Tie Taxes to GDP

[NaughtyGeek]

Everyone always talks about our "regressive" tax system but does it really work that way? Does not your contribution to GDP indicate your "ownership" in our country/economy and therefore your vesting in that ownership is your responsibility as far as providing services to maintain the current support system? GDP was 13.13 Trillion dollars last year. So, for every 130 Billion dollars you created/earned, you should be liable for 1% of the cost of running the country no? Isn't it time we quit moaning about the current system taking from the rich and giving to the poor and figure out how it is that such a large portion of our household income has to go to pay for the maintenance of a system we have such an infinitely small ownership in?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek
Everyone always talks about our "regressive" tax system but does it really work that way? Does not your contribution to GDP indicate your "ownership" in our country/economy and therefore your vesting in that ownership is your responsibility as far as providing services to maintain the current support system? GDP was 13.13 Trillion dollars last year. So, for every 130 Billion dollars you created/earned, you should be liable for 1% of the cost of running the country no? Isn't it time we quit moaning about the current system taking from the rich and giving to the poor and figure out how it is that such a large portion of our household income has to go to pay for the maintenance of a system we have such an infinitely small ownership in?

Oh damn, I think the Wealthy would be ecstatic about Obama's Tax proposals compared to that. :laugh: (if I'm understanding you correctly)

Has anyone done the Math on such an idea or did you just think it up? Sounds interesting.

edit: On second thought, this probably wouldn't be much different than the current Income Tax. It would have a few twists, but should work kinda similar. Exception might be in regards to Loopholes. Loopholes could be implemented in tough Economic times as an alternative or associate with increased Government Spending(Deficit or Slush Fund spending) to stimulate the Economy.

 

[yllus]

Well, that would be a model system of disincentives for people attaining financial success. And it doesn't even make sense. Why should you be taxed on your profits - shouldn't you be taxed on your usage?

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: yllus
Well, that would be a model system of disincentives for people attaining financial success. And it doesn't even make sense. Why should you be taxed on your profits - shouldn't you be taxed on your usage?

It might be a disincentive, it might not. One would still gain Wealth, their Tax Share would just increase as well. Someone like Bill Gates could see a lot of Fluctuation in their Net Worth(possibly) if they have a down year compared to the previous, but they would still be very Wealthy for a very long time.

 

[NaughtyGeek]

Originally posted by: yllus
Well, that would be a model system of disincentives for people attaining financial success. And it doesn't even make sense. Why should you be taxed on your profits - shouldn't you be taxed on your usage?

So what is your usage of the military? When it's all said and done, the military is here to protect the country's assets and my sum total of assets by the time I'm dead won't be .0000001% of what the country is worth. Why am I, or anyone else without significant holdings, on the line to pay for asset protection?

Second, do you really think it's going to be a disincentive for someone to try to earn a tenth of the countries wealth at the cost of shouldering a tenth of the expense? I highly doubt that. The problem is we've all been sold into this idea that we're responsible to pay for the maintenance of a system we don't own. Our SS money is going out to pay for our country's maintenance while those actually in control of the major assets and wealth who will never need that system get off without a hitch.

In fact, it would likely become a boon to the economy as people would suddenly get a 10, 15, 20 % raise. Suddenly the true riches of every American could be put to work strengthening our economy. People who were struggling to make ends meet would suddenly be able to afford extras like education for their children.

Don't get me wrong, I know without a doubt something like this will NEVER happen. The true owners of this country will never allow it and there's plenty of blissfully ignorant dolts out there that will justify why they don't have to for them. Just a thought since people seem so wrapped up in the manufactured class war of taxes never realizing that from millionaires down to the lowly minimum wage earners, we're all slaves to those that truly run and own this country.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: yllus
Well, that would be a model system of disincentives for people attaining financial success. And it doesn't even make sense. Why should you be taxed on your profits - shouldn't you be taxed on your usage?

So what is your usage of the military? When it's all said and done, the military is here to protect the country's assets and my sum total of assets by the time I'm dead won't be .0000001% of what the country is worth. Why am I, or anyone else without significant holdings, on the line to pay for asset protection?

Second, do you really think it's going to be a disincentive for someone to try to earn a tenth of the countries wealth at the cost of shouldering a tenth of the expense? I highly doubt that. The problem is we've all been sold into this idea that we're responsible to pay for the maintenance of a system we don't own. Our SS money is going out to pay for our country's maintenance while those actually in control of the major assets and wealth who will never need that system get off without a hitch.

In fact, it would likely become a boon to the economy as people would suddenly get a 10, 15, 20 % raise. Suddenly the true riches of every American could be put to work strengthening our economy. People who were struggling to make ends meet would suddenly be able to afford extras like education for their children.

Don't get me wrong, I know without a doubt something like this will NEVER happen. The true owners of this country will never allow it and there's plenty of blissfully ignorant dolts out there that will justify why they don't have to for them. Just a thought since people seem so wrapped up in the manufactured class war of taxes never realizing that from millionaires down to the lowly minimum wage earners, we're all slaves to those that truly run and own this country.

You probably would see a Capital Flight. It's an interesting idea and would likely be the most "Fair" system thought of to date. Would only work, I suspect, on a Global Scale.

 

[ebaycj]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: NaughtyGeek

Originally posted by: yllus
Well, that would be a model system of disincentives for people attaining financial success. And it doesn't even make sense. Why should you be taxed on your profits - shouldn't you be taxed on your usage?

So what is your usage of the military? When it's all said and done, the military is here to protect the country's assets and my sum total of assets by the time I'm dead won't be .0000001% of what the country is worth. Why am I, or anyone else without significant holdings, on the line to pay for asset protection?

Second, do you really think it's going to be a disincentive for someone to try to earn a tenth of the countries wealth at the cost of shouldering a tenth of the expense? I highly doubt that. The problem is we've all been sold into this idea that we're responsible to pay for the maintenance of a system we don't own. Our SS money is going out to pay for our country's maintenance while those actually in control of the major assets and wealth who will never need that system get off without a hitch.

In fact, it would likely become a boon to the economy as people would suddenly get a 10, 15, 20 % raise. Suddenly the true riches of every American could be put to work strengthening our economy. People who were struggling to make ends meet would suddenly be able to afford extras like education for their children.

Don't get me wrong, I know without a doubt something like this will NEVER happen. The true owners of this country will never allow it and there's plenty of blissfully ignorant dolts out there that will justify why they don't have to for them. Just a thought since people seem so wrapped up in the manufactured class war of taxes never realizing that from millionaires down to the lowly minimum wage earners, we're all slaves to those that truly run and own this country.

You probably would see a Capital Flight. It's an interesting idea and would likely be the most "Fair" system thought of to date. Would only work, I suspect, on a Global Scale.

Yep, because when you start assigning "ownership" to governmental costs, people are going to expect way way more input in governmental decisions than they do now.

It would be way more efficient than what we have now though.

 

[ProfJohn]

Seems like your system would be unfair to the poor. Unless I misunderstand it.

BTW I read an article that said our government cost $4000 per tax payer. So if you pay less than $4000 a year in taxes you are getting a 'free ride' and if you pay more you are carrying the load of those who get the 'free ride'.

 

[JD50]

Tax everyone, let God sort it out.

 

[Blain]

I love the idea of having a "Consumption Tax", (not VA tax).
But I spend less than I make... :thumbsup:
For those that live on credit and spend more than they actually make... Sorry Bub! :laugh:
Some basic items can be exempt and the downtrodden can be prebated a check to help balance things out.