• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

GOP 2012 budget to make $4 trillion-plus in cuts

disneydude said:
No. The flat tax is nothing more than a veiled attempt to cut taxes even further for the wealthiest Americans. I prefer a return to the pre-Reagan days, before Reagan raised taxes on the working class and cut taxes of the wealthiest Americans in half.

Remember those days, when the people of this country could actually afford to buy a home, the "American dream" was alive and well and a two parent working home was a luxury not a necessity?

Remember those days?.....Reagan and the so called "Family values" party but an end to that, took parents out of the homes, created generations of latch key kids and have bankrupted this once great country.
Click to expand...

I remember sitting in long lines at the gas pump. I remember my dad working 3 jobs to make ends meet. I remember unemployment being a big problem. I remember the Iranian hostage crisis. Ahh, those days before Reagan - they were great weren't they?

:roll:
 
Hugh_Akston said:
I remember sitting in long lines at the gas pump. I remember my dad working 3 jobs to make ends meet. I remember unemployment being a big problem. I remember the Iranian hostage crisis. Ahh, those days before Reagan - they were great weren't they?

:roll:
Click to expand...

LOL...I take it you probably conviently forgot "My heart wants to believe I didn't lie to the American people, but the facts and evidence say otherwise"...Ronald "Iran/Contra" Reagan....right?
 
disneydude said:
LOL...I take it you probably conviently forgot "My heart wants to believe I didn't lie to the American people, but the facts and evidence say otherwise"...Ronald "Iran/Contra" Reagan....right?
Click to expand...

Where were you when this was discussed on the various Reagan threads? Why would you hijack this thread to argue about Reagan? Typical diversion when the topic confuses you.
 
Conservative said:
Where were you when this was discussed on the various Reagan threads? Why would you hijack this thread to argue about Reagan? Typical diversion when the topic confuses you.
Click to expand...

No....follow along. This isn't the deflect and deny style that you are a master at. If you followed the context...you would see that there was a discussion going on about what type of tax system I believe would be beneficial to the country. I mentioned that I would like to see a return to the pre-Reagan big tax cut for the wealthy days, when people could afford to buy a home, something many people cannot do any more due to the redistribution of wealth under Reagan/Bush.

So c'mon con...if you wanna join the party...bring something to the table....other than your usual.
 
Moderator's Warning:
Cease with the personal attacks or else.
 
disneydude said:
No....follow along. This isn't the deflect and deny style that you are a master at. If you followed the context...you would see that there was a discussion going on about what type of tax system I believe would be beneficial to the country. I mentioned that I would like to see a return to the pre-Reagan big tax cut for the wealthy days, when people could afford to buy a home, something many people cannot do any more due to the redistribution of wealth under Reagan/Bush.

So c'mon con...if you wanna join the party...bring something to the table....other than your usual.
Click to expand...

Ok, so how much revenue would a huge tax on the wealthy generate for the govt remembering we have a 14.3 trillion dollar debt? Seems that high tax rates in your world trump actual revenue generated? Did revenue go up from Federal Income Taxes during the Reagan years with a 10-10-5% income tax rate reduction? Do higher tax rates mean higher tax revenue? What do those evil rich and corporations do with the revenue they get from lower tax rates? You really need to get out of that liberal box and think bigger picture.
 
disneydude said:
LOL...I take it you probably conviently forgot "My heart wants to believe I didn't lie to the American people, but the facts and evidence say otherwise"...Ronald "Iran/Contra" Reagan....right?
Click to expand...

What does Iran/Contra have to do with any of this? Reagan was far from perfect, but he is the best President we've had in my lifetime. Nice try at deflecting though.
 
Hugh_Akston said:
What does Iran/Contra have to do with any of this? Reagan was far from perfect, but he is the best President we've had in my lifetime. Nice try at deflecting though.
Click to expand...

Second worst in my lifetime.
 
disneydude said:
I dunno...why don't you ask GE and all the other corporations who take billions in government handouts and don't pay a cent in taxes.
Click to expand...

oh, that upsets you? tell us, then, what your feelings are on the House 2012 budget closing those loopholes and ending corporate welfare?
 
disneydude said:
LOL...I take it you probably conviently forgot "My heart wants to believe I didn't lie to the American people, but the facts and evidence say otherwise"...Ronald "Iran/Contra" Reagan....right?
Click to expand...

yeah......


tell me again how an arms selling scandal somehow negates the point that the nation was headed downards under carter, and reagan turned it around?
 
cpwill said:
oh, that upsets you? tell us, then, what your feelings are on the House 2012 budget closing those loopholes and ending corporate welfare?
Click to expand...

