Flat Tax

[JSt0rm]

Originally posted by: Engineer
Turning point. I found out that the upper management of my company received the usual bonus last year even though the company lost money for the first time in over a decade. Everyone had to take a 5% pay cut in the US and many around the world (i.e. China, etc) volunteered to take a 5% cut to help the company's cash position and keep in business.

that's fucked up. I would be in their offices with a hand ax and a propane torch.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: b0mbrman
And I'll say again that it's not the progressiveness of the tax law that benefits the wealthy, it's all the loopholes.

In other words, you honestly believe that a progressive tax with no exemptions would punish the middle class more than a flat tax with no exemptions?

Not to mention that most of these proposals still treat capital gains and other investment income differently.

Conceptually, I'm not against shielding investments from taxation, because that taxation can really kill commerce.

Practically speaking, when your income is in the multi-6-figures or higher, it becomes easier and more rewarding to shift it around into different income classes - with a little work, you can make your income 'look' like whatever it needs to be to pay the least tax.

BF is right, of course about complex tax codes, but not about progressiveness being the 'problem' (and he knows that).

 

[Genx87]

There is no reason we couldnt make a flat tax progressive via prebates based on income.

 

[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.

 

[Brainonska511]

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

If you're going to do that, you might as well keep the progressive tax system with varying marginal rates based on income level. If you want to make it a little better, add a few more brackets at the top, fix the AMT issue, and remove some of the ridiculous deductions available.

 

[Genx87]

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.

Ok???????

I am not against ending the corn subsidies. I just dont understand what that has to do with changing our tax code.

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?

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

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

If you're going to do that, you might as well keep the progressive tax system with varying marginal rates based on income level. If you want to make it a little better, add a few more brackets at the top, fix the AMT issue, and remove some of the ridiculous deductions available.

I'd give you two reasons. Less paper work and fraud.

One of the biggest problems if not the biggest problem is our tax code is books thick. Which allows for too many loopholes.

 

[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.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: Genx87

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

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

If you're going to do that, you might as well keep the progressive tax system with varying marginal rates based on income level. If you want to make it a little better, add a few more brackets at the top, fix the AMT issue, and remove some of the ridiculous deductions available.

I'd give you two reasons. Less paper work and fraud.

One of the biggest problems if not the biggest problem is our tax code is books thick. Which allows for too many loopholes.

So what if the book is thick. 99.5% of people filing their income taxes do not need to read the books to figure out how to fill out the forms. If you want to reduce the size of the tax code, remove the deductions available, that's what causes it to be so thick - everyone wants to reward their special constituents.

 

[3chordcharlie]

Originally posted by: Genx87

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.

Ok???????

I am not against ending the corn subsidies. I just dont understand what that has to do with changing our tax code.

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?

Why would you advocate a flat tax with the goal of making it progressive?

The basic income tax is already quite simple, and already ensures that you never have to work for free. It takes about 50 words to describe the current tax, and thousands of pages to describe the deductions. How would removing a couple of tax brackets significantly change this. I don't think you'll find people of means less evasive of taxes because you drop them a point or two.

Flat taxes, even with prebates will either raise the tax burden on those who have trouble making ends meet already, or severely reduce tax revenue.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Flat Tax on someone making 1,250,000 a year will reduce their tax payout by a TON while increasing it on someone making 50,000 by a lot.

Just another way to make the rich richer and the middle class poorer.

care to work through the numbers?

Originally posted by: Engineer
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.

who gets what portion of it depends on who needs who more.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: JSt0rm01

Originally posted by: Engineer
Turning point. I found out that the upper management of my company received the usual bonus last year even though the company lost money for the first time in over a decade. Everyone had to take a 5% pay cut in the US and many around the world (i.e. China, etc) volunteered to take a 5% cut to help the company's cash position and keep in business.

that's fucked up. I would be in their offices with a hand ax and a propane torch.

Welcome to the real world.

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: TruePaige

Flat Tax on someone making 1,250,000 a year will reduce their tax payout by a TON while increasing it on someone making 50,000 by a lot.

Just another way to make the rich richer and the middle class poorer.

care to work through the numbers?

Assuming both are single and no other deductions (second number is tax amount per bracket)

Guy making $50,000
first $8350: $835
next $25599: $3839.85
last bit: $4012.50

Total Taxes: $8687, 17.374% paid in taxes

Guy making 1,250,000
first $8350: $835
next $25599: $3839.85
next $48300: $12075
next $89300: $25004
next $201400: $66462
next $877050: $306967.5

Total taxes: $415183.35, 33% paid in taxes

Tax brackets and percentages from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I...brackets_and_tax_rates

The guy making over a million/year will save tons of money with a flat tax as long as it is under 33%. If you had a flat tax of 20%, the $50k/year guy will save nothing and pay more. Of course it is people with a lot of money backing proposals like the flat tax scam; people in the middle can easily get shafted while the well-to-do stand to save thousands upon thousands of dollars

 

[Genx87]

Originally posted by: 3chordcharlie

Originally posted by: Genx87

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.

