View Poll Results: Which do you prefer:

Voters
197. You may not vote on this poll
  • Income tax - no changes in the status quo

    39 19.80%
  • Flat tax - Everyone pays the same %

    67 34.01%
  • National sales tax - don't spend, you don't pay taxes

    47 23.86%
  • No tax - Unconstitutional - rely on private donations

    10 5.08%
  • Other - explain

    21 10.66%
  • Cookies!

    13 6.60%
Page 23 of 90 FirstFirst ... 1321222324253373 ... LastLast
Results 221 to 230 of 899

Thread: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

  1. #221
    onomatopoeic
    mbig's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Last Seen
    04-20-17 @ 08:59 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,350

    Re: FairTaxFraud.com

    Quote Originally Posted by rally2xs View Post

    And existing housed wouldn't. Those buying new houses generally have the $$$ to pay such a tax. Poorer people generally buy existing housing.

    "Poorer People generally" RENT which would be Taxed at 30%
    .. even at Fairytax's Bogus Claimed rate.
    Fairytax Discriminates against those who don't have enough money to buy (and never will will with taxing their rent).
    Creating a PERMANENT Underclass.

    When They do buy it's Oft New inexpensive attached housing.

    Taxing RENT is just one of the things that makes Fairytax a NON-starter even for the non-poor.
    Rental costs in cities like NY, SF, Boston, etc are often 50% of a persons income.. especially, but not limited to, the young who are Saving to try and buy a house (which will also be 30% higher if new).
    and I'm not talking 'poor' here. I'm talking a good percent.

    You think most can pay a 30% increase?


    Medical care is already taxed up the wazoo by taxes that would go away under the fair tax. Every nurse a doctor hires, every orderly, everybody is paying social security and medicare that costs that employee 7.65% of their gross earnings and costs their EMPLOYER 7.65% of the employee's gross earnings.

    Oooooh, that's only 1/4 of Fairtax's Claimed rate of 30%. Which is Actually 56% when scored independently
    .

    You think Anyone can afford to pay 30% more for costly Heart operations (or Kidney, Chemo etc)?
    Insurance companies will have to Raise Their rates too to pay for that Huge increase. Not to mention Auto insurance etc.

    I suggest you go back and read/try rebuting posts 144, 147, 149, and 184 .... all debunking/Documenting that Fairtax's ACTUAL neeed rate is in the Mid 50's% range.


    This article you responded to was just last in a series of debunkings, and Probably it's weakest. But still decnt and informative.

    The Fair Tax includes a prebate calculated at the poverty level, which pays for the tax on the necessities of life that those at the poverty level incur, including food. It isn't necessarily big enough to cover someone eating truffles and steak for a $400 plate at some swank restaurant, tho.
    That BS.
    The prebate is far INadequate and only added to try and hide the obvious Regressivity of the tax... but it doesn't come close to mitigating it.

    Do you think the rich and super-rich who now pay either 38% income, or 15% Capital, Gains and Divs, taxes are going to be taxed more or less?

    CEOs of Goldman Sachs/GE/Disney? Billionaires like Buffett who spend relatively NOTHING compared to their active and passive incomes?

    The whole Sick basis of Fairtax is making those who NECESSARILY spend a higher part (next to all) of their incomes pay a Higher Burden. While The Rich who sit on money and collect interest will pay next to nothing Relative to current rates.. not to mention estate taxes.

    (ie simplification), If I make $1 billion and pay $380,000,000 in Income tax alone as well as Divs and Cap gains on my other Invested money.
    WHO Is Going to pay more to make up for the HUGE Tax decrease on me?

    Who's going to make up for their Huge tax Decrease since FT Claims 'Revenue neutral'?


    In fact, what 'Fairytax' does is INVERT The tax Brackets!!
    The new Top bracket will be the Poor and Middle who spend virtually all the make to live .. they'll now pay "30%" of their income since they necessarily spend virtually all of it to live...
    while the Rich will be the new 0-10% Bracket since they spend so Little of their income to live!

    Yes, that's the truth of this tax Designed and Financed, by Two Billionaires.
    Hark!