I'll believe they can accomplish that miracle when I see it. Those same corporations that get welfare also have lobbyists and donate to campaigns, after all.

But, I could be wrong. My cynicism proves right only about 90% of the time, after all.
 
Politicians only do what the voters let them get away with. I blame a lot of this on the Early 20th Century Progressives and the move to make Senators elected by "the people". All that did was ENSURE such stupidity.
 
MrVicchio said:
Politicians only do what the voters let them get away with. I blame a lot of this on the Early 20th Century Progressives and the move to make Senators elected by "the people". All that did was ENSURE such stupidity.
Click to expand...

Repealing the 17th would fix a lot!
 
Hugh_Akston said:
So you are in support of a flat tax where corporations can't play the system? That's great news!!!
Click to expand...

Actually, a flat tax would be perfect. Exempt food, medicine, school supplies, and rent / mortgage for actual persons. For corporations, exempt raw materials, so that products are not taxed twice. Also, eliminate offshore exemptions, which encourage corporations to change their mailing addresses to PO boxes in the Cayman Islands.
 
danarhea said:
Actually, a flat tax would be perfect. Exempt food, medicine, school supplies, and rent / mortgage for actual persons. For corporations, exempt raw materials, so that products are not taxed twice. Also, eliminate offshore exemptions, which encourage corporations to change their mailing addresses to PO boxes in the Cayman Islands.
Click to expand...

A flat tax would eliminate the IRS, eliminate the gargantuan tax code, eliminate loopholes that companies like GE utilize and everyone pays their fair share. Everyone pays the same percentage on what they purchase. You purchase more, you pay more in taxes.

I figured out roughly what I would be paying a couple of years ago. I would be paying about $450-500 more per year in taxes and the government would save billions by eliminating the IRS. It's a win-win for government (more in revenue generated from taxes and eliminating the money pit that the IRS is). Of course the "tax the evil rich bastards" crowd would never go for such a thing, even though it makes complete sense and saves the government billions per year while generating more in tax revenue.
 
Some issues:

danarhea said:
Exempt food, medicine, school supplies, and rent / mortgage for actual persons.
Click to expand...

Unfortunately, that would eliminate 40%-50% of the tax base, meaning the tax rates would have to be quite high to raise revenue similar to current levels of revenue.

U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

Indeed, I believe this tax base issue is the reason Dick Armey proposed a flat tax with no deductions other than a large personal exemption. His flat tax plan contained no mortgage interest deduction, no state/local taxes deduction, etc., but offered a very low tax rate.

For corporations, exempt raw materials, so that products are not taxed twice.
Click to expand...

Exempting only raw materials would create a bias in favor of firms that consume a lot of raw materials. Hence, among other things, professional services firms would be at a decided disadvantage relative to manufacturing firms when it comes to the tax code, even as knowledge/information-intensive industries are growing relatively more important on a global basis.
 
donsutherland1 said:
Some issues:



Unfortunately, that would eliminate 40%-50% of the tax base, meaning the tax rates would have to be quite high to raise revenue similar to current levels of revenue.

U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

Indeed, I believe this tax base issue is the reason Dick Armey proposed a flat tax with no deductions other than a large personal exemption. His flat tax plan contained no mortgage interest deduction, no state/local taxes deduction, etc., but offered a very low tax rate.



Exempting only raw materials would create a bias in favor of firms that consume a lot of raw materials. Hence, among other things, professional services firms would be at a decided disadvantage relative to manufacturing firms when it comes to the tax code, even as knowledge/information-intensive industries are growing relatively more important on a global basis.
Click to expand...

In 2009 47% of the income earners didn't pay any Federal Income taxes anyway and in my opinion that is a travesty

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/04/14/business/economy/14leonhardt.html
 
Dittohead not! said:
I'll believe they can accomplish that miracle when I see it. Those same corporations that get welfare also have lobbyists and donate to campaigns, after all.

But, I could be wrong. My cynicism proves right only about 90% of the time, after all.
Click to expand...