Ok???????

I am not against ending the corn subsidies. I just dont understand what that has to do with changing our tax code.

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?

Why would you advocate a flat tax with the goal of making it progressive?

The basic income tax is already quite simple, and already ensures that you never have to work for free. It takes about 50 words to describe the current tax, and thousands of pages to describe the deductions. How would removing a couple of tax brackets significantly change this. I don't think you'll find people of means less evasive of taxes because you drop them a point or two.

Flat taxes, even with prebates will either raise the tax burden on those who have trouble making ends meet already, or severely reduce tax revenue.

Reduce the complexity of the system. I'd advocate a flat tax on the consumption side with pre-bates based on income. I dont believe a true flat tax is fair and would be regressive for our country.

Prebates cover what sales tax somebody of that income braket should be paying. So unless they mess up the prebates calculation or somebody is spending more than they are making. They should be tax neutral at the end of the year.

 

[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.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

The guy making over a million/year will save tons of money with a flat tax as long as it is under 33%. If you had a flat tax of 20%, the $50k/year guy will save nothing and pay more. Of course it is people with a lot of money backing proposals like the flat tax scam; people in the middle can easily get shafted while the well-to-do stand to save thousands upon thousands of dollars

what guy making $1.25 million is making it in straight salary with no deductions?

 

[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?

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Brainonska511

The guy making over a million/year will save tons of money with a flat tax as long as it is under 33%. If you had a flat tax of 20%, the $50k/year guy will save nothing and pay more. Of course it is people with a lot of money backing proposals like the flat tax scam; people in the middle can easily get shafted while the well-to-do stand to save thousands upon thousands of dollars

what guy making $1.25 million is making it in straight salary with no deductions?

I just did it that way for simplicity's sake. If you want to run the numbers assuming he makes it in capital gains (which a flat tax wouldn't cover) or some other form and add in deductions that skew one way or the other, feel free.

 

[ElFenix]

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
I just did it that way for simplicity's sake. If you want to run the numbers assuming he makes it in capital gains (which a flat tax wouldn't cover) or some other form and add in deductions that skew one way or the other, feel free.

why wouldn't a flat tax cover capital gains? it's income

 

[Brainonska511]

Originally posted by: ElFenix

Originally posted by: Brainonska511
I just did it that way for simplicity's sake. If you want to run the numbers assuming he makes it in capital gains (which a flat tax wouldn't cover) or some other form and add in deductions that skew one way or the other, feel free.

why wouldn't a flat tax cover capital gains? it's income

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

 

[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.

 

[Brainonska511]

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.

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

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Zstream
So why are people against a flat tax regardless of income?

because liberals don't think a dollar = $1 if you make over a certain amount of money (note - "certain amount" is subject to their whim of the day)

diminishing marginal utility is an observable fact. Anyone who isn't a mindless hack can admit that.

$1 is clearly not that same to a millionaire and a starving Somalian.

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY


The issue is, I and most others aren't saying we are "unfairly taxed" but rather fighting against the libs who wish to foist even more taxes on people because they don't think it's "fair" as it is now - they want it to steal more from the producers.

you realize that 'the producers' thing you have here is a marxist argument right? However typically they argue that the producers in society are the people that work in the factories, not the people that own them. (typically refered to in marxist style literature and capitalists or some such crap)

 

[miketheidiot]

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY

Originally posted by: Phokus

Originally posted by: CADsortaGUY


Theft is defined as: "the felonious taking and removing of personal property with intent to deprive the rightful owner of it" So no, "steal" is not arbitrary.
And the second part - that's the whole problem - it's entirely subjective. How much of your liberty and freedom are you willing to give up(or make other give up) for progressivism?

Then you could make the argument that all taxes are theft and we shouldn't have a military, courts, police, etc. etc. etc.

And i know you don't believe that because you're not an anarchist.

Please explain to us why YOUR ideal world doesn't involve 'theft' when ours does (or why YOUR thieving ideal is ok but ours isn't)

Sure, you could make that argument - and many do regarding income tax. A consumption tax would not be theft as you do not pay the tax if you don't choose to buy.

BTW, if you haven't figured it out - I support a consumption based tax(with a floor) rather than an income based tax - progressive or flat. I just think the liberal argument against a flat tax is weak so it's an easy target.

Ahahaha, yeah, i'm sure if there was no income tax that you could get through life without ever having to pay a consumption tax.

The only 'weak' thing is your intellect when you can't even acknowledge that the founder of modern capitalism and those schooled in learning how the economy functions support progressive taxation and you have to rail against 'liberals'.

everyone knows that economics is a very liberal discipline too :roll: