View Poll Results: Question below

Voters
23. You may not vote on this poll
  • Lean Right and like it

    2 8.70%
  • Lean Right and dislike it

    1 4.35%
  • Lean Left and like it

    9 39.13%
  • Lean Left and dislike it

    5 21.74%
  • Set base between 0.1 and 2

    3 13.04%
  • Set base between 2 and 4

    4 17.39%
  • Set base between 4 and 6

    5 21.74%
  • Set base between 6 and 8

    3 13.04%
  • Set base between 8 and 10

    4 17.39%
  • I like pie

    9 39.13%
Multiple Choice Poll.
Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 134

Thread: Thought regarding a tax system

  1. #101
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by Zyphlin View Post
    Whose suggesting to hammer the crap out of people with taxes? Seriously, you've just thrown out a random number at 28% and decided to act like that was somehow my suggestion.
    It's not a random number, it's the current tax rate on the $72,000 to $125,000 tax braket. You're consternating about how the system should flow, but you're not suggesting any numbers. In that case, I can only use the current tax brackets.



    Seems you're hearing wrong. However, I don't believe you're just playing within the rules the government created. I think you like, prefer, and would desperately hold onto the rules the government created out of self interest...country and principles be damned. That's significantly different than just "playing by the rules", that's embracing and supporting them.
    So, now y're calling me a liar and I'm unpatriotic. What kind of work do you do?



    I'll be honest, I'm having a little fun with the whole conservative thing since so often people enjoy having a go at me for not being "conservative" because its not lock step in the method they want. However there is a point to it, specifically pointing out that sometimes we put certain personal thoughts or views ahead of conservative principle sometimes and that in and of itself doesn't necessarily negate one from being "conservative" as I'd hardly call you anything else but that.
    I've never questioned your conservative primciples, so how about saving the game for someone who does.

    I get it, you're looking out for your own. You're comfortable and you don't want anyone rocking that boat. However, I don't think the results of my suggestion would have an outcome such as you're suggesting, I think your suggestion is an over reaction, and I think the total benefit it'd have for the nation would be significantly more than any damage.
    It would have one hell of an impact if my tax bill doubled.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  2. #102
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    I have found that some conservatives instinctively shy away from criticizing subsidies if they happen to be located in the tax code. This is unfortunate, because this is where some of the least efficient subsidies occur, and should be a prime place for fiscal hawks to look for wasteful spending to cut. For example, if Obama proposed a new social program wherein the government would give people a few cents for every mile that they commuted to work, conservatives would be screaming bloody murder...and rightly so. They'd complain about social engineering, and how the government couldn't afford this, and how it isn't the government's place to get people to behave in certain ways...all valid criticisms. And yet, if you include exactly the same subsidy into the tax code instead of a social program, suddenly it's not only OK but it's essential.
    Deductions aren't loopholes, they're subsides now?
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  3. #103
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by JMJ View Post
    Technically, they're opposed to increasing revenue, because they want the federal government to be much smaller. They might prefer to replace with tax credit with a general tax reduction, for instance.
    Wrong. I want to see tax revenue go up, with the creation of jobs, which will happen when the current regime isn't suppressing the private sector any longer.

    Can you possibly imagine how many billions in revenue are being lost because of the drilling ban? New York state is losing out on around $11,000,000 dollars in economic activity, because of the state's drilling ban in the Marcellus Shale.
    Last edited by apdst; 10-20-11 at 01:27 AM.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  4. #104
    Sage
    teamosil's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    San Francisco
    Last Seen
    05-22-14 @ 12:47 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    6,623

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Wrong. I want to see tax revenue go up, with the creation of jobs, which will happen when the current regime isn't suppressing the private sector any longer.

    Can you possibly imagine how many billions in revenue are being lost because of the drilling ban? New York state is losing out on around $11,000 dollars in economic activity, because of the state's drilling ban in the Marcellus Shale.
    Given all the oil subsidies the Republicans have managed to pack into the budget, we probably save money every time a drilling site goes offline.

  5. #105
    Student
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Last Seen
    10-31-11 @ 11:07 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    180

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Wrong. I want to see tax revenue go up, with the creation of jobs, which will happen when the current regime isn't suppressing the private sector any longer.

    Can you possibly imagine how many billions in revenue are being lost because of the drilling ban? New York state is losing out on around $11,000 dollars in economic activity, because of the state's drilling ban in the Marcellus Shale.
    Normally expressed as a % of the economy.

  6. #106
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil View Post
    Given all the oil subsidies the Republicans have managed to pack into the budget, we probably save money every time a drilling site goes offline.
    No, we actually have lost precious revenue, due to the drilling ban. Around 16 billion in revenue. That's not counting the jobs that have been lost and the 1 billion in revenue they would have created.

    Oil companies pay the federal government an 18.75 percent royalty on the oil produced. In 2008, the offshore industry paid $8.3 billion in royalties, and another $9.4 billion for bids on new leases. Last year those bids brought in just $979 million.

    Oil Drill Ban Costs Govt Billions; al-Qaida Targeted Brooklyn Bridge
    Letting the Bush tax cuts expire would create $709 billion over the next 10 years. The oil and gas industry creates 20 times that amount in the same 10 years in royalties and leases alone.
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  7. #107
    Enemy Combatant
    Kandahar's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Washington, DC
    Last Seen
    10-15-13 @ 08:47 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    20,688

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    Deductions aren't loopholes, they're subsides now?
    Most (all?) deductions are subsidies. They're basically the government telling people "We think it's better if you spend your money on X instead of Y...and so we are going to give you a financial incentive to spend it on X instead of Y." That sounds pretty much exactly like a subsidy to me. If there are certain things that we, as a society, want to encourage people to do (e.g. going to college), then it's more efficient to just use government programs to directly subsidize it, instead of mucking about in the tax code to indirectly subsidize it. And if it's not something that we, as a society, want to encourage people to do, then it shouldn't be a deduction in the income tax code in the first place.
    Are you coming to bed?
    I can't. This is important.
    What?
    Someone is WRONG on the internet! -XKCD

  8. #108
    Sage
    apdst's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Bagdad, La.
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 08:55 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    76,584

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by Kandahar View Post
    Most (all?) deductions are subsidies. They're basically the government telling people "We think it's better if you spend your money on X instead of Y...and so we are going to give you a financial incentive to spend it on X instead of Y." That sounds pretty much exactly like a subsidy to me. If there are certain things that we, as a society, want to encourage people to do (e.g. going to college), then it's more efficient to just use government programs to directly subsidize it, instead of mucking about in the tax code to indirectly subsidize it. And if it's not something that we, as a society, want to encourage people to do, then it shouldn't be a deduction in the income tax code in the first place.
    Yeah! Ok!
    Quote Originally Posted by Top Cat View Post
    At least Bill saved his transgressions for grown women. Not suggesting what he did was OK. But he didn't chase 14 year olds.

  9. #109
    Banned
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Theoretical Physics Lab
    Last Seen
    01-06-15 @ 11:06 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Right
    Posts
    25,120

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by teamosil
    Given all the oil subsidies the Republicans have managed to pack into the budget, we probably save money every time a drilling site goes offline.
    You can understand why oil/energy subsidies might be a good idea though - because fuel prices affect almost every aspect of our society. Not only does it directly affect us at the pump, but industrial shipping stays cheap with inexpensive, readily available fuel. Infinite travel methods follow suit as well.

    The real problem exists due to the fact that oil has an inelastic demand, which means - to an extent - they can charge whatever they want.

  10. #110
    Global Moderator
    Moderator

    Zyphlin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    NoMoAuchie
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    47,998

    Re: Thought regarding a tax system

    Quote Originally Posted by apdst View Post
    It's not a random number, it's the current tax rate on the $72,000 to $125,000 tax braket.
    Which is somewhat irrelevant to my suggestion. What does the current tax rate have to do with this specific thread. If you don't like the premise of the thread that doesn't mean you should just come in, ignore it, and talk about taxes in general.

    You're consternating about how the system should flow, but you're not suggesting any numbers. In that case, I can only use the current tax brackets.
    I've suggested very specific numbers. Or more to the point, numbers representing a very specific formula.

    Lets say we went right down the middle with a 5% baseline. That'd put the people making what you mentioned above at 20% rather than 28%.

    And there's nothing guaranteeing under the system that it'd be at 5%. For example, that'd get the "wealthy" up where some liberals would like, but that'd also be hitting the poor with a 5% tax and the lower middle class at 10% which may or may not affect what the democrats would push. That's part of the discussion here...what number would YOU push for to plug into the baseline to make it what you'd like to see

    So, now y're calling me a liar and I'm unpatriotic. What kind of work do you do?
    Nope. I'm saying it seems that based on the principles you've seemed to imply at other times are best for this country...such as small government...that it appears you're against something that would go towards doing that very thing because it'd be harmful to you personally. I'm not calling you a liar, I'm calling you someone who is rationalizing to himself his reasons for going against his principles as spoken about when not directly effecting him and why its okay for you to do so.

    And I work for the Federal Air Marshals.

    I've never questioned your conservative primciples, so how about saving the game for someone who does.
    Hmm, in that case perhaps I'm mistaken in my memory.

    It would have one hell of an impact if my tax bill doubled.
    Sure it would. It'd have an impact if your tax bill quadrupedal to. And it'd have a major impact if the tax bill suddenly turned into dog **** while you held it.

    What does that have to do with this thread? This thread isn't talking about removing deductions from the current tax code, so why is it that is what you keep focusing on instead of what the topic actually is?

Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •