z31maniac wrote:fast_eddie_72 wrote: I've still not see the right cite a figure for how low is low enough.I'm hardly the "right" as I consider myself a Libertarian, but I think for the third time in this thread, I'll post: www.fairtax.org
Well, yeah, but as you say, you're not the right.
The tax on necessities is usually the first thing people bring up about a new tax structure. A general flat tax does not address this. The Fairtax does however. Most people that oppose the Fairtax do not even understand the basics of the Fairtax. It usually just gets thrown into the flat tax/national sales tax pile(which deserves to be stepped on). My favorite part of the Fairax is it will put the power of funding the federal government in the hands of the people and not the other way around. The over spending is a whole other topic that needs to be addressed though. That is a berkeleying mess.
You want people who buy corporate jets to pay more taxes? Well with the embedded tax gone and the 23% now in place would fork nearly $15M of the currently $65M, for a C650 corporate jet, over to the government without forcing the companies to pay the payroll tax and breaking the back of the people building the jets by taxing their income. Let the big spenders pay the majority of tax(they already do, but this would be more "fair").
*Of course I used the corporate jet hot button word to grab your attention.
And I am not the right either, their social politics are waaaaaay too much for me.
Signal < noise... so...
mmm....redheads
In reply to Anti-stance:
Just a national sales tax.
The one problem are the people who just accumulate wealth. At a certain point in life, it becomes virtually impossible to spend more money. So if you are in the market for a Corporate Jet, the odds of you having massive amounts of money in reserve are quite high. Considering that people who scrape by would probably be taxed on 95-100% of their income vs. people who have means, who can easily live off of 70-80% of their income vs. the wealthy- who have no problem living off of 50% of their income.
the other problem is off shore spending. if you have the means, you can easily fund a life somewhere other than the US, and all the money you spend there does not go toward tax. Personally, I can just have a second home somewhere else, spend more money there, and walla- no tax on what I spend overseas.
The FAQ on the fairtax site even says that nothing is exempt, including food and medicine.
Funny that the fair tax is kept being brought up, but it's a no brainer to figure out how to not pay taxes.
Far, far, far from fair.
ronholm wrote: I think you misunderstand.. I don't think we should be forcing people to give. We should be teaching them to give.
Taxation via the honor system? I think we've proven that what we currently have is damned close to the honor system. It's not working. Not when large corporations wait for a tax holiday to bring profits back home to the U.S. Link - It's NPR so hold your nose. Strictly informational and not biased. I swear.
Which brings us to...
fast_eddie_72 wrote: Shouldn't the burden fall on the people who have gotten what they asked for yet delivered larger deficits and poor economic results?
I love how everyone talks about "job creators" when this topic comes up. "We can't tax the job creators! If we do they won't create jobs for us!" If they're job creators...where're the f'in jobs?! They're overseas. With all the squirreled away money corporations are waiting for a tax holiday to bring back. Again, the middle class are played for chumps as we pay taxes the rich and corporate are allowed to avoid.
^No corporate income tax, no need to put the money overseas to start with.
alfadriver wrote: the other problem is off shore spending. if you have the means, you can easily fund a life somewhere other than the US, and all the money you spend there does not go toward tax. Personally, I can just have a second home somewhere else, spend more money there, and walla- no tax on what I spend overseas.
This is what I don't like about the Fairtax. It would just drive those who can afford to spend lots of money to spend their money else-where.
What we want to do is tax folks who make money off our great American system. There are Chinese owned companies making money in America and using the same tax avoidance strategies as their greedy American counterparts. There are American who are making millions off doing business in China, but live in security and freedom of the USA.
A true fair tax is one that says if you've been successful doing business in/from America the country wants some of that back as a "Thank You" for being so awesome.
fast_eddie_72 wrote: Indeed it is not. I've still not see the right cite a figure for how low is low enough. Reagan called for lower taxes. He got them. Bush called for lower taxes. He got them. They are now very, very low. Yet Romney wants lower taxes. Is there any amount of tax reduction that will satisfy them? You say the left should say what is "fair". How can they? They've lost every round.Shouln't the burden fall on the people who have gotten what they asked for yet delivered larger deficits and poor economic results?
It's easy, just throw out a number and let "us", as in "we the people", decide.
You conveniently forget that our deficits and poor economic results are the results of bi-partisan co-operations over the last 50yrs and that includes those two unfunded wars. But go ahead and continue to profer your blame-game as it fits a particular narrative.
Imagine how productive our political system would be if every year we could vote on a set of ballot questions.
"Do you like getting free food, clothes, and living essentials for you and your 8 kids?"
YES! - says %40 of our population
Think taxes are bad now, imagine if you put that up to a national ballot question.
z31maniac wrote: ^No corporate income tax, no need to put the money overseas to start with.
NO federal taxes on anything except new goods and corporations will be lined-up at the borders and fighting to get in.
Isn't it amazing how so many "progressive thinking" people choose to demagogue the FairTax and want to continue with a policy that's the economic version of waterboarding?
Xceler8x wrote:ronholm wrote: I think you misunderstand.. I don't think we should be forcing people to give. We should be teaching them to give.Taxation via the honor system? I think we've proven that what we currently have is damned close to the honor system. It's not working. Not when large corporations wait for a tax holiday to bring profits back home to the U.S. Link - It's NPR so hold your nose. Strictly informational and not biased. I swear.
If you want a 'fair tax' the only way I see it being fair is if everyone pays the same amount.. that is the only 'fair'....
Rich, poor, broke.. whatever.. you owe X amount.. or you work it off in community service.
I don't think the tax could should be any more fair than I think politicians should be running around playing robin hood... At the end of the day Robin hood was little more than a thief and coward.
These groups lobby for such things because the gummit is powerful enough to deliver it..
You destroy the fabric of men when talking about taxes and money in such ways.
z31maniac wrote: ^No corporate income tax, no need to put the money overseas to start with.
Might want to read the link next time:
"A group called Win America is pushing the government to allow companies to repatriate hundreds of billions of dollars in cash parked in offshore accounts. Normally, that money would be subject to a tax rate of up to 35 percent. But lobbyists are hoping to strike a deal that would temporarily lower the rate to about 5 percent. Bloomberg Businessweek Magazine published an article that shows how dozens of former congressional aides are part of this effort to help major corporations secure a massive tax break. Guy Raz talks to Jesse Drucker, an investigative reporter for Bloomberg."
oldsaw wrote: It's easy, just throw out a number and let "us", as in "we the people", decide. You conveniently forget that our deficits and poor economic results are the results of bi-partisan co-operations over the last 50yrs and that includes those two unfunded wars. But go ahead and continue to profer your blame-game as it fits a particular narrative.
fast_eddie_72 is actually not blaming. I am. We've got plenty of ways to fix this but one party is unwilling to compromise to make it happen.
Also, let's be clear. It is the Republican party currently advocating for tax cuts and other benefits for the wealthy and corporate. Republicans are defending oil subsidies, paid for by your disproportionate share of taxes, for some of the wealthiest corporations in the world's history. Link. Not just the world. Not just now. But the wealthiest corporations the Earth has ever known. They need welfare? Let's not also forget Republican push for not taxing the rich as much as you or I are currently taxed.
The data is pretty clear here. While one sides pushes for sensible fiscal policy the other side is continuing to vote for unfairly taxing the middle class while continuing to give the rich a pass on paying their fair share. They're also against ending corporate welfare for corporations that are doing just fine without sucking up our tax dollars to piss away on millionaire/billionaire CEO bonuses.
ronholm wrote: Rich, poor, broke.. whatever.. you owe X amount.. or you work it off in community service. I
Hey.. that would be cool.. I am VERY slow in winter/early spring as far as work is concerned. I would not mind doing a hundred hours or so to work off all my tax
Xceler8x wrote: We've got plenty of ways to fix this but one party is unwilling to compromise to make it happen. The data is pretty clear here. While one sides pushes for sensible fiscal policy the other side is continuing to vote for unfairly taxing the middle class while continuing to give the rich a pass on paying their fair share. They're also against ending corporate welfare for corporations that are doing just fine without sucking up our tax dollars to piss away on millionaire/billionaire CEO bonuses.
Bwahahahahahahahaha! stifle Wait, sorry, didn't mean to laugh out loud, that was impolite. But if you think the Evil Republicans are solely to blame and the Care Bear Democrats are just trying to help everybody get along, you are sadly - and dangerously - mistaken.
With that said, I'm withdrawing back under my rock now. Feel free to ignore me.
alfadriver wrote: The FAQ on the fairtax site even says that nothing is exempt, including food and medicine.
Prebate, prebate, prebate, say it with me now and re-read the FAQ about how that works. I know you don't want to read it, but click the "How does the prebate work?" on the FAQ.
With no corporate tax rate, companies would have another reason to be packing their E36 M3 tomorrow to get over here.
Edit: and one more thing, you think there are not embedded taxes in everything you already buy? You think those evil corporations are not passing the tax buck on to the purchaser of the good they are selling? 
Don't tax anyone more, just get rid of the loopholes and make sure everyone is paying what they are supposed to which is currently less than it has ever been.
No loopholes would help the current tax code for sure.
oldsaw wrote:fast_eddie_72 wrote: Indeed it is not. I've still not see the right cite a figure for how low is low enough. Reagan called for lower taxes. He got them. Bush called for lower taxes. He got them. They are now very, very low. Yet Romney wants lower taxes. Is there any amount of tax reduction that will satisfy them? You say the left should say what is "fair". How can they? They've lost every round.Shouln't the burden fall on the people who have gotten what they asked for yet delivered larger deficits and poor economic results?It's easy, just throw out a number and let "us", as in "we the people", decide. You conveniently forget that our deficits and poor economic results are the results of bi-partisan co-operations over the last 50yrs and that includes those two unfunded wars. But go ahead and continue to profer your blame-game as it fits a particular narrative.
Well, it was pretty good for several pages. I'm out of this one. I went out of my way not to blame. I presented a case. You're free to counter my points or make another case. I stand by what I said and how I said it. It's really a shame that we can't have a discussion about these issues without it turning into a blame game. But the example set by our leaders so offten is so poor, I guess it's to be expected.
And another thing... nah. Not wasing any more time. Everyone has already made up their mind. Someone on the radio or tv already told us all what to think.
Duke wrote: Bwahahahahahahahaha! *stifle* Wait, sorry, didn't mean to laugh out loud, that was impolite. But if you think the Evil Republicans are solely to blame and the Care Bear Democrats are just trying to help everybody get along, you are sadly - and dangerously - mistaken.
So the choices are Tax and Spend Dems.. or No Tax and Spend Repubs...
mad_machine wrote:Duke wrote: Bwahahahahahahahaha! *stifle* Wait, sorry, didn't mean to laugh out loud, that was impolite. But if you think the Evil Republicans are solely to blame and the Care Bear Democrats are just trying to help everybody get along, you are sadly - and dangerously - mistaken.So the choices are Tax and Spend Dems.. or No Tax and Spend Repubs...
Since third party candidates traditionally add up to about 5% of the popular vote, that would appear to be the case, yes.
Anti-stance wrote:alfadriver wrote: The FAQ on the fairtax site even says that nothing is exempt, including food and medicine.Prebate, prebate, prebate, say it with me now and re-read the FAQ about how that works. I know you don't want to read it, but click the "How does the prebate work?" on the FAQ. With no corporate tax rate, companies would have another reason to be packing their E36 M3 tomorrow to get over here. Edit: and one more thing, you think there are not embedded taxes in everything you already buy? You think those evil corporations are not passing the tax buck on to the purchaser of the good they are selling?
Ok, so you address some of the lower incomes. But that does not address the simple fact that as you get richer, it takes less of your income to live on. So the "fair" tax will peak at some percentage of income, and then drop as income goes up. Not sure how that's better, except that you can accumulate more wealth faster.
Or the very basic idea of spending your money off shore. Which, again, is very easy with nominal means. We could. I know with a fair tax, I probably would not vacation in the US ever again.
The fact that corporations are embedding their taxed into their products isn't lost on me at all. That's a perfect example of how a blatant tax on products would take a while to work. As opposed to 1) not really knowing how much taxes you pay right now on products, 2) not really realizing how much tax you pay on your salary- you would shift it to knowing every time you bought something That totally shifts how people would buy, and, for the most part, undermine how the current economy chugs along- people buy stuff from other people.
It does have a nice name-- "fair tax" but it's so simple to come up with very, very easy ways that it's not fair at all, well....
BTW, you give a prebate to the poverty level- who decides what that is? And do you fully understand that poverty is very different in New York vs. West Virginia?
oldsaw wrote:z31maniac wrote: ^No corporate income tax, no need to put the money overseas to start with.NO federal taxes on anything except new goods and corporations will be lined-up at the borders and fighting to get in. Isn't it amazing how so many "progressive thinking" people choose to demagogue the FairTax and want to continue with a policy that's the economic version of waterboarding?
Well, once we recover from the depression when people stop buying stuff, they might....
I already don't vacation in the US, it's too expensive. Not sure how the Fairtax would be any worse than the typical sales tax + hotel tax combos + paying for much higher wages changes that.
As for the poverty level, it's definied by the Feds.
alfadriver wrote: Or the very basic idea of spending your money off shore. Which, again, is very easy with nominal means. We could. I know with a fair tax, I probably would not vacation in the US ever again.
Whether the Fair tax is implemented or not, people are going to spent money off shores. There will be roughly a 1% difference in the overall price of something. Not paying income taxes will more than make up for that. You are not going to be able to buy a E36 M3 ton of stuff off shores and be able to bring it right on in here without paying a duty.
As far as tourist, paying 1% more of common touristy stuff isnt going to keep people from visiting this country, especially from the economic boom from businesses flogging the gates to get in here without a corporate tax. More businesses creates more competition and more competition drives down cost.
One thing I do agree with you on is that the price of goods dropping would not happen over night. But more companies coming to these shores will create more jobs, which will make the economy boom, and more spending creating more revenue for the federal government.
Now where are all those other "not fair" things about the Fair tax you are talking about?
Oh and I'll admit the FairTax isn't perfect, but it's a whole lot better than the system we have now.
Part of the problem is everyone knows our current system sucks. But everyone is stuck on a "perfect" solution, and a "perfect" solution does not exist.
This topic is locked. No further posts are being accepted.
