Flat or Sales tax instead of current system...agree or disagree?

[Tom]

"All citizens should be taxed at an equal rate, as they all vote at an equal rate."

Our current graduated system does just that. Everybody pays the same rate on their first $10,000, their next 10,000, their next 10,000, etc,etc,etc. (ignoring loopholes like home mortgage deductions, capital gains rates, etc.)

Just because poor people don't have any income between $150,000 and a million doesn't mean they wouldn't pay the same rate as everybody else if they did.

The argument is specious.

 

[LunarRay]

If you wish for all persons to pay an equal amount of tax then we must first enable all persons to earn an equal amount.
Why is digging a ditch or delivering a pizza worth so much less than delivering babies or digging for third? Some would say that the education process enabled the MD to deliver the babies and the lack of it causes some to stick with pizza... which means that but for the brains she would drive a bicycle and deliver pizza. Is there an inalienable right to brains? Why are we not all equally smart? If we were we could prosecute our intellectual prowess competitively. Why is it the professional base ball player earns so much more than a ditch digging laborer? Why does the base baller get more to entertain than the laborer to construct?
Well ... I guess cuz we get to benefit from our 'assets' to the extent they are in demand. All of us have that going for us. And to the extent we are able to benefit we are asked to kick in a bit extra to offset the bit that those with less 'assets' to exploit could kick in but by doing so their lot in life would be significantly impacted versus those who are not.
Of course there is the spending factor. The tax unpaid by the poor is used to keep the economy going. The rich can only spend so much and the rest is invested.. there is a balance involved an equilibrium that we reach and it is stable and reasonable.
If one wishes to pay less tax they can easily earn less. If they wish to have more money and don't we all... they can deliver babies or dig for third.. surely they'd be able to do that ... everyone has the unalienable right to pursue happiness..

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: LunarRay
If you wish for all persons to pay an equal amount of tax then we must first enable all persons to earn an equal amount.
Is there an inalienable right to brains? Why are we not all equally smart?

There is a short story you should read.

 

[Dissipate]

BTW LunarRay & other income tax advocates:

Tax Evasion Today
Under today?s income tax system, tax evasion is a major, continuing and growing problem.
Under the pressures of a much larger Internal Revenue Service (IRS), more burdensome
information reporting requirements, increasingly stiff and numerous penalties, and a host of
legislative initiatives, the problem is getting worse. Based on IRS figures, tax evasion has
increased by 67 percent during the most recent 11-year period for which data is published. As a
percentage of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), tax evasion has reached 2.0 percent in 1992 as
compared to 1.6 percent in 1981. Tax evasion continues to amount to approximately 22 to 23
percent of all income taxes collected. (See table next page). And, these IRS figures do not
include taxes lost on illegal sources of income.

Link

Like I said before. Tax evasion through income hiding is becoming more lucrative and easier than ever inspite of the increased bureacracy at the IRS trying to crack down. Its only a matter of time before the income tax is dead. Think about it, if you don't report part of your income you get two bonuses under the current tax system. A. You don't pay taxes on the income you didn't report. and B. Because the tax system is progressive your tax rate goes down!

In the future people will look back and laugh at the fact that people had to report their income to the government and fill out billions of tax forms every year.

 

[Tom]

Sales taxes are just as subject to cheating, and the incentive to cheat would increase at the high rate that would be necessary to replace the income tax.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Zephyr106

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
for most of us a national sales tax and/or flat tax that replaces the current graduated income tax makes NO SENSE.

All either one will accomplish is lower the tax burden the wealthier you are, compared to today's system; which means it would increase the tax burden for everybody else, which means YOU !!

It would also accomplish making goverment responsable to those who pay taxes. Right now those that dont pay vote to services paid for by others.

If you pay taxes or not, you are affected by this government's laws. Therefore everyone has the right to vote on how they are governed. That is a unalienable right if we are to respect the Founding Fathers' wishes. Paying taxes is a duty that society has deemed some people of incapable of performing due to insufficient money.

Zephyr

I would guess our founding fathers would be shocked by our current tax structure. All citizens should be taxed at an equal rate, as they all vote at an equal rate.

Taxing everyone at an equal rate would be impossible if we wanted to keep 1/3 of our federal state and local budgets. The rhetoric thrown around such as the top 50% paying 95% are indicative of this. The poor could simply not pay enough for all Americans to provide enough revenue at a flat rate. So unless you want to drastically sacrifice your standard of living and have unpaved roads, no running water, no military, no police, no education, etc. taxes must be unequal. What are the alternatives to having government provide the services I just described? Local services by private companies? Sounds like the best way to make America a fractured anarchy.

Zephyr

I dont presonally believe any of what you mention. MOst of the services you have mentioned are state and local to begin with, not federal. I beleive that flat rate income tax( one bracket for all, no deductions, could be processed on a postcard) or a national sales tax would lead to a goverment that is far more responsive the people and capable of balancing a budget. But as long at the lower 50% do not pay federal income taxes, they will continue to vote themselves the treasury.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
for most of us a national sales tax and/or flat tax that replaces the current graduated income tax makes NO SENSE.

All either one will accomplish is lower the tax burden the wealthier you are, compared to today's system; which means it would increase the tax burden for everybody else, which means YOU !!

It would also accomplish making goverment responsable to those who pay taxes. Right now those that dont pay vote to services paid for by others.

I'm limiting my comments to reality, not anti-government rhetoric based on anti-democratic principals like voting should be based on income.

So you dont see a problem with that receive goverment services, but dont pay for goverment services, be able to vote for goverment services? THis is kinda like congress voting themselves a payraise everyyear, and we know how popular that is.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: LeadMagnet
I prefer the National sales tax system, with essential food, clothing, medine , and school exempt.

I would also phase out social security on a graduted scale starting with current 35 year olds recieving 10% to 60 yr olds getting 100% When the current 35 yr olds die off then the system is fully desolved.

I would also increase the tax on gasoline $0.25 a gallon every six months from now on.

I like the sales tax system the most myself. Though I would probably go ahead with a 3% sales tax on food and 5% on apparel. Medicine and School being exempt. Also raising the gasoline tax that much will cause other prices to rise drastically also. Think, about it.....how are all the goods transported to the stores?? Big rigs use gas and so do many trains and boats. Keeping gasoline prices down are essential.

 

[Chadder007]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: mfs378

take a look at the tax that caused almost killed the economy. The rich simply left the country, causing jobs to dry up after they left.

What tax are you refering to?

THere is a forbes article from 2001(webcontent is now gone).

google cache

Consider the distance Sweden has traveled. After some flush years in the 1950s and 1960s (the result, according to Milton Friedman, the Nobel winning economist, of Sweden's "having had the good economic sense to stay out of World War II"), the socialists neutered then exiled the geese that laid the golden eggs. Ingvar Kamprad, 75, the founder of ikea, the $10 billion (estimated worldwide 2000 revenues) furniture retailing chain, describes meetings with Sweden's tax bureaucrats in the 1960s and 1970s this way: "They would accuse me: ?But you just want a profit.' And I would proudly reply that I was giving people jobs."

Bertil Hult, 60, the founder of the Stockholm-based ef language schools, remembers those dark days well. "By the 1970s, the Swedish media were presenting anyone who started a business as someone who was using the people," he says. "Entrepreneurs were pariahs. So lots of entrepreneurs left. The government's view was, ?Let them go, we don't need them here.'" In the 1970s Hult left and built ef from Germany, the U.K. and the U.S. Today the privately owned ef Group is the largest company of its kind in the world. Veckans Affärer, a respected Swedish business magazine, estimates that its revenues are $650 million; its net margin is 5%; and its payroll is 17,000.

Sweden had excessive taxes on the wealthy, and the wealthy just left.

...Bunch of dumb blondes... BUWHAHAHAHAHAHA

 

[Nitemare]

Would rather have income tax repealed and sales tax increased to compensate

 

[LunarRay]

The REAL issue is not the methodology of the taxing process but, rather, the amount of tax extracted from the various sources to fund the operations of Government. We have city, county, state and federal governments each of whom has overlapping and duplicate programs to insure the continuity of social wants and needs.
To solve the taxing issue we need solving the need for the tax amount extracted. One can easily see that the cost of Social Security and Medical Care for the aged is not a current drain on the tax revenue - will become one but, not current. So what is it and who benefits from it? To what extent do we pay tax only to have it squandered away by multi level governmental programs. Should all but the essential federal duties be handled at the state level? Is the foreign affairs activity beneficial to all Americans equally? In this case, I doubt it. WTO actions are purported to create jobs but, it serves another purpose as well. It enables the richest investors to amass greater wealth by exploitation of expanded markets. To the extent the individual benefits he should contribute to the cost of tax demand. For example: If there are a million workers benefiting from a program and one hundred 'rich investors' one could argue the ratio should be for every dollar from the worker ten thousand should come from the 'rich investor' (assuming a proportionally equal income - and if not then the tax rates reflect this). Commerce upon the highway and the upkeep of that benefits the consumer and the corporate ownership using the highway to transport his goods. The pyramid of economic worth would be a cube if everyone earned the same and the burden then would be presumed to be the same. It is a pyramid and the burden reflects this. Move to the states the burden the states have and leave the federal with what only it can provide.

edit: to be clear... If you benefit by being able to exploit your particular advantage then the greater the income realized from that exploitation the presumed greater share you should pay to enjoy that exploitation. And, at the same time eliminate waste!