Ryan knows if he doesn't keep this thing revenue neutral then his argument for cutting rates is f&$*ed, and so is he. I generally trust politicians to look after their personal political interests.
 
Hugh_Akston said:
A flat tax would eliminate the IRS, eliminate the gargantuan tax code, eliminate loopholes that companies like GE utilize and everyone pays their fair share. Everyone pays the same percentage on what they purchase. You purchase more, you pay more in taxes.

I figured out roughly what I would be paying a couple of years ago. I would be paying about $450-500 more per year in taxes and the government would save billions by eliminating the IRS. It's a win-win for government (more in revenue generated from taxes and eliminating the money pit that the IRS is). Of course the "tax the evil rich bastards" crowd would never go for such a thing, even though it makes complete sense and saves the government billions per year while generating more in tax revenue.
Click to expand...

While I agree with this completely, anything short of a mob in the street and public beheadings won't get this done.

The tax code is complicated and befuddling by design. To get rid of it would be to virtually eliminate any and all power held by those we elect. They won't give that up, either side, without anything short of civil war.
 
Erod said:
While I agree with this completely, anything short of a mob in the street and public beheadings won't get this done.

The tax code is complicated and befuddling by design. To get rid of it would be to virtually eliminate any and all power held by those we elect. They won't give that up, either side, without anything short of civil war.
Click to expand...

To a liberal rate means more than dollars collected because liberals ignore personal behavior and incentive. To a liberal when rates go up individual behavior never changes as they ignore reality. Reagan cut income taxes 10-10-5% over three years and Income tax revenue almost doubled. Liberals say that when you cut taxes 10% that nothing changes in behavior and revenue goes down. Facts simply are ignored.
 
donsutherland1 said:
Some issues:



Unfortunately, that would eliminate 40%-50% of the tax base, meaning the tax rates would have to be quite high to raise revenue similar to current levels of revenue.

U.S. Department of Commerce. Bureau of Economic Analysis

Indeed, I believe this tax base issue is the reason Dick Armey proposed a flat tax with no deductions other than a large personal exemption. His flat tax plan contained no mortgage interest deduction, no state/local taxes deduction, etc., but offered a very low tax rate.



Exempting only raw materials would create a bias in favor of firms that consume a lot of raw materials. Hence, among other things, professional services firms would be at a decided disadvantage relative to manufacturing firms when it comes to the tax code, even as knowledge/information-intensive industries are growing relatively more important on a global basis.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. By taxing raw materials, then you are essentially taxing the same product twice.
 
Conservative said:
To a liberal rate means more than dollars collected because liberals ignore personal behavior and incentive. To a liberal when rates go up individual behavior never changes as they ignore reality. Reagan cut income taxes 10-10-5% over three years and Income tax revenue almost doubled. Liberals say that when you cut taxes 10% that nothing changes in behavior and revenue goes down. Facts simply are ignored.
Click to expand...

You mean like all of the tax deductions that were eliminated along with that reduction in rate?
 
Dittohead not! said:
You mean like all of the tax deductions that were eliminated along with that reduction in rate?
Click to expand...

No, like all the revenue that was generated when the Reagan tax rate cuts were put into place. Federal Income tax revenue doubled, how do you explain that? People and businesses keeping more of their money stimulates the consumer driven economy and creates new taxpayers. That is what liberals never understand. There has to be incentive to create jobs and economic growth does that.
 
danarhea said:
I respectfully disagree. By taxing raw materials, then you are essentially taxing the same product twice.
Click to expand...

I'm not suggesting that raw materials need to be taxed, only that raw materials, alone should not be subject to favorable tax treatment. A value added tax gets around the problem by levying a tax only on the value that is added to a product/service at each stage of the value chain. Dick Armey's flat tax proposal used the formula gross revenue less the sum of purchases of goods and services/capital equipment/structures/land/wages to arrive at taxable income for companies. Raw materials would be included in the cost of goods purchased. However, a labor-intensive business would not be at a disadvantage, as wages would be completely tax deductible.

Fringe benefits would not have been deductible by companies under the Armey proposal. Why? Because the proposal chose not to tax such benefits as income at the individual level. Therefore, to assure tax neutrality, namely that all income streams would be taxed, but only once, the stage of taxation would have occurred at the business-level (via non-deductibility of fringe benefits).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom