• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Im shocked the possible VAT tax has this much support

I find it funny how the government tries to turn the U.S. into a European style socialist state right before it goes under. If the government taxed the economy at 100% it still would not have enough to pay the national debt and pay for social security and the healthcare package. If anything, at this point, new taxes will just accelerate the collapse because it will severely weaken growth.
 
I doubt all people even know what a VAT tax is. If they asked the question "Do you support a 17% sales tax along with existing taxes" I expect less people would like it. Only 22% of voters knew what cap and trade was when Obama won election
 
It's in line with the 40% of the nation that think socialism is a good idea and supported the health care law. A little less than the 47% that don't pay taxes though, to them they think all taxes are great even if they don't know what those taxes are.

Always remember these people can vote so do your part to save this nation.
 
The only way a VAT or national sales tax would get any traction with the public is if it did away with personal income taxes.
And that isn't likely to happen.
 
VAT is a horribly regressive tax. Sure, it's an efficient way of collecting money, but most definitely Obama will murder much of his political career by enacting such a bill. When people see the 10&#37; <- that's low extra they have to pay, they are going to be pissed. Especially middle class/poor.
 
Praxis1452 said:
VAT is a horribly regressive tax. Sure, it's an efficient way of collecting money, but most definitely Obama will murder much of his political career by enacting such a bill.
Click to expand...

He doesnt care. Obama has said before he doesnt mind being a 1 term president as long as he can pass his agenda.
 
cubeless said:
whachu means vat tax? i thot you be sayin' a fat tax!!! tax all dem fat cats!!!
Click to expand...

i bet a lot of people actually do think they say 'fat' tax.



i support VAT but only if most of the income tax is repealed. i'd rather have a regular sales tax because it isn't as hidden but i do understand that it is much easier to avoid than the VAT, and i hate people who don't pay what they're legally required to pay.
 
ElFenix said:
i bet a lot of people actually do think they say 'fat' tax.



i support VAT but only if most of the income tax is repealed. i'd rather have a regular sales tax because it isn't as hidden but i do understand that it is much easier to avoid than the VAT, and i hate people who don't pay what they're legally required to pay.
Click to expand...
The problem is that it(income tax) won't stay repealed nor will a low (~7%) initial vat stay low. F-n politicians.
 
ElFenix said:
i bet a lot of people actually do think they say 'fat' tax.



i support VAT but only if most of the income tax is repealed. i'd rather have a regular sales tax because it isn't as hidden but i do understand that it is much easier to avoid than the VAT, and i hate people who don't pay what they're legally required to pay.
Click to expand...

That's a way of shifting the tax burden into the 47% who don't pay Federal taxes at present. What you're suggesting is great for anyone that makes a cent above the median income, and gets even better as income increases.
 
SamurAchzar said:
That's a way of shifting the tax burden into the 47% who don't pay Federal taxes at present.
Click to expand...

That is the point and one of the reasons that the USA is in its current financial problem.

Hell, if you took 100% of the income of the "rich" you couldn't even cover the deficit.

What is your solution?
 
SamurAchzar said:
That's a way of shifting the tax burden into the 47&#37; who don't pay Federal taxes at present.
Click to expand...
Um, you are incorrect with that statistic.

47% don't pay federal income taxes. Most of those 47% pay payroll and other federal taxes though. So, claiming that 47% don't pay tax is demonstrably false. The total payroll taxes that the federal government collect are almost as big as the income taxes, so if you tried to still get out by claiming that payroll taxes are small, you'd be wrong there too (not that you said it, but I want to prevent you from saying it).

Your point is essentially correct though, the few people who basically pay no tax will be taxed. It is just that your paragraph around your point was so obviously false, I had to mention it.
 
dullard said:
Um, you are incorrect with that statistic.

47% don't pay federal income taxes. Most of those 47% pay payroll and other federal taxes though. So, claiming that 47% don't pay tax is demonstrably false. The total payroll taxes that the federal government collect are almost as big as the income taxes, so if you tried to still get out by claiming that payroll taxes are small, you'd be wrong there too (not that you said it, but I want to prevent you from saying it).

Your point is essentially correct though, the few people who basically pay no tax will be taxed. It is just that your paragraph around your point was so obviously false, I had to mention it.
Click to expand...

How do you feel about the VAT?
 
nick1985 said:
How do you feel about the VAT?
Click to expand...
My VAT feelings would be pretty similar to my feelings on the "fair tax". I must have posted long ramblings here at least a half dozen times about that. I'll try to summarize.

Basically, I wouldn't object to a SMALL (as in 3&#37; or less) VAT if it were accompained by a reduction in taxes elsewhere. However, like someone above said, I highly doubt that it would be small, I doubt that it would stay small, and I doubt that there would be any lasting reductions in taxes elsewhere. So, basically, we'd then end up with triple taxation which is worse than the double taxation we have now. I'd perfer not to have a small VAT, but I'd live with it if it ever happened.

I'd be strongly opposed to a large VAT (which I assume would come with a large reduction in other taxes for this post). A large VAT creates many numerous problems. Here are some of them:

1) Think about people with money now. That money has already been taxed (income tax, payroll tax, and possibly other taxes like corporate tax). All the equity in your house, all the money in your bank, all the post-tax investments you have, etc have already been taxed. Now we are to pay another large tax on this already taxed money? That is certainly something to protest.

2) It is quite regressive. Meaning, it pushes the tax burden to the poor who really can't afford it. They should pay some tax, of course, and they do pay payroll taxes. I wouldn't be against them paying a small VAT too. But a large VAT means that a large chunk of their money is put into the government instead of buying goods/services. It would destroy our economy.

3) Number 2 is true, unless we give even MORE money to the poor. Give them more entitlements, more monthly checks, etc. I do not think they need many more new entitlements.

4) The rich suddenly don't pay much tax. They spend very little of what they make, thus, very little of their income would be subject to the VAT. If they wanted to, they are rich enough to buy everything overseas, and thus they could completely avoid the VAT. This would be the biggest boon ever to the rich. At a time when the rich are so, so much richer than the poor, they don't need yet another way to save on taxes.

5) The rich get a break (since most of their money would be untaxed), and the poor may get a break (if we give them entitlements to stop the regressive part of the tax). So where does that lost tax money come from? From the middle class, from me and from you. This would be the biggest tax burden shift in the history of the country from the rich/poor to us. That is my selfish reason to be against the VAT. Plus, the VAT adds a lot more headache with yet another system of taxes to file and collect. Where does the money to pay those extra expenses come from? From you and me. More paperwork for businesses raises costs above and beyond the VAT. More IRS work raises their need to tax us.

6) Income taxes and payroll taxes are generally double-checked. Your employer and you both report the income. It is much harder to scam the system. If you under-report your income, your employer won't (they want to claim the full deduction). And vise-versa. That is, unless you own your own business and no one checks up on your math. The VAT has no double-check mechanism. Suddenly it is very, very easy to cheat on taxes. Think under the table cash deals are bad now (especially with illegal aliens)? Wait until black markets boom in a large VAT situation.

There are more minor points, but I need to go off to a birthday party now. Have a good weekend. Conclusion, properly done (hah) I'd be fine with a small VAT, I'd be very adamantly opposed to a large VAT.
 
Last edited:
PricklyPete said:
I just don't see it happening unless the Dems want to murder their re-election chances.
Click to expand...

This doesn't matter to progressives. They lie to get into office, and they do get into office every 10 years because somehow people forget that they lie. DAT FAT CASH is promised, they pass whatever horrible crap they want, then all lose office. But the damage is done, the right amounts of money hit the right bank accounts, the right enemies got murdered, so they're happy. By the time the polls come in for reelection they find out if it's time to start lying to get back in for a few more years or flee the country, retire, suicide, etc.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top