 

[Jhhnn]

Remarkable amounts of disinformation and obfuscation, particularly from the anti-tax crowd. Maybe somebody will bring up Grover Norquist's comparison of progressive taxes as being like the holocaust... or other uber right pundits who have equated taxes and slavery... The total tax burden is a lot more evenly distributed than those at the top would like to admit, and is even regressive for those with the ability to properly configure their income sources...

Income taxes aren't the only taxes, not by a longshot. We all pay a variety of hidden taxes and not so hidden taxes- in many respects progressive income taxes help to compensate for the fact that those at the top tend to spend on things hat aren't taxable under the current system, or in ways that avoid taxation. No sales tax on stocks, bonds, real estate, travel in the corporate jet or accomodations in the corporate retreat. And they don't pay income tax on company cars or a variety of other perks, some of them quite large...

The notion that progressive taxes are unethical strikes me as offensive, and as a false argument. Having just done our taxes, I discovered that the wife and I broke the $100K mark, and I'm thrilled, also more than happy to pay the taxes on that income. Apparently, however, many who make a lot more than we do are extremely resentful, downright unpatriotic in my estimation. If I made ten times the money, I'd be very happy to pay a much larger percentage in taxes- grateful to live in a society that allows me such opportunities, proud to be able to assume the attendant responsibilities with a little grace and humility... and not to whine about entitlements when assuming entitlements of my own...

The notion that it's fair to tax different kinds of income at different rates is also offensive, particularly when passive income is taxed at a much lower rate than earned income. And it's distasteful to hear individuals with vast incomes whine about it all, particularly when they get an automatic 13% break on all earned income over $85K, the SS cutoff... and a lower rate on capital gains and dividends. Tears in my eyes as big as horseturds, I'll tell ya...

So, uhh, ask the families with below average incomes if they'd mind paying high taxes on big money- increase income by 50%, increase taxes by 10%- I'm sure they'd be happy to go along.

I figure that the reason Republican pundits gave up on the flat tax is that they'd actually have to pay more than under the present system, and also that a purely sales tax based system would lead to a revolt from the underclass...
such a tax would have to be in the 20-25% range to equal even current revenues, even keeping the SS and medicare taxes unchanged... that is, of course, what the current leadership in the executive and legislative branch are shooting for- a regressive tax system, but one not totally obvious...

 

[Tom]

"So you dont see a problem with that receive goverment services, but dont pay for goverment services, be able to vote for goverment services? THis is kinda like congress voting themselves a payraise everyyear, and we know how popular that is. "


No, it's kind of like democracy. I applaud your honesty though. I wish more Republicans would admit they don't want poor people voting, instead of doing it the way they did in Florida.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"So you dont see a problem with that receive goverment services, but dont pay for goverment services, be able to vote for goverment services? THis is kinda like congress voting themselves a payraise everyyear, and we know how popular that is. "


No, it's kind of like democracy. I applaud your honesty though. I wish more Republicans would admit they don't want poor people voting, instead of doing it the way they did in Florida.

I never said I want remove poeple right to vote. I do beleive that all people from all classes should bear the cost of goverment. I am not against the rich people paying more in taxes, as any taxing scheme would have the rich paying more. I do however think it is quite unhealthy for democracy when 50% of the population pays little no federal income tax.

From a privacy standpoint, I would prefer a sales tax(food and such not a taxable item) and fee for service(gas tax at the pump). Luxary items could probably be taxed at a higher rate if you wish to soak the rich.

The income tax needs to be overhauled for the sake of simplicity. Remove all deductions and fix a single rate for everything above a fixed dollar amount(everything above 20k is taxed at 15%). I would even say those folks working more than 1 job, should not have the seconday incomes taxed at all.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Jhhnn

The notion that progressive taxes are unethical strikes me as offensive, and as a false argument. Having just done our taxes, I discovered that the wife and I broke the $100K mark, and I'm thrilled, also more than happy to pay the taxes on that income. Apparently, however, many who make a lot more than we do are extremely resentful, downright unpatriotic in my estimation. If I made ten times the money, I'd be very happy to pay a much larger percentage in taxes- grateful to live in a society that allows me such opportunities, proud to be able to assume the attendant responsibilities with a little grace and humility... and not to whine about entitlements when assuming entitlements of my own...

You may be thrilled to reveal every detail of your financial life to the government but I certainly am not and neither are many others. How is being against laws that force you to reveal all of your private financial information unpatriotic?

I guess you also weren't aware that honest citizens and businesses spend hundreds of billions of dollars a year just to COMPLY with the current tax code. It is an asbolute horrible mess. Even so called tax experts can't agree what taxes should be paid given the exact same information! In this respect the tax code is terribly regressive as well. The average American spends a lot of their time doing their taxes while wealthier people hire CPAs and other professionals to do their taxes for them.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Sales taxes are just as subject to cheating, and the incentive to cheat would increase at the high rate that would be necessary to replace the income tax.

Have any facts or data to support that statement or are you just making this up as you go along?

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: Dissipate

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
Sales taxes are just as subject to cheating, and the incentive to cheat would increase at the high rate that would be necessary to replace the income tax.

Have any facts or data to support that statement or are you just making this up as you go along?

There is always the black market and garage sales. But it would be far harder to cheat against a sales tax.

 

[Dissipate]

Originally posted by: Dead Parrot Sketch
"So you dont see a problem with that receive goverment services, but dont pay for goverment services, be able to vote for goverment services? THis is kinda like congress voting themselves a payraise everyyear, and we know how popular that is. "


No, it's kind of like democracy. I applaud your honesty though. I wish more Republicans would admit they don't want poor people voting, instead of doing it the way they did in Florida.

How many times do I have to say it? Not everything in a democracy is ethical. It is a logical fallacy. In the case of taxes there happens to be millions of people who want government services and also want someone else to pay for them.

 

[Tom]

"In the case of taxes there happens to be millions of people who want government services and also want someone else to pay for them."


That statement applies to pretty much everybody. And not just taxes, but lunch too..

btw, i'm gettin' hungry.

 

[amok]

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Spencer278
For some reason it tends to be the rich that want sales tax or flat tax I wonder why that might be?

Huh?

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?

I've got some for you. Based on my spending for last year, and the amount of taxes I paid, my tax burden would be ~1/6 of what I paid in if we had a 25% national sales tax and no other form of federal taxation. Wealthier people may spend more money overall, but we tend to spend a smaller percentage of our total income than those a few tax brackets down.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: amok

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Spencer278
For some reason it tends to be the rich that want sales tax or flat tax I wonder why that might be?

Huh?

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?

I've got some for you. Based on my spending for last year, and the amount of taxes I paid, my tax burden would be ~1/6 of what I paid in if we had a 25% national sales tax and no other form of federal taxation. Wealthier people may spend more money overall, but we tend to spend a smaller percentage of our total income than those a few tax brackets down.

So what would you do with the 5/6th you saved?

 

[amok]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: amok

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Spencer278
For some reason it tends to be the rich that want sales tax or flat tax I wonder why that might be?

Huh?

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?

I've got some for you. Based on my spending for last year, and the amount of taxes I paid, my tax burden would be ~1/6 of what I paid in if we had a 25% national sales tax and no other form of federal taxation. Wealthier people may spend more money overall, but we tend to spend a smaller percentage of our total income than those a few tax brackets down.

So what would you do with the 5/6th you saved?

Lol, to be perfectly honest, I would probably reinvest half of it and find something charitable for the rest. That way I could satisfy both my greed and generosity. They tend to fight with each other a lot, so I have to do things to placate both of them .

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: amok

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: amok

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Spencer278
For some reason it tends to be the rich that want sales tax or flat tax I wonder why that might be?

Huh?

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?

I've got some for you. Based on my spending for last year, and the amount of taxes I paid, my tax burden would be ~1/6 of what I paid in if we had a 25% national sales tax and no other form of federal taxation. Wealthier people may spend more money overall, but we tend to spend a smaller percentage of our total income than those a few tax brackets down.

So what would you do with the 5/6th you saved?

Lol, to be perfectly honest, I would probably reinvest half of it and find something charitable for the rest. That way I could satisfy both my greed and generosity. They tend to fight with each other a lot, so I have to do things to placate both of them .

Either way, it gets back into the community I had a pretty good idea you dont hide your savings under your matress.

 

[Orsorum]

Originally posted by: amok

Originally posted by: Orsorum

Originally posted by: Spencer278
For some reason it tends to be the rich that want sales tax or flat tax I wonder why that might be?

Huh?

Do you have any statistics to back up your claim?

I've got some for you. Based on my spending for last year, and the amount of taxes I paid, my tax burden would be ~1/6 of what I paid in if we had a 25% national sales tax and no other form of federal taxation. Wealthier people may spend more money overall, but we tend to spend a smaller percentage of our total income than those a few tax brackets down.

Well, first off, I specifically asked Spencer278 for supporting evidence, and no offense, but anecdotal evidence just doesn't cut it, unless it's part of a logic argument, and even then it's suspect.



You're right, rich people have a lower portion of their income taxed if consumption alone is taxed. Of course, one notes that a national sales tax would most likely NOT apply to essential goods, such as unprepared food from grocery stores.

 

[Orsorum]

LunarRay - Did you go to college?