    Disregarding the bad math, the Fair Tax taps many more sources than the income tax can hope to. The Fair Tax will tax rich people who are simply sitting on a pile of money, spending a little each year, but never earning a taxable dime.
    100% wrong.
    They now pay 15% Divs and Cap Gains... and an estate tax.
    And that's down from 28% ONLY because Bush lowered from that higher rate. 7 years ago. There is talk now of at least putting it back at 20%.
    Their 'Fairytax' would be in the Low Single Digits.
    You couldn't even tax that old mansion they buy in Newport every 20 years.

    Also untouched by the income tax is the imports that are killing our own industry.
    What's killing our industry and wouldn't change is in Mexico and China they pay 1/10 as much.

    Additionally, the income tax also does not tax the proceeds of the illegal drug trade, prostitution, other smuggling, numbers rackets, etc. ..
    WHAT!
    Those people would be no more easily taxable//findable than they are under the current system!

    In fact Fairytax will created MILLIONS/TENS of MILLIONS More offenders who will 'Go Cash' to avoid the 30% (+ their 5-10% State sales Taxes). Say over 40% in New york already and that again allowing for Fairytax's Bogus "30%" instead of the real 56%.

    It will be Mindboggling. The Fairtax creates the biggest Beauracracy in history.. keeping track of prebate amounts, and turns everyone who sells anything into another tax entity and impossible really to monitor.


    Overall, the Fair Tax would radically boost the economy, causing massive investment in the USA with its new 0% manufacturing tax rate.
    As I said, its wages will still Not be competitive with Foreign wages in Mexico etc. .. and if you think a 30% Tax on New House and Cars will create "Massive Investment" do you?

    Under Fairtax the Domestic Car company has to pay it's suppliers 30% More,
    and has to pay the Railroad Company which brings is Coal 30% More,
    The Coal company itself 30% more,
    the Railroad company has to pay 30% more when it buys new cars, or new rails, and so down the line..
    taxing at every level and Increasing costs.

    Fairtax BOGUSLY also depends on the government paying Taxes to Itself! when it buys anything Medical care, Tanks, Jets, Uniforms, etc.

    The Fair Tax, I believe, is the answer to our overall problems that has been slowly gutting our economy over the last 50 years. And, it's the income tax that has been doing it.
    The economy has NOT been Gutted over "50 years"..
    WHAT!
    The USA became a powerhouse during the first Half of those 50 years.
    and with a Large Middle Class.
    THAT is what made/Makes America what it is.. NOT a few Billiionaires like Costa Rica.


    The last 25 years...
    When the top Marginal Income tax rates Dropped from the 70-90% it was in the 50's to early 80's to 35-40% it was since.

    I not only believe that the Fair Tax is the overall answer to our long-standing economic problems, but further believe that if we _don't_ pass the fair tax and get rid of the income tax, we're headed for an eventual economic train wreck, like Zimbabwe, where there will only be the very very rich and the very very poor, and nobody in between.
    You got it Backwards again
    THAT where we're headed now.
    OBVIOUSLY the less progressve a tax will lead to more Polarity of wealth/Standard of living.

    The Income tax was Inroduced, Successfully, in the First place as there were VERY rich like the Rockefellers and Melllons; and VERY poor.
    The Income tax/Progressive Income tax, DID succesfully Help create a large middle class that is the Hallmark of America.
    Regressive taxes as Fairytax or Flat tax will just reverse that progress.
    As have the Tax cuts for the rich since.
    -

    And now, even after being Wrong on all the above... you have again to answer the REAL RATE, 56/57% questions of this SCAM in the aforementioned posts and articles.
    144, 147, 149, and 184 etc.
    -
    Last edited by mbig; 01-09-10 at 04:51 PM.
    I'm personally sick of not being able to dunk a basketball because of racism.
    anon

  2. #222
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by rally2xs View Post
    The factcheck article is an internet relic of the 2008 presidential campaign, and is, I believe, simply a hit piece on the platform centerpiece of gov. Mike Huckabee.

    At any rate, its misleading on several levels. A rebuttal can be found here:

    Americans For Fair Taxation: A Response to FactCheck.org article "Unspinning the FairTax"

    Factcheck ain't Snopes - unbiased it ain't.
    LOL! You call FactCheck.org biased and you reference The Tax Foundation, an organization set up by wealthy corporations to work to lower their taxes. I guess that makes sense if you are promoting a lower tax for those making over $200,000 a year, and a higher tax for those making less.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  3. #223
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Location
    Whitewater, CO
    Last Seen
    04-05-16 @ 06:04 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Centrist
    Posts
    8,260
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    A flat tax favors the weathly and is therefore unacceptable.

    Income tax is, unforuntely, a necessary evil.

  4. #224
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    01-13-10 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    16

    Re: FairTaxFraud.com

    I can see from the demeanor, and factual errors of this particular post, that you are going to simply ignore any arguments that I come up with for the fair tax. Your previous articles to which you refer by number are, largely, simply assertions without any numbers to back them up. So, since it is incredibly time-consuming to answer a post this long on a point-by-point basis, I'm just going to hit the high spots.

    Rent - where I come from, pretty much anyone can buy a house, just not a new house. No real NEED for rent. Here's a few offerings; these are good houses, not decrepit fixer-uppers:

    $11,000:
    310 S Poplar, Fostoria, OH, 44830 - MLS #113368 - Single Family Home real estate - REALTOR.com®

    $14,900:
    114 W Culbertson, Fostoria, OH, 44830 - MLS #115871 - Single Family Home real estate - REALTOR.com®

    $15,000:
    505 College Ave., Fostoria, OH, 44830 - MLS #115973 - Single Family Home real estate - REALTOR.com®

    Just 3 examples.

    That's my home town, where there are mostly factories to work in, although not nearly as much as there used to be.

    As for rent elsewhere, it will fall in price for several reasons. First, that rent is set by what the market will bear. It has virtually no relationship to the costs of ownership. So, if the price goes up because of the Fair Tax, it will come down, somewhat, because the places will sit empty for lack of renters, since there won't be so many that can afford the new price.

    Also, there are embedded costs in some of the rents that are income tax. When the income tax goes away, those costs will go away. Again, the price can be lowered when that happens, and it will be.

    Can most people pay a 30% increase? Well, it won't be 30%, now will it? Those goods and services have anywhere from 10% to 22% of their price composed of income tax, which will go away upon the abolition of the IRS and the income tax. So, prices might go up from 1% - 17%.

    Yes, many can afford a 17% increase because they're paying more than that in their own personal income taxes, and social security and medicare taxes. I'm square in the middle of the middle class, and sent $17,000 to the Feds for 2008. That is money that will be jingling around in my pocket, so yeah, I can afford a lot of tax, and I'll STILL have enough to visit the Big Screen Store, and maybe even my Jeep Dealer.

    People's insurance companies are going to pay for their heart operations, just like they do now. Having the income tax go away are going to make these operations, and all medical things cheaper. We're going to be replacing one tax with another, so it is not valid to ignore the 1st tax going away while dealing with the effects of the 2nd tax. It will balance out, and mostly in favor of the American people.

    The prebate is going to pay for the poor person's share of the Fair Tax all the way up to the poverty level. For instance, if a poor person buys a $1.00 tomato today, he'll pay $1.00 after working to make considerably more than $1.00, because he has to pay the income tax on his earnings, including the social security and medicare taxes.

    If the poor person buys a $1.00 tomato after the Fair Tax, well, it's going to cost about $0.22 less, since there will be about that much embedded income tax in the price of the tomato. To pay for the tomato, the poor person reaches into his pocket and pulls out his payroll check, cashes it, and pays the store owner $0.78 for the tomato. Then, he reaches into his other pocket, pulls out the prebate check he got from the government, and pays the store owner $0.23 to cover the Fair Tax on the tomato. That will work, all the way up to the poverty level, for all purchases. The prebate check will run out exactly when the person has spent the poverty level of purchases of new items. (If it runs out early, then the poverty level calculation was off, or the poor person is buying some particularly expensive items. If the poverty level is erroneous, then it will be corrected in the next month's calculations.)

    You're rant about who thought of the fair tax and what the rich might be getting or not betrays your underpinnings; You're upset that the Fair Tax is absolutely no good as an instrument to "stick it to the rich." Nope, its for financing the government, not for punishing success.

    You're wrong about the example of the rich that I gave. In order for the rich to be paying capital gains, they'd have to own some stocks. I said, they just sat on their pile of money, and if anything, they invested in some municipal bonds. Their tax liability under the income tax is zero. Nada. Nothing. If they don't have any muni bonds, then the same thing. And, of course, there's $10 - $15 trillion dollars ALREADY overseas, both legally and illegally, for the single, sole purpose of avoiding the income tax. It works, too. With the Fair Tax, it will come rushing back into the country, either to invest in works that will ultimately create jobs, or be put in banks, who will loan it out to entrepreneurs that will build factories, in order to make money, and.. that will create more jobs.

    You get hung up on the rate of foreign wages. Don't worry about it. Only about 10% of the price of a lot of heavy industrial things is wages. 90% of the price of a car built here is NOT wages, but materials and overhead. Removing the income tax from a car costing $25,000 here will be the equivalent of paying the workers $0.00 / hr. That's how we'll win the fight with the foreign workers, and their work-for-peanuts attitude. There'll be nothing they can do to keep their factories from outsourcing their labor to... the USA.

    You're totally wrong about companies paying Fair Tax on their supplies. The Fair Tax is not collected on items used in business - not the auto maker's machine tools, raw materials, or the farmer's tractors. Its statements like this that reveal that you're talking just to hear yourself make noise, with absolutely no understanding of what you're talking about. I'm just typing this for the casual observers. I know you're going to ignore me.

    The economy _has_ been gutted over the last 50 years. Go see the hulks of buildings in new England, that used to be textile mills. Go to Pittsburgh, try to find the big steel making plants. Go to Detroit, and see them attempting to do subsistence farming in downtown Detroit to attempt to keep from starving. I actually went to a Rolling Stones concert in Detroit, 4 years ago, and paid half-price for a set of tickets in the 7th row on the floor, from a scalper over the internet, 'cuz there's no money in that town. They can't sell anything there unless they're willing to do 50% discounts.

    The American economy is on a decades-long, downhill slide that is about to end with the ultimate economic train wreck. We’re going to have just the very, very rich, and the very, very poor, nobody in between, and it will all be the work of the income tax, sucking the life out of our industries and chasing good jobs overseas.

    You're 56 / 57 percent rants as figures for the fair tax are laughable. You have no math basis on which to base them, only the political rants from a website that was created to attack a Republican candidate for president last year.

  5. #225
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    01-13-10 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    16

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I guess that makes sense if you are promoting a lower tax for those making over $200,000 a year, and a higher tax for those making less.
    Ha! I'm promoting a lower tax for _ME_, and I'm square in the middle of the middle class. Sent $17K to the Feds in 2008. Would like to have ALL that money in my pockets. Prices really won't go up as much as the detractors are trying to say.

  6. #226
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: FairTaxFraud.com

    Quote Originally Posted by rally2xs View Post
    Yeah, but that wouldn't get (good, manufacturing) jobs to come back to the USA.
    No, but it would allow us to gain tax revenue from those things, which that post I quoted was purported to do so.

  7. #227
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    01-13-10 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    16

    Re: FairTaxFraud.com

    Quote Originally Posted by samsmart View Post
    No, but it would allow us to gain tax revenue from those things, which that post I quoted was purported to do so.
    Sure, it would, but the Fair Tax would tax them without making them legal, which would be easier. That's all I'm saying. Fair Tax isn't the only way to do it - I understand.

  8. #228
    Disappointed Evolutionist
    Catawba's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Last Seen
    05-28-13 @ 08:15 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Liberal
    Posts
    27,254

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by rally2xs View Post
    Ha! I'm promoting a lower tax for _ME_, and I'm square in the middle of the middle class. Sent $17K to the Feds in 2008. Would like to have ALL that money in my pockets. Prices really won't go up as much as the detractors are trying to say.
    Since there are a whole lot more people making less than $200,000 than there are making greater than $200,000, I can't really see this regressive consumption tax going anywhere. Especially, since the majority of us have felt the pain of Bush's last tax cuts to the wealthy.
    Treat the earth well: it was not given to you by your parents, it was loaned to you by your children. We do not inherit the Earth from our Ancestors, we borrow it from our Children. ~ Ancient American Indian Proverb

  9. #229
    Sage
    AlbqOwl's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2005
    Location
    New Mexico
    Last Seen
    Today @ 05:09 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    17,546
    Blog Entries
    2

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    LOL! You call FactCheck.org biased and you reference The Tax Foundation, an organization set up by wealthy corporations to work to lower their taxes. I guess that makes sense if you are promoting a lower tax for those making over $200,000 a year, and a higher tax for those making less.
    The proof is in the real facts. Factcheck, an arm of the Annenberg group, is better than most and I do refer to it quite a bit, but it does depend on mostly left wing contributors to survive. Therefore, it does try not to be an ideological organization, but it cannot be completely neutral and unbiased either.

    The Tax Foundation has been around since 1937 and was founded when business executives of both political parties became dismayed at irresponsible fiscal policy of both the Hoover and Roosevelt administrations. It now analyzes and supports and criticizes actions of whatever party is in power and it really is a neutral organization where politics are concerned, but it does hold to some pretty non-negotiable principles. (Somewhere in the back of my mind, I'm thinking Bill Ahern, its current chief executive, is a Democrat, but I'm not positive about that.)

    Anyhow, the principles of the Tax Foundation are pretty straight forward. I think all of us discussing what kind of tax system we want should consider that within the framework of these principles:

    Simplicity: Administrative costs are a loss to society, and complicated taxation undermines voluntary compliance by creating incentives to shelter and disguise income.

    Transparency: Tax legislation should be based on sound legislative procedures and careful analysis. A good tax system requires informed taxpayers who understand how tax assessment, collection, and compliance works. There should be open hearings and revenue estimates should be fully explained and replicable.

    Neutrality: The fewer economic decisions that are made for tax reasons, the better. The primary purpose of taxes is to raise needed revenue, not to micromanage the economy. The tax system should not favor certain industries, activities, or products.

    Stability: When tax laws are in constant flux, long-range financial planning is difficult. Lawmakers should avoid enacting temporary tax laws, including tax holidays and amnesties.

    No Retroactivity: As a corollary to the principle of stability, taxpayers should rely with confidence on the law as it exists when contracts are signed and transactions made.

    Broad Bases and Low Rate: As a corollary to the principle of neutrality, lawmakers should avoid enacting targeted deductions, credits and exclusions. If such tax preferences are few, substantial revenue can be raised with low tax rates. Broad-based taxes can also produce relatively stable tax revenues from year to year.
    The Tax Foundation - About the Tax Foundation
    Last edited by AlbqOwl; 01-09-10 at 06:54 PM. Reason: corrected incorrect syntax
    "I think the best way of doing good to the poor, is not making them easy in poverty, but leading or driving them out of it." --Benjamin Franklin 1776

  10. #230
    User
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Last Seen
    01-13-10 @ 11:12 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    16

    Re: Income tax; Flat tax; National Sales tax; No tax

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    Since there are a whole lot more people making less than $200,000 than there are making greater than $200,000, I can't really see this regressive consumption tax
    Can't be regressive, since the poor don't pay a dime of it.

    BTW, you want regressive? How about the income tax? In addition to the 7.65% payroll tax that EVERYBODY pays, including the poor, including down to the 1st dollar they make, there's the embedded income tax in the product that are built in this country. The 35% corporate income tax has the effect of passing along anywhere from about 10% to 22% of the price of the product being just paying the income tax. 7.65% + 22% - the poor person is feeling the effects of the income tax possibly in the high 20%'s of all the money he makes.

    The FAIR TAX is NOT regressive, the INCOME TAX is HIGHLY regressive.

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    going anywhere. Especially, since the majority of us have felt the pain of Bush's last tax cuts to the wealthy.
    Don't know what that has to do with anything - that's apples to the Fair Tax's oranges.

Page 23 of 90 FirstFirst ... 1321222324253373 ... 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
  •