It is nice and equal, the difference is what you choose to buy and how much you buy. If everyone is taking home 100% of what they make, whats the problem? I understand that thier is a basic cost for necessities, but that occurs with any rate. We dont have progressive state sales taxes, and somehow people are able to eat. This isnt seperate but equal, its one law. Everyone is treated equally.

The increased cost is a concern. Some say the increase wont be much and could be lower. Im not so sure about the costs coming down. But we would have consumers with more money on payday. And businesses with less costs and HOPEFULLY overseas companies actually coming here because of the tax advantages.

You kinda proved my point with your tax holiday. You put off normal spending to wait for the day you can save on tax. Now why not move that towards your INCOME tax, everyday?

1/11/2010 4:55:51 PM

Quote :

"It is nice and equal, the difference is what you choose to buy and how much you buy. If everyone is taking home 100% of what they make, whats the problem? I understand that thier is a basic cost for necessities, but that occurs with any rate. We dont have progressive state sales taxes, and somehow people are able to eat. This isnt seperate but equal, its one law. Everyone is treated equally."

I'm really not into pointing out grammar and spelling mistakes in an effort to argue against someone's point, but goddamn you are retarded and it's not surprising that your reading comprehension skills are extremely lacking.

1/11/2010 4:59:27 PM

I'd love to be able to drop the income tax rate to 0% for everyone, but until we pay down the deficit and reign the government back in to a reasonable size there is no way to make it happen, and as long as we have the same yahoos running things as we currently do there is no way that either will happen.

The sad fact is that the American people don't have the collective stones to take some short term pain for long term gain.

1/11/2010 5:02:03 PM

Quote :

"If people feel like they're getting something useful from the government they are less likely to attack it violently than if they feel like they're getting nothing."

An absurd notion. The planet is filled with governments that literally rob their populous blind, and die of old age in office.

Revolutions are more complicated and have causes that usually have nothing to do with either inequality or income redistribution. Your position that the U.S. was just out of the womb is telling, we had just finished waging a Revolution that, if anything, reduced redistribution in much of the land (the Crown operated various charities throughout the colonies).

More to the point, the poor do not lead revolutions. Not once. Castro was a college graduate. So was Lenin. And the U.S. founding fathers were all wealthy businessmen. The French revolution was one group of aristocrats waging war against another. So to suggest that ignoring the plight of the poor will lead to a revolution is lunacy. It has never happened, not once in recorded history that I know of. it is about power and who wields it, not what they do with it.

1/11/2010 5:03:03 PM

1917 AD

1/11/2010 5:09:34 PM

Yeah, not quite.

1/11/2010 5:14:05 PM

Quote :

"I'm really not into pointing out grammar and spelling mistakes in an effort to argue against someone's point"

Well Im glad you made an exception. And great points, btw. I pay more attention when typing my CV than on a message board pissing contest, but my grammar is pretty bad. Thanks for noticing.


Good points Kurtis. I am not talking about a tax rate of 0. Im talking about the fairtax, which is like a national sales tax. One of the hopes is that people will call for the spending to stop when they actually have to pay for it, instead of someone else paying for it.

[Edited on January 11, 2010 at 5:16 PM. Reason : .]

1/11/2010 5:15:19 PM

It's not your grammar that's the problem like I said. It's just very indicative of how poor your reading comprehension skills are. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're actually an intelligent person, but the fact that you can't grasp the fact that $10000 means a fuck ton lot more to someone who makes $50000 than it does to someone who makes $1,000,000 doesn't say a whole lot about your critical thinking ability.

1/11/2010 5:19:37 PM

Oh, i'd be in favor something like that too, but it'll never happen because then the 1/3 of Americans currently paying $0 or less would have to pay something and they'll never agree to that. You need a plan that would be good for the top 60%+ of voting tax payers in order for it to ever even have a chance of making it through the legislature.

IMO, the fairtax, a flat tax, and a national income tax are all a pipe dream.

1/11/2010 5:20:48 PM

Quote :

"It's not your grammar that's the problem like I said. It's just very indicative of how poor your reading comprehension skills are. I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt that you're actually an intelligent person, but the fact that you can't grasp the fact that $10000 means a fuck ton lot more to someone who makes $50000 than it does to someone who makes $1,000,000 doesn't say a whole lot about your critical thinking ability."

why are you comparing a 20% taxation rate to a 1% taxation rate?

your argument should be more like, "does $10k from $50k mean more to a person than $200k from $1mill?" which I say no. it means the same.



