• 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!

Revisit - Tax Reform

Tax Reform

  • Total voters
    28
jonny5 said:
Exactly, so we're back to citizens having almost no recourse when govt violates their end of the deal. We violate it, they lock us up. They violate it, we have to jump through extraordinary measures to correct it.
Click to expand...
Which "deal" is that?

There's nothing "extraordinary" about appealing a court decision, it happens every day.

If you're against a particular law you should be doing something about it before it even becomes a law. Chances are you're not alone and an appeal can happen en masse as soon as the first person is ticketed/fined for it.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
Which "deal" is that?

There's nothing "extraordinary" about appealing a court decision, it happens every day.

If you're against a particular law you should be doing something about it before it even becomes a law. Chances are you're not alone and an appeal can happen en masse as soon as the first person is ticketed/fined for it.
Click to expand...

The deal is the constitution. The govt violates it constantly and there is no legal means to combat it because the judges are the govt.
 
jonny5 said:
The deal is the constitution. The govt violates it constantly and there is no legal means to combat it because the judges are the govt.
Click to expand...
You are welcome to provide evidence of bias but I don't think you'll find any. The USSC has often struct down laws and parts of laws for being unconstitutional. That's the reason for the three branches of our government.

In the case of income taxes there's an Amendment that covers it, an Amendment to which 42/48 States agreed.
 
Last edited:
MoSurveyor said:
You are welcome to provide evidence of bias but I don't think you'll find any. The USSC has often struct down laws and parts of laws for being unconstitutional. That's the reason for the three branches of our government.

In the case of income taxes there's an Amendment that covers it, an Amendment to which 42/48 States agreed.
Click to expand...

Im not talking about income taxes. The recent health care ruling however is one such example of where the court ruled clearly in favor of an unconstitutional action of govt.
 
jonny5 said:
Im not talking about income taxes. The recent health care ruling however is one such example of where the court ruled clearly in favor of an unconstitutional action of govt.
Click to expand...
In some people's opinion it is and in other people's opinion it isn't. Citing one example out of 200 years isn't even close to enough evidence to claim bias.
 
The left is hung up on wanting people who make more to pay more. The flat tax of a set percentage does that, but it doesn't sink in. If I make $50K I'll pay $5K, if I make $100K I'll pay $10K. Look it up... it's MORE!!! The left is hell bent on not only punishing someone for being successful, but they want to bleed them dry so they can cash in and get more free stuff. Someone has to pay for all the free Obamaphones.
 
Reform if that means abolishing the entire system and then replacing it with the flat tax system.
 
jonny5 said:
How many examples would you like?
Click to expand...
Considering the USSC has probably heard over 10,000 cases over the years, 1000 cases of bias - 1/10 - would be a good starting point for an argument of bias.
 
MoSurveyor said:
Considering the USSC has probably heard over 10,000 cases over the years, 1000 cases of bias - 1/10 - would be a good starting point for an argument of bias.
Click to expand...

So if i meet your arbitrary number then i will absolutely convince you that Im right?
 
jonny5 said:
So if i meet your arbitrary number then i will absolutely convince you that Im right?
Click to expand...
No, I just said it was a good starting point for proving an argument of bias.
 
digsbe said:
I think we need to reform taxes. We need to eliminate loopholes and simplify the tax code to prevent businesses and high wealth individuals from legally dodging taxes. I think income taxes are too high and should ultimately be lowered to a max rate of around 15% for individual income, but this should also be done after spending has been drastically cut (which isn't really a tax issue). I think we need to make tax rates fair for single and married people, everyone should file as a single individual. Progressive taxation is a necessary evil in my book until there is a system that better handles taxation without a progressive system. However, I think that the progressive ladder should be lowered where the max rate is 30% and only applying on the top 500k+ in income, the lowest bracket should be 15% with that starting at the 15k income level mark (anything under 15k should be tax free).
Click to expand...

There are more loopholes--actual loopholes--that benefit the IRS than there are that benefit the citizens. Hence the reason the tax code is so complex and convoluted. The government will never reform the code by simplifying it. If anything, they're make it more complex and confusing, so the government can continue to benefit.
 
You don't understand the left. If you make $50k and pay $5k that is fine so long as you pay $1k in union dues. But if you make a 100k they don't want $10K they wants $55k so you are equal to the guy who made $50k and paid union dues.


Woodman909 said:
The left is hung up on wanting people who make more to pay more. The flat tax of a set percentage does that, but it doesn't sink in. If I make $50K I'll pay $5K, if I make $100K I'll pay $10K. Look it up... it's MORE!!! The left is hell bent on not only punishing someone for being successful, but they want to bleed them dry so they can cash in and get more free stuff. Someone has to pay for all the free Obamaphones.
Click to expand...
 
CalGun said:
You don't understand the left. If you make $50k and pay $5k that is fine so long as you pay $1k in union dues. But if you make a 100k they don't want $10K they wants $55k so you are equal to the guy who made $50k and paid union dues.
Click to expand...
When our income is near the same as an average household, and the last $10k of that income is at a higher percentage than Romney paid, that's bias toward the upper class - I don't care how you cut it or how you try to spin it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom