Flat Tax

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Complex tax laws favor the rich, and always will..

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Phokus

This is kind of like how conservatives say they're christians, but pretty much ignore all the parts about jesus christ railing against the rich.

I know its OT, but your statement is inherantly false. Wealth is neither anti-Christian nor anti-biblical. Unless youre talking about a different Jesus than whats in the bible. For example, in the old testament there is Solomon, David, and Joseph. You mentioned Jesus, and He had much to say about wealth, mostly having to do with warning about the trappings of wealth (cannot serve God and mammon). And there is the oft misquoted scripture 1 Timothy 6:10: For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. This is often quoted as Money is the root of all evil....which is wrong. BIG difference.

Back on topic. I used to be for a flat tax;however, Ive changed my position. I believe in a progressive tax, but certainly not to the extent many of the rich-haters call for. I would, however, like to see some taxation even on the poor, even if its just 1/2 %.

'it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle that for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven' or something like that.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Specop 007

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Genx87
There is no reason we couldnt make a flat tax progressive via prebates based on income.

I have a much better idea - end corn subsidies and let the world food market function. As a bonus, you'll save enough to give everyone a decent tax break.

Do we have to stop with corn subsidies?

They're *probably* the single worst one interms of fscking the entire world's food markets (and the US is hardly the only offender), but no, of course we don't.

 

[Engineer]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Engineer

Originally posted by: Genx87


I could say gut the medicare program and let the workers save 2.5% of their paychecks. But wtf does that have to do with progressive vs flat tax?

Medicare isn't 2.5%. It's 1.45%. There is, of course, an employer match of that which doubles it but don't expect your employer to give that to you if it were ended.

:roll:

And I am not arguing the employer would give us that. I was only providing an example that had nothing to do with flat vs progressive taxation.

So I quoted the wrong %, sue me.

I didn't say it to be a smartass, it was a FYI. Damn, now I know why I'm starting to hate politics and this place too.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

No, it's making a distinction between passive income and earned income, just like the current system does.

if the sole thing you are taxing is labor, then it's not an income tax.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Not all proposals include taxing passive income within the flat tax system. Some only apply the flat tax to wages.

then that's not an income tax, it's a sales tax on labor.

any system that only taxes labor and not passive income sounds absolutely terrible

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

Not all proposals include taxing passive income within the flat tax system. Some only apply the flat tax to wages.

then that's not an income tax, it's a sales tax on labor.

any system that only taxes labor and not passive income sounds absolutely terrible

sounds great if most/all of your income is passive though.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

No, it's making a distinction between passive income and earned income, just like the current system does.

if the sole thing you are taxing is labor, then it's not an income tax.

Where did I say that a flat tax system was ignoring capital gains? I just said that the current system and many flat tax proposals treat capital gains differently - where they get a lower rate overall instead of paying the earned income rate.

 

[blackangst1]

Originally posted by: miketheidiot

Originally posted by: BoberFett
Complex tax laws favor the rich, and always will..

:thumbsup:

Originally posted by: blackangst1

Originally posted by: Phokus

This is kind of like how conservatives say they're christians, but pretty much ignore all the parts about jesus christ railing against the rich.

I know its OT, but your statement is inherantly false. Wealth is neither anti-Christian nor anti-biblical. Unless youre talking about a different Jesus than whats in the bible. For example, in the old testament there is Solomon, David, and Joseph. You mentioned Jesus, and He had much to say about wealth, mostly having to do with warning about the trappings of wealth (cannot serve God and mammon). And there is the oft misquoted scripture 1 Timothy 6:10: For the love of money is a root of all kinds of evil. This is often quoted as Money is the root of all evil....which is wrong. BIG difference.

Back on topic. I used to be for a flat tax;however, Ive changed my position. I believe in a progressive tax, but certainly not to the extent many of the rich-haters call for. I would, however, like to see some taxation even on the poor, even if its just 1/2 %.

'it is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle that for a rich man to enter the kingdom of heaven' or something like that.

Right. Again, warning about the trappings of wealth. Thanks for backing up my statement

 

[lsquare]

Because, in an economic system where the wealthiest 1% of the people control more wealth
than the lowest 95%, a flat tax is inherently unfair to the point of betraying our own humanity.

A flat tax is regressive because it takes far more of the money the poor need for their basic survival while the wealthy gain the same benefits as the poor from public uses of our taxes, such as infrastructure, public services such as police, schools, etc. and defense.

There is no excuse or justification for allowing the wealthiest of our people to take so much more from the economy than they can every use in their lifetimes while the poorest of our citizens, including those working full time, can't earn enough to meet their basic requirements for survival.

I agree!

 

[piasabird]

I might be for doing away with income tax and for a sales tax. But it might be possible to use some kind of hybrid of both if I did not have to file a tax return. That would mean the government could not continue to use the tax code to constantly pit groups against each other.

 

[ShawnD1]

What's up with these horrible ideas on AT? Flat tax is a horrible idea. I can't remember where he sourced this, but one of John Stossel's reports said that something like the top 1% of Americans pay 50% of the taxes. This is because poor people (students) like me don't pay tax. Single parents don't pay tax. Working poor do not pay tax. If the taxes were adjusted so everyone paid an equal percentage, the very large majority of us would see an incredibly big tax hike.

 

[Anarchist420]

They ought to just have uniform tarriff (about 8.5% or 10%) and varying excise taxes (tax the production, buying, and selling) while cutting spending. They could add an export tax (8.5% or 10%) to make up for any lost revenue.

Flat tax sucks because they're still taking a percentage of your income.

The flat tax will never happen though, because this country is too democratic and it doesn't bring in enough revenue.