I think everyone should pay taxes. No matter how much you make, you should have to pay some income tax. A small %, yes, but I think its crazy that so many people pay zero. I also think automatic withholding should be eliminated which would force all of us to actively save to pay our taxes...once that happened I think you would see real tax reform.

to the original post,

I am generally in favor of something more along the lines of a FairTax because it takes power away from the government. However, knowing that we will likely never see that, more tax brackets makes sense.

1/11/2010 5:29:55 PM

Quote :

"I agree with Boone."

The top .001% should be taxed more than than the top .01% should be taxed more than the top .1% should be taxed more than the top 1%.

1/11/2010 5:55:26 PM

Quote :

"IMO, the fairtax, a flat tax, and a national income tax are all a pipe dream. "

sadly, I agree. However, you still gotta stand for something. Maybe the tide will change once people realize we cant afford this shit anymore.

420, if that is what you think I fail to understand or my arguement then Im not doing a good job making my point. My point is that we cannot assume how much a certain amount of income means MORE to one than another, and you certainly shouldnt legislate that way. There are plenty of millionares that never made more than 40k, then there are plenty of people who earned 6 figures who are broke. Sure they spent their money differently and lived different lifestyles, but you cant dictate that. Im just saying that with politics/govt you get into problems when you treat people differently. It causes divisions. A clear history of it. Just look at this thread. Is that any better? I really am a horrible writer. haha

1/11/2010 6:15:59 PM

Quote :

"There are plenty of millionares that never made more than 40k, then there are plenty of people who earned 6 figures who are broke."

First of all, there's no way you can believe that.

Second of all... what?

1/11/2010 6:27:31 PM

He is pointing out the difference between income and wealth. An income tax only taxes legal income. A sales tax would tax legal income, illegal income, and both inherited and imported wealth.

1/11/2010 6:45:21 PM

No, I think he's talking about responsible spending and investment. Think about all the lottery winners who end up in abject poverty, or all the former pro athletes who are now janitors. On the flip side, there are people like my roommates father who was a truck driver for 30 years and is now retired and worth well over a million dollars, despite never making a six figure salary. There are tons of examples like both cases.

1/11/2010 7:15:05 PM

^exactly, its impossible to state how much or little one needs based on income alone. What im arguing is that we shouldnt. Let everyone keep what they earn, just tax it when they spend. People can control their level of spending, which is something they have more control over. (to an extent)

Loneshark is right about now collecting taxes on those who previously avoided them. There is a reason why illegals are attractive hires. Now everyone is a federal tax payer, including tourists, illegals, and under the table workers in many different professions.

1/11/2010 7:36:29 PM

Oh no doubt, that's why so frequently those in favor of legalizing marijuana frequently add the addendum, and tax it. There is a HUGE black market that is going totally untaxed at the moment as well as a huge amount of income being paid "under the table." A national sales tax would certainly fix some of this, but we'll never see the income tax go away completely. People have gotten far to use to all the "free" government services, and frankly why should they want it changed, for about 60 million Americans it is free.

1/11/2010 7:41:33 PM

The Fair Tax is a great idea. But I think it would get corrupted pretty badly by today's politicians.
I doubt they would pass it in any form that would fulfill its potential.

And we may clap our hands in glee as we raise taxes on the high producers of this country. We may cheer as we stick it to those greedy rich, who got their money by ripping off the poor. We have to strip away their property so that the poor won't revolt.

But a basic rule is that whatever activity you tax, you get less. And if you continue to raise taxes on the job creating people who make life much more bearable for the rest of us...you will get less jobs, less innovation, less ambition. You end up with a bored, depressed population of uncreative and unmotivated serfs who eek out a meager living on the scraps that their centralized gov't throws them.

1/11/2010 10:56:57 PM

my pay went down about $10 this year due to paying more fed taxes - clearly something is wrong with the system

1/11/2010 10:58:26 PM

Quote :

"I also think automatic withholding should be eliminated which would force all of us to actively save to pay our taxes...once that happened I think you would see real tax reform."

Regardless of the tax system in place, I think this would be a great idea. Too many people have no idea what they are paying.

Other than they are getting $700 back. And, if they sign here, they get walk out with $500 right now!

1/11/2010 11:35:28 PM

Quote :

"But a basic rule is that whatever activity you tax, you get less. And if you continue to raise taxes on the job creating people who make life much more bearable for the rest of us...you will get less jobs, less innovation, less ambition. You end up with a bored, depressed population of uncreative and unmotivated serfs who eek out a meager living on the scraps that their centralized gov't throws them. "

As history has shown, this is complete bullshit.

This is a perfect example of an extremist ideology. You're the opposite side of the coin from the people who say that the world would be perfect if only people could have all their needs provided for-- their creativity and inventiveness would flourish.

1/11/2010 11:38:48 PM

Quote :

"But a basic rule is that whatever activity you tax, you get less. And if you continue to raise taxes on the job creating people who make life much more bearable for the rest of us...you will get less jobs, less innovation, less ambition. You end up with a bored, depressed population of uncreative and unmotivated serfs who eek out a meager living on the scraps that their centralized gov't throws them."

Yeah, I don't know about that. Taxing a billionaire at a higher rate isn't really going to cause their company to provide less jobs, less innovation, or anything else. These individuals are sitting on a ton of money that isn't even being used in a productive way, for the most part.

The taxes that really kill the economy or the ones on businesses, especially small businesses. Entrepreneurs are what make the economy work. When it's nearly impossible for a young entrepreneur to get into business because it costs so much, that destroys innovation. A higher tax on the super rich and a lower tax on the less than super rich would probably be a net benefit.

It's all hypothetical at this point, though. If we actually wanted to cut deficits and reduce the debt, we'd have to have high taxes on pretty much everyone. The situation we're in now is a result of politicians promising (and delivering) the world but not raising taxes enough to pay for it, since they were too cowardly to deal with the electoral ramifications.

1/12/2010 12:02:46 AM

Quote :

"If everyone is taking home 100% of what they make, whats the problem? I understand that thier is a basic cost for necessities, but that occurs with any rate."

It's like you answer your own question.

A very poor family is not paying income tax. They are paying a modest sales tax, that's true. Under something like what you suggest, they pay a substantial sales tax. Their taxes go up, plain and simple.

Quote :

"Im not so sure about the costs coming down. "

At least you have some sense. You know how government budgets never shrink, even if their expenses do? You think private enterprise will be much better, when they know than can keep milking us like they always have?

Quote :

"Now why not move that towards your INCOME tax, everyday?"

Because I have to buy shit, and because if the federal government relied on sales taxes and offered a holiday, it'd go broke. People would go to great lengths to wait until the one day or weekend when they could buy a car without paying massive taxes on it (which is probably part of the reason why NC limits its tax holidays to education-related items like computers).

Quote :

"The planet is filled with governments that literally rob their populous blind, and die of old age in office. "

And they accomplish this either through totalitarianism/authoritarianism unheard of in this country, or (and often in conjunction with) buying off the poorer masses with things billed as benefits.

Quote :

"More to the point, the poor do not lead revolutions. Not once."

"Not once" is a pretty bold statement. I'm not going to bother finding a full list of examples that reveal that as bullshit, but Toussaint L'ouverture (a slave until he was 33) and Ho Chi Mihn (who paid his way through the world until he started getting revolutionary training by working as kitchen helpers on ships).

I also never said that all revolutions were the product of poverty or wealth distribution issues. You can quit bringing up the American Revolution. And in other examples, it was often not a poor person or cadre at the very top of the fight, but the poor were frequently the driving force.

1/12/2010 3:23:10 AM

I wonder why Robert Mugabe is still in power.

1/12/2010 8:02:57 AM

ok, I have to go back to this:

Quote :

"Yep, Tenn has no income tax. They are also benefiting from the influx of jobs from California. The internet and selby county hurt tenn books more than the current downturn."

What are you even saying here? Influx of jobs from California? The internet hurts (I assume you mean) the budget more than the current downturn?

And buget revenues continue to fall across the board. How is "the internet" the fault?
http://tennessee.gov/finance/newsrel/060809MayRevenues.shtml

And I'm not going to bore people with my Shelby (I assume that's what you meant, doctor) County rant. Needless to say, whatever you probably believe is wrong and in my time living there, it became clear to me that the white flight suburbs and a refusal by anyone outside Memphis proper to give a shit were just as harmful as Ford family or Herenton cronyism.

1/12/2010 9:59:23 AM

Yes, shelby county is what I meant.

And I was talking long term effects Pink, Tenn has been open longer than the last 10 months. And as long as I can remember they have been struggling with TennCare (or whatever they rename it after it bankrupts every couple years) Tennessee spents the majority of its money on health and human services followed by education.

More people are becoming used to buying online, which hurts states revenue. (even longer than a 10 month downturn)

I lived and went to school in shelby county(memphis). yeah, the outsiders not giving a shit about memphis is the problem.

1/12/2010 12:06:01 PM