internet tax: yes or no?

[Frdm51472]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472
So the next time there is an influenza breakout, or something worse, remember our vaccine is all gone, because you wanted that extra $2 a week in your check.

Sounds to me like a good argument for privatizing those vaccines instead of leaving them in government monopoly.

Yes, I trust a corporate private hospital to distribute more than I do the government.

I dont know what cave you have lived in, but private hospitals arent very good with community service.

EDIT: vaccines are already produced and sold on the private market. The government just has a stranglehold on the drug manufacturers and forces them to keep pricing extremely low.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You can laugh at Canada's taxes - as I do - but I think the US is heading in the same direction. Unless I'm mistaken taxes are higher now than they were in 1993. Higher then than in 1983, 1973, etc.

Keep going back. Income tax rates have been far, far higher than they are today. It was up to 77% in 1918.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: Frdm51472

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472
So the next time there is an influenza breakout, or something worse, remember our vaccine is all gone, because you wanted that extra $2 a week in your check.

Sounds to me like a good argument for privatizing those vaccines instead of leaving them in government monopoly.

Yes, I trust a corporate private hospital to distribute more than I do the government.

I dont know what cave you have lived in, but private hospitals arent very good with community service.

EDIT: vaccines are already produced and sold on the private market. The government just has a stranglehold on the drug manufacturers and forces them to keep pricing extremely low.

If you're arguing the benefits of what you do I won't dispute it. Undoubtedly some government groups are essential. You can't privatize the military, for instance.

But, you also can't deny that if it was run as a business the government would have gone bankrupt long ago. It just doesn't run smoothly enough because, unlike a business, it KNOWS it's going to be here in 5 years regardless of how crappy it does. Sure, a president may not get re-elected, but frankly the bar has been set pretty low so it's not like a president has to come in and balance things anyway. And, if they tried, as Vic mentioned the government employees are such a huge voting number now, it's tough to work against.

 

[StageLeft]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You can laugh at Canada's taxes - as I do - but I think the US is heading in the same direction. Unless I'm mistaken taxes are higher now than they were in 1993. Higher then than in 1983, 1973, etc.

Keep going back. Income tax rates have been far, far higher than they are today. It was up to 77% in 1918.

It's not fair to include times of war

And before anybody says it currently the US is not in a "war against terrorism" in the conventional sense of an ending ever likely to happen, so what is going on now to fight terrorism is likely to continue on indefinitely.

 

[ViRGE]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ViRGE
Yes; why should an internet purchase be tax free, but not a B&M purchase? The state/county/city where the store is located should get its usual tax rate enforced

This is not about sales tax, but an internet access tax which would show up on your ISP bills. Similar to the taxes you pay on your phone and cable bills.

Ahh, ok then. I am very much opposed to taxing internet access.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: Frdm51472

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472
So the next time there is an influenza breakout, or something worse, remember our vaccine is all gone, because you wanted that extra $2 a week in your check.

Sounds to me like a good argument for privatizing those vaccines instead of leaving them in government monopoly.

Yes, I trust a corporate private hospital to distribute more than I do the government.

I dont know what cave you have lived in, but private hospitals arent very good with community service.

I see our governments still only hire the best and brightest

Who said anything about entrusting it to the monopoly of a single private hospital? In fact, I specifically stated taking the vaccine out of the monopoly situation it is in now. Why not just make it like a regular prescription drug, handled directly by the manufacturing pharmaceutical. After all, that's where government buys their vaccines in the first place, do they not? People could then buy the vaccine directly, and government costs could be avoided.

Hey... you were the one who said first that it's okay to cut vaccines to the people if government can't get their extra money. I'm just the one who thinks your sh!tty bureaucratic attitude sucks balls, and that you should be fired. So I'm just looking for a way to do that. Seems like there are some other very valid alternatives that wouldn't threaten us with basic and lifesaving medical supplies just because we don't like to see our taxes jacked up every year.

 

[V00DOO]

Fvck no. That's why I don't buy high value items from Newegg or Buy.com cause of in state tax.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You can laugh at Canada's taxes - as I do - but I think the US is heading in the same direction. Unless I'm mistaken taxes are higher now than they were in 1993. Higher then than in 1983, 1973, etc.

Keep going back. Income tax rates have been far, far higher than they are today. It was up to 77% in 1918.

It's not fair to include times of war .

Yes we were at war. The top bracket at ~90% in WWII.

"The top income tax rate rose during World War I to 77%. In World War II, it reached more than 90%. In 1953, with the Cold War raging, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower refused to support a Republican move to reduce it. By 1980, it was still way up there, at 70%."
Link

More data (top rates listed in this post):
1862: 5%
1913: 7%
1916: 15%
1917: 67%
1918: 77%
1920s: as low as 25%
1936: 79%
1941: 94%
1954: 87%
1984: 50%
1986: 28%
1990: 31%
1993: 39.6%
2001: 33%

I didn't list every single change, just some highlighted ones. Now compare that to the post above stating that rates have dramatically increased in recent decades.

 

[Frdm51472]

We could trun a profit, but that would force the underprivledged to be absolutely without health care once again.

 

[Ausm]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472
So the next time there is an influenza breakout, or something worse, remember our vaccine is all gone, because you wanted that extra $2 a week in your check.

Sounds to me like a good argument for privatizing those vaccines instead of leaving them in government monopoly.

Yes, I trust a corporate private hospital to distribute more than I do the government.

I dont know what cave you have lived in, but private hospitals arent very good with community service.

I see our governments still only hire the best and brightest

Who said anything about entrusting it to the monopoly of a single private hospital? In fact, I specifically stated taking the vaccine out of the monopoly situation it is in now. Why not just make it like a regular prescription drug, handled directly by the manufacturing pharmaceutical. After all, that's where government buys their vaccines in the first place, do they not? People could then buy the vaccine directly, and government costs could be avoided.

Hey... you were the one who said first that it's okay to cut vaccines to the people if government can't get their extra money. I'm just the one who thinks your sh!tty bureaucratic attitude sucks balls, and that you should be fired. So I'm just looking for a way to do that. Seems like there are some other very valid alternatives that wouldn't threaten us with basic and lifesaving medical supplies just because we don't like to see our taxes jacked up every year.

Vic you hit the nail right on the head...why the hell would the government want anyone with a brain working for them...

Ausm

 

[bcterps]

Originally posted by: ViRGE

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: ViRGE Yes; why should an internet purchase be tax free, but not a B&M purchase? The state/county/city where the store is located should get its usual tax rate enforced

This is not about sales tax, but an internet access tax which would show up on your ISP bills. Similar to the taxes you pay on your phone and cable bills.

Ahh, ok then. I am very much opposed to taxing internet access.

The original post is about internet SALES tax. I am opposed to taxing internet access, but it's going to happen sooner or later, what are you going to do, stop using the internet? Although I don't want to pay more for internet access, it's no different than phone service, which is also taxed.

 

[Vic]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You can laugh at Canada's taxes - as I do - but I think the US is heading in the same direction. Unless I'm mistaken taxes are higher now than they were in 1993. Higher then than in 1983, 1973, etc.

Keep going back. Income tax rates have been far, far higher than they are today. It was up to 77% in 1918.

True, but that was in a time of war and only on taxable income in excess of $1 million in 1918. I'm not going to calculate the inflation rates, but that would be like income in excess of $100 million today I would think.
Income under $1 million was taxed at 6%.

 

[Frdm51472]

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472

Originally posted by: Vic

Originally posted by: Frdm51472
So the next time there is an influenza breakout, or something worse, remember our vaccine is all gone, because you wanted that extra $2 a week in your check.

Sounds to me like a good argument for privatizing those vaccines instead of leaving them in government monopoly.

Yes, I trust a corporate private hospital to distribute more than I do the government.

I dont know what cave you have lived in, but private hospitals arent very good with community service.

I see our governments still only hire the best and brightest

Who said anything about entrusting it to the monopoly of a single private hospital? In fact, I specifically stated taking the vaccine out of the monopoly situation it is in now. Why not just make it like a regular prescription drug, handled directly by the manufacturing pharmaceutical. After all, that's where government buys their vaccines in the first place, do they not? People could then buy the vaccine directly, and government costs could be avoided.

Hey... you were the one who said first that it's okay to cut vaccines to the people if government can't get their extra money. I'm just the one who thinks your sh!tty bureaucratic attitude sucks balls, and that you should be fired. So I'm just looking for a way to do that. Seems like there are some other very valid alternatives that wouldn't threaten us with basic and lifesaving medical supplies just because we don't like to see our taxes jacked up every year.

First off, I see this has turned into a personal attack, good for you! Secondly, as I stated in my above post, vaccines are not a monopoly and are sold on the private market, so I see you like to jump to unsubstantiated conclusions for mere shock value. To add to this, nearly 50% of the vaccine we receive gets distributed to private doctors and hospitals, and the national stockpile's distribution plan includes all healthcare facilities.

 

[Miramonti]

Regular sales tax would be appropriate imo.

 

[dullard]

Originally posted by: Vic

True, but that was in a time of war and only on taxable income in excess of $1 million in 1918. I'm not going to calculate the inflation rates, but that would be like income in excess of $100 million today I would think.
Income under $1 million was taxed at 6%.

Thanks for the link. It shows exactly what I was arguing. That the poster who said 2003>1993>1983>1973 was incorrect in every case. The top rate acutally is like this: 1973>1983>1993>2003.

 

[Amused]

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Skoorb

Originally posted by: dullard

Originally posted by: Skoorb
You can laugh at Canada's taxes - as I do - but I think the US is heading in the same direction. Unless I'm mistaken taxes are higher now than they were in 1993. Higher then than in 1983, 1973, etc.

Keep going back. Income tax rates have been far, far higher than they are today. It was up to 77% in 1918.

It's not fair to include times of war .

Yes we were at war. The top bracket at ~90% in WWII.

"The top income tax rate rose during World War I to 77%. In World War II, it reached more than 90%. In 1953, with the Cold War raging, Republican President Dwight Eisenhower refused to support a Republican move to reduce it. By 1980, it was still way up there, at 70%."
Link

More data (top rates listed in this post):
1862: 5%
1913: 7%
1916: 15%
1917: 67%
1918: 77%
1920s: as low as 25%
1936: 79%
1941: 94%
1954: 87%
1984: 50%
1986: 28%
1990: 31%
1993: 39.6%
2001: 33%

I didn't list every single change, just some highlighted ones. Now compare that to the post above stating that rates have dramatically increased in recent decades.

I just love this. What people fail to tell you is, with vastly more allowable deductions and tax shelters, the average top earner paid LESS than they do today in income taxes. When Reagan dropped the tax rates, he closed most loopholes, shelters and deductions. So, in reality, the rich pay more today than they did when tax rates were at ridiculous and mostly symbolic levels.

And when you look at it, it's a damn good thing. A flat 90+% tax rate with few if any deductions and shelters would have all but stopped industry and investment in it's tracks.

And that, folks, is the REST of the story the liberal propaganda folks don't want you to know.

 

[DainBramaged]

Bad idea.