Quote :

"If you think it's fair for 90% of Americans to pay ~18%, but the richest 10% of Americans to pay less than this, then by all means, vote for Cain. "

9/28/2011 9:21:05 AM

I hope that wasn't directed at me... and if so, do you even know what the Fair Tax movement is?


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FairTax

(I know that is just wiki, but it gives you a basic idea, which your quote, if truly directed at me, shows you have little of)



and with that, I'm out- not wasting my 30,000th posts on this squabble

9/28/2011 9:24:55 AM

I really don't think the fair tax is fair. It's as fair as the the clear skies act clears our skies. It's a smoke and mirrors moniker. I don't think most of the supporters understand how regressive the "fair tax" is, or what that would do to our society which is already dealing with the tragedy of the growing gap between the rich and poor being the largest gap in decades. The fair tax would slow social mobility and turn the dying American dream into a nightmare where you wake up in a bathtub full of ice while the Koch brothers are masturbating above you.

9/28/2011 9:42:19 AM

now that I have wasted my 30k post, I can come back in here...



how is it better to tax the people who are hiring others more? tax them 1 million dollars, and that gets the government 1 million dollars, but that could be used to pay 20 people 50g's a year instead. You tax the rich and the corporations more, and the folks at the top won't take the hit- the folks at the bottom will


and with fair tax, everyone pays for what they use, not what they earn. People can't get around tax evasion, or just "not exist," (ie: the illegal aliens that a lot of real right wing contenders say are putting a burden on the system- whenever they need to eat, get gas, buy clothes, etc... they will be doing their part to support the system they are living in).


I really do want to hear more examples of why you think this is a bad idea, rather than "smoke and mirrors"

Quote :

" Retail prices could fall. Fair Tax supporters say 20% of all prices today represent the hidden income and payroll taxes embedded in the price of everything we buy. not sure how much I agree with that, but it is an argument used Eliminating corporate income taxes and capital-gains taxes would make the United States a more desirable place to do business. Cut transaction costs, and you encourage more people to get into the game. There would be reduced losses of tax revenue from the underground economy. Illegal immigrants, many of whom do not report income or pay taxes, would be forced to pay their share of the Fair Tax. So would the 40 million foreign tourists who visit the U.S. each year. Social Security and Medicare taxes could be eliminated. These regressive taxes are probably the largest tax burdens on lower-income taxpayers. The Social Security Administration will get 6.2% of all wages and salaries up to $102,000 in 2008. Medicare gets an additional 1.45% from all wages and salaries. The Fair Tax would minimize the congressional tinkering and behavioral manipulation that permeates our current tax code. Special benefit provisions and lobbyist-generated deductions and exclusions would be gone. Substituting the Fair Tax could mean that the Internal Revenue Service could be disbanded. (That might sell the deal.)"

that is just a quick set of common arguments for Fair Tax- start giving some real arguments against it

Another good one that harks on the second agreed point from above:

Quote :

"A huge pro of the fair tax is it would significantly broaden the tax base. Illegal activity (such as selling drugs) that creates large amounts of income would now get taxed. Under the current system we just get lots of rich drug dealers. Under this system they now get taxed every time they buy something."

- and don't try to twist the words and say that I think they will tax weed... but whenever they go buy a new lexus with weed money, it is gonna be taxed appropriately

I don't think Cain is for this, and I don't care- I just saw a bunch of people arguing taxes, and thought I'd throw out another argument into there and see which yokels came poking through the fire to try and tell me how dumb this was. I'm sure there is actually someone out there with some good points against it, and that is what I'm trying to find!

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 9:51 AM. Reason : w]

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 9:54 AM. Reason : s]

9/28/2011 9:43:26 AM

regardless of whether you agree with the "fairness" of fairtax, it's not as simple as described:
http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/jan/23/adding-fairtax/
http://mises.org/daily/1975

ignoring that, realize that "fair" is completely subjective and as such, the fairtax is only fair to some people

i am a huge proponent of higher taxes on luxuries (of course, what qualifies as a "luxury" is debatable), no taxes on necessities (again, the definition is arguable, but certain foods would qualify), and progressively higher taxation based on income

of course it's not "fair" to impose higher taxes on those who make more money, but i have no problem whatsoever making those who hold a higher percentage of the country's wealth pay more to maintain the infrastructure...again, i recognize that this is not "fair" by some accounts, but one person's definition of "fair" is no more or less "correct" than another's

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 9:56 AM. Reason : links]

9/28/2011 9:54:45 AM

if you buy a 75,000 dollar house, and I buy a 750,000 dollar house, I will be paying my proportionately larger cut towards taxes- but this way I get something out of it, and it isn't just coming out of my taxes. People will not all the sudden start living below their means if FairTax is implemented...


^and keep in mind, a lot of arguments you are posting are based off of various different plans of the fair tax... I didn't say what was put out there was the best way of doing it, but in theory, if they can get the numbers right, I feel it is the best way to do it. And how is paying for what you use not fair? if you can't afford something, don't buy it... the money they want to pay back to the families based on the poverty level will help cover those "necessities" you are talking about

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 9:58 AM. Reason : w]

9/28/2011 9:56:41 AM

Quote :

"if you buy a 75,000 dollar house, and I buy a 750,000 dollar house, I will be paying my proportionately larger cut towards taxes"

valuation makes this argument invalid in regards to fair taxation

Quote :

"And how is paying for what you use not fair?"

how is redistribution of wealth not fair? not ever "poor" person is solely responsible for their the poorness and not every wealthy person is solely responsible for their wealth

this is my point...you want a simple form of fairness, i want a more complete form...you're neither wrong nor right, but neither am i

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 10:01 AM. Reason : .]

9/28/2011 9:59:01 AM

Quote :

"them 1 million dollars, and that gets the government 1 million dollars, but that could be used to pay 20 people 50g's a year instead. You tax the rich and the corporations more, and the folks at the top won't take the hit- the folks at the bottom will"

Trickle-down economics has never worked, and never will work. You can make arguments for why you think it may work at some point in the future, but once you bring human nature into economics it's pretty easy to see why it doesn't work. Saving a rich person 1M in income tax will probably create a job at an offshore bank quicker than it creates a job in the US.

Also, I think this is not just a bad idea, but a HORRIBLE idea - because of what I said earlier about what it will do to the gap between the rich and the poor and social mobility. It's already bad, and the fair tax's regressive nature would make it much worse. When the gap gets too wide it always ends up in the lower class revolting.

9/28/2011 10:05:01 AM

There's a difference between telling that company/person they have an extra $1M to play with and taking that $1M away, thus never giving the business a chance to expand with that money

9/28/2011 10:50:02 AM

Yeah you're right, and we need to take a business' marginal propensity to save into account.

9/28/2011 11:16:28 AM

Cynicism at it's best...

9/28/2011 11:22:50 AM

Quote :

"Social Security and Medicare taxes could be eliminated. These regressive taxes are probably the largest tax burdens on lower-income taxpayers. The Social Security Administration will get 6.2% of all wages and salaries up to $102,000 in 2008. Medicare gets an additional 1.45% from all wages and salaries."

Um...so did they just forget to come up with new funding for these or am I to assume they want them gone?

9/28/2011 12:26:07 PM

or are you to assume that they will be calculated in with the fair tax?

hell, you can assume they want to stick their cocks up a monkey's butt

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 12:53 PM. Reason : because, you know, you are free to assume whatever you would like]

9/28/2011 12:40:09 PM

I'll assume that whoever wrote that wasn't smart enough to cover up the glaring hole in their plan.

9/28/2011 1:00:49 PM

Quote :

"You tax the rich and the corporations more, and the folks at the top won't take the hit- the folks at the bottom will "

The folks at the bottom take the hit either way.

The "people who are hiring others more" aren't hiring others more.

9/28/2011 1:56:42 PM

nope the rich are just keeping their money, firing their workers, and doing everything themselves.... sound logic!

9/28/2011 1:59:07 PM

yes i said they were firing all of their workers.

9/28/2011 2:00:39 PM

it's like you people don't know we are in a recession- almost a full blown second depression, yet you still blame the business owners (who are losing money too) for not hiring people? LET'S TAX EM MORE, CAUSE THAT'LL SHOW EM! AND THEN GIVE THE MONEY TO THE POOR! I'M ROBIN HOOD BITCHES RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE

9/28/2011 2:03:40 PM

one problem in the fair tax debate is assuming government revenues/spending/size remain the same.

the fair tax would be a great system if the government were downsized dramatically.

and that I support.

9/28/2011 2:04:53 PM

well massive government reforms have been in order for a looooong time, but I don't see that happening regardless of who is in power

9/28/2011 2:05:58 PM

BING BONG, SING ALONG!

YOUR TEAM'S HERMAN CAIN 'CAUSE YOUR VIEWS ARE WRONG!

-Troy

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 2:14 PM. Reason : ]

9/28/2011 2:14:17 PM

I know


I hate being flawed

9/28/2011 2:14:49 PM

I, too, can communicate in extremes

YES LETS DOWNSIZE THE GOVERNMENT, FUCK ROADS AND SCHOOLS AND POLICE, CONTRACT IT ALL OUT

9/28/2011 2:15:26 PM

Quote :

"And this stat you just can't run from. The top 1 percent, you know, those rich people that are very fortunate -- they don't work hard, they're fortunate. They were born into royalty. Those rich people, the 1 percent of the country, they pay almost 40 percent of America's federal income tax of the entire pot. "

But I guess they aren't paying their "fair share"

Fair Tax is the way to go, Bio makes several good points above. But it also helps restore jobs in the U.S., primiarily because there is no incentive to having a offshore business.

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 2:21 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2011 2:16:24 PM

PS, I'm not a Cain supporter per say- I do agree with some of his stances, but I would only vote for him if I agreed with more of them than the other guy


^you are MR EXTREME

9/28/2011 2:16:55 PM

per se

9/28/2011 2:44:35 PM

Quote :

"YES LETS DOWNSIZE THE GOVERNMENT, FUCK ROADS AND SCHOOLS AND POLICE, CONTRACT IT ALL OUT"

while I know your comment was in jest, I'm pretty sure nobody in this thread said to downsize the state governments. Since those items are the responsibility of the state and not the fed. (excluding the Interstate highway system)

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 2:54 PM. Reason : k]

9/28/2011 2:54:07 PM

Corporations right now are just sitting on piles of money, for real. If you want "the people who make jobs" to actually make jobs you need to raise the capital gains tax pretty drastically to get them to actually do something with that money instead of letting it sit there and draw interest.

Quote :

""And this stat you just can't run from. The top 1 percent, you know, those rich people that are very fortunate -- they don't work hard, they're fortunate. They were born into royalty. Those rich people, the 1 percent of the country, they pay almost 40 percent of America's federal income tax of the entire pot."

The top 20% owns 85% of the wealth and the top 1% is continuing to get richer despite the recession so yeah I don't feel too bad for them

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 7:40 PM. Reason : ]

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 7:59 PM. Reason : Realized my last chart isn't really up to date so http://blogs.wsj.com/wealth/2010/04/30/top-1-incre]

9/28/2011 7:36:42 PM

But they're the job creators[/Boortz]

9/28/2011 7:45:45 PM

It’s amazing the Bush tax policy has maintained for so long, despite having no real-world basis.

And it’s mindboggling that the tea partyers have no grasp on the economic realities of this country, and continue to support destructive policies.

To quote myself…

Quote :

"A representative government is literally an extension of its citizenry. If the gov works against the country's interest, it’s because a certain percentage of the population has started to act as a virus or cancer and direct the countries immune system to destroy itself. Stop thinking like a virus, and actually think of ways to FIX things [tea baggers]."

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 7:55 PM. Reason : ]

9/28/2011 7:53:22 PM

Quote :

"I really don't think the fair tax is fair."

Of course you think that. Tell me do you find it more "fair" than the sales tax?

^yes the destructive policies of limited govt and people keeping more of what they earn and self reliance.... oh the horror. (well for unproductive maybe)

[Edited on September 28, 2011 at 10:17 PM. Reason : .]

9/28/2011 10:16:10 PM

^^^^ http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/30/top-1-paid-more-in-federal-income-taxes-than-bottom-95-in-07/

So the top 1% earned about 22% of total income but paid 40% of total taxes in 2006... Again paying their "fair share"

9/29/2011 8:52:00 AM

Quote :

"Janeane Garofalo: "Herman Cain is probably well liked by some of the Republicans because it hides the racist elements of the Republican party. Conservative movement and tea party movement, one in the same. "People like Karl Rove liked to keep the racism very covert. And so Herman Cain provides this great opportunity say you can say 'Look, this is not a racist, anti-immigrant, anti-female, anti-gay movement. Look we have a black man.'""

Oh, liberals

9/29/2011 9:11:00 AM

it would be nice if celebrities went to the booths and voted, and chose not to address political matters publically. because they all sound pretty stupid

9/29/2011 9:44:31 AM

^^^There are other taxes out there than income tax. Look at total wealth.

9/29/2011 11:20:21 AM

What exactly is "fair share" anyways? How does one quantify that?

9/29/2011 11:46:57 AM

I assumed "fair share" meant "less than or equal to percentage of income"

[Edited on September 29, 2011 at 12:05 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2011 12:02:32 PM

Not sure what you are trying to prove with that graph....

"Fair Share" is a good question (which is the problem with the progressive income tax system), but O brings it up quite a bit and he gives the impression that the middle and lower class pay the majority of the taxes, which simply is not true.

9/29/2011 12:21:00 PM

Quote :

"Relative to Average Incomes IF Distribution Had Prevailed"

I'm working on a glue and glitter chart, will post shortly.

9/29/2011 12:23:52 PM

The point is the growing wealth gap. Wealth inequality has not been affected by the recession (hastened if anything), and the top 1% controls about 38% of the wealth while the top 10% controls 71%. The fact that they richest pay a larger percentage of income tax is immaterial because they are still getting richer at a faster rate than anyone else. Long-term capital gains is where they keep their money, and that's only taxed at 15%, so income tax is pretty much immaterial by itself if you're looking at people paying their "fair share."

9/29/2011 12:29:32 PM

Nothing is stopping any of you libs from getting your piece of that wealth.

The problem is you want the government to take it from the producers and just give it to you instead of you having to earn it.


And you come up with these charts that show that successful people are doing better and better than average people and want to blame that on corporations and those successful people for doing too good when the real blame lies on our crappy education system not preparing a generation or so to do anything, and public policy continually funding their unproductive (well, maybe reproductive) lifestyles.

[Edited on September 29, 2011 at 12:38 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2011 12:35:27 PM

9/29/2011 12:38:19 PM

Quote :

"it's like you people don't know we are in a recession- almost a full blown second depression"

by "almost," i assume you mean "not really"...someone didn't pay attention to what the great depression actually entailed

[Edited on September 29, 2011 at 12:45 PM. Reason : .]

9/29/2011 12:42:48 PM

Quote :

"And you come up with these charts that show that successful people are doing better and better than average people and want to blame that on corporations and those successful people for doing too good when the real blame lies on our crappy education system not preparing a generation or so to do anything, and public policy continually funding their unproductive (well, maybe reproductive) lifestyles."

Literally the Republican camapign platform: We love America even though 95% of its citizens are unproductive and worthless (because we run the system that allows us to increase our wealth exponentially to the detriment of everyone else) but of course you aren't in that 95%! Hey, look over there, someone's getting an abortion!

9/29/2011 12:43:50 PM

^ haha!

9/29/2011 1:06:02 PM

Chit chat political threads > Soapbox political threads

9/29/2011 1:33:53 PM

NEWS FLASH: It's easier to make money when you already have money.

9/29/2011 1:50:28 PM

No shit

9/29/2011 1:56:26 PM

Quote :

"Literally the Republican camapign platform: We love America even though 95% of its citizens are unproductive and worthless (because we run the system that allows us to increase our wealth exponentially to the detriment of everyone else) but of course you aren't in that 95%! Hey, look over there, someone's getting an abortion!"

Literally what ActionPants is saying: That 5% of America s'got all the monies and contributes nothing! How is it fair that they get all this money off the blood, sweat, and tears from the 95% of us living in African-esqe conditions! Government, since these people obviously don't know what they're doing, please redistribute the money. I won't save a dime I swear. I wont even reinvest it because that actually doesn't make anyone else's life better. Hey look over here, I'm using contradictory rhetoric and using graphs! GRAPHS!

[Edited on September 29, 2011 at 2:27 PM. Reason : ]

9/29/2011 2:26:21 PM

Actually they know exactly what they're doing and that's the problem!

Not really sure what your point is with the last three sentences but sorry if you don't like graphs/concrete data!

9/29/2011 2:39:28 PM