on our housing, transportation, clothing, etc. to help them out? It's not fair that you live in a nicer home, drive a better vehicle, and have nicer clothes than the poor. In fact you are exploiting labor to enrich yourself by keeping the profits from your business, you bourgeois bastard!
-
I'm saying with a flat sales tax one is paying taxes on things they consume, it's strictly based on their lifestyle or business model. The current system offers plenty of incentives to be NON-productive.
Because you are consuming more to get more, TAB! And remember the extra costs due to the tax WILL be passed on to your customers and/or employees.
Following your logic: lower income people pay a greater proportion of their income for housing, transportation, clothing, medical care, etc. Why don't we rig the system to make you and I pay an excise tax on our housing, transportation, clothing, etc. to help them out? It's not fair that you live in a nicer home, drive a better vehicle, and have nicer clothes than the poor. In fact you are exploiting labor to enrich yourself by keeping the profits from your business, you bourgeois bastard!
This is exactly why people hate the Healthcare bill
-
UPDATE: Confirmed. Obama favors a VAT
Grow the beast so that we will be forced to feed it:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20100421/ap_on_bi_ge/us_obama_tax
WASHINGTON – President Barack Obama suggested Wednesday that a new value-added tax on Americans is still on the table, seeming to show more openness to the idea than his aides have expressed in recent days.
Before deciding what revenue options are best for dealing with the deficit and the economy, Obama said in an interview with CNBC, "I want to get a better picture of what our options are."
*Read my lips, no new taxes:
“I can make a firm pledge. Under my plan, no family making less than $250,000 a year will see any form of tax increase. Not your income tax, not your payroll tax, not your capital gains taxes, not any of your taxes.”
-
on what Constitutional basis???
not like that has stopped them lately....
Constitutional..... They don't need no stinking Constitutional. :'(