View Poll Results: Would you support Bples Simpson

Voters
10. You may not vote on this poll
  • yes

    4 40.00%
  • no

    3 30.00%
  • other

    1 10.00%
  • not sure enough of what is in it

    2 20.00%
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 24 of 24

Thread: Would you support the Boles Simpson debt reduction plan?

  1. #21
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Would you support the Boles Simpson debt reduction plan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    sure, as long as the end result is not regressive.

    i doubt we'll see it in our lifetimes, though. those deductions and convolutions were paid for by a lot of lobbying. also, what is considered a "loophole," and which loopholes do we eliminate?
    All of them.

    Basically, for income tax, a flat tax of around 25% for all with a maximum of 5% reduction for donation to charity. Adjust tax rate for all as necessary. Capital gains, inheritance, etc, are income. No earned income credit, no family credit, no marriage deduction, etc. At the end of the year, you earned x number of dollars during the year after including losses and then give the government 25% of it.(or whatever other rate meets our needs).

    For Corporations, lets say around 15% for those who have 5% or less profits, 25% for those with between 5-10% profits, 35% for those earning between 10-20% profit and 75% for any corporation earning greater than 20% profit. Taxes apply for only those profits earned in the United States, it's territories or protectorates.

    Tariffs are applied equal to what the other country taxes our products entering their country. If there is a relief of tariffs if the company produces in the US, it is only applied to those products produced in the US. If someone like Toyota only assembles in the US, then we tariff the parts coming in but not the finished model assembled here.

    Government spending is reduced to only those items which are a benefit to all Americans, not a limited number of them. Since Social Security and Medicare are separate tax items, independent of federal income tax withholdings, then they are separated from governments direct control. Like the post office, the government sets it up, but then only chooses it's head and cannot take anything from it. If the final analysis shows that simply buying all seniors and disabled persons a private insurance policy with acceptable co-pay is more cost effective, then we do that instead of the government running the whole show and making the mess of it as they have.

  2. #22
    Global Moderator
    Moderator
    Helix's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Last Seen
    Today @ 07:35 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Independent
    Posts
    37,090

    Re: Would you support the Boles Simpson debt reduction plan?

    Quote Originally Posted by DVSentinel View Post
    All of them.

    Basically, for income tax, a flat tax of around 25% for all with a maximum of 5% reduction for donation to charity. Adjust tax rate for all as necessary. Capital gains, inheritance, etc, are income. No earned income credit, no family credit, no marriage deduction, etc. At the end of the year, you earned x number of dollars during the year after including losses and then give the government 25% of it.(or whatever other rate meets our needs).

    For Corporations, lets say around 15% for those who have 5% or less profits, 25% for those with between 5-10% profits, 35% for those earning between 10-20% profit and 75% for any corporation earning greater than 20% profit. Taxes apply for only those profits earned in the United States, it's territories or protectorates.

    Tariffs are applied equal to what the other country taxes our products entering their country. If there is a relief of tariffs if the company produces in the US, it is only applied to those products produced in the US. If someone like Toyota only assembles in the US, then we tariff the parts coming in but not the finished model assembled here.

    Government spending is reduced to only those items which are a benefit to all Americans, not a limited number of them. Since Social Security and Medicare are separate tax items, independent of federal income tax withholdings, then they are separated from governments direct control. Like the post office, the government sets it up, but then only chooses it's head and cannot take anything from it. If the final analysis shows that simply buying all seniors and disabled persons a private insurance policy with acceptable co-pay is more cost effective, then we do that instead of the government running the whole show and making the mess of it as they have.
    a flat 25 percent tax is incredibly regressive. you're basically proposing a massive tax cut for the top tier and a massive increase for the bottom. (edit to indicate that i just noticed that you included capital gains as income, so that brings down the tax cut for many at the very top.)

    as for corporations, i don't have a problem with allowing businesses to deduct expenses and losses. i'd propose undercutting the lower rates in Europe, but ensure that every corporation actually pays that low rate.

  3. #23
    Sage

    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Location
    The Republic of Texas.
    Last Seen
    11-15-17 @ 11:40 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    5,647

    Re: Would you support the Boles Simpson debt reduction plan?

    Quote Originally Posted by Helix View Post
    a flat 25 percent tax is incredibly regressive. you're basically proposing a massive tax cut for the top tier and a massive increase for the bottom. (edit to indicate that i just noticed that you included capital gains as income, so that brings down the tax cut for many at the very top.)

    as for corporations, i don't have a problem with allowing businesses to deduct expenses and losses. i'd propose undercutting the lower rates in Europe, but ensure that every corporation actually pays that low rate.
    Part of the problem is that we haven't used an equal taxation (equal based upon percentage) in the past, so the system is already way out of whack and a gross adjustment will occur.

    Your corporate tax scheme might help some, but if a company is charging enough to exceed 20% profits in a multibillion dollar corporations, I have no problem cutting the family jewels off. Especially since taxation is based upon profit, which is only after payroll, R&D and other factors have already been taken out. For the most part, the drug companies (last I heard around a 28% profit margin, almost entirely from the US) would be the worst hurt. I haven't looked at all of Europe's taxes, but most companies would be happy I think at a 15% or 25% rate (10% or 20% if the donate enough to charities), especially if they don't have to fess up for overseas profits. Our current nominal tax rate for corporations is around 64% on global profits. Ouch, no wonders they are trying to hide what they can. And since my plan would tax all companies doing business in the US, whether US owned or not, I think we would come out better in the end.

  4. #24
    Sage
    cpwill's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    USofA
    Last Seen
    Today @ 02:43 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Conservative
    Posts
    57,107

    Re: Would you support the Boles Simpson debt reduction plan?

    Quote Originally Posted by lpast View Post
    Marine the harm thats been done to the middleclass and poor did NOT happen in the last 3.5 yrs it started in 1981
    That is incorrect. Middle decile incomes rose from the 1980's as costs of living fell. Until 2008, when we started this grand keynesian experiment we find ourselves in.


    When politicians disperse money, do you think that they follow economic incentives, or political ones?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

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