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 35 of 90 FirstFirst ... 2533343536374585 ... LastLast
Results 341 to 350 of 899

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

  1. #341
    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=Harry Guerrilla;1058482136]
    Not really, the rich would still pay more than everyone else.
    They spend more than everyone else.
    As they should. They own most of the wealth. That is why our forefathers set up a progressive tax system almost a century ago.


    Some people do not do anything worth a living wage.
    I am speaking of people that work full-time. If a person is valuable enough to be kept as a full-time worker, they deserve a living wage.
    Last edited by Catawba; 01-12-10 at 02:03 PM.
    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

  2. #342
    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

    I find it curious that some argue both that what we need is a regressive tax scheme, and that a National sales tax/Fair tax/flat tax is not regressive but support it anyway.

    You don't think that is transparent to those of us that support a progressive tax?
    Last edited by Catawba; 01-12-10 at 02:06 PM.
    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. #343
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    As they should. They own most of the wealth. That is why our forefathers set up a progressive tax system almost a century ago.
    Unfortunately those people aren't my forefathers, there ideas have lead to greater class conflicts and not less.

    "Rates under the Act were 3% on income above $800 (adjusted for inflation: $17,679 in as of 2008[update] dollars [2]) and 5% on income of individuals living outside the country."
    [ame=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revenue_Act_of_1861]Revenue Act of 1861 - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/ame]

    "(2% on income over $4,000 or $88,400 in 2008 dollars, which meant fewer than 10% of households would pay any)"
    Wilson?Gorman Tariff Act - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    Those tax rates are reasonable, taxing more than 10% of any wages is crazy.
    Now the absolute minimum tax rate is 10% with this highest being 35%.
    » 2009 Federal Income Tax Brackets (Official IRS Tax Rates)


    Can you not see the difference in how insane things have gotten?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I am speaking of people that work full-time. If a person is valuable enough to be kept as a full-time worker, they deserve a living wage.
    Not true, a "living wage" is entirely subjective, what happens when one person can live on $8 an hour while another needs $20 an hour.

    Who makes the living wage and which is one right?
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  4. #344
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I find it curious that some argue both that what we need is a regressive tax scheme, and that a National sales tax/Fair tax/flat tax is not regressive but support it anyway.

    You don't think that is transparent to those of us that support a progressive tax?
    Those are only regressive because they are not progressive.

    National sales tax and flat taxes are naturally progressive and don't need to be manipulated by politicians.

    The rich will still pay more regardless.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

  5. #345
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    As fun as it would be to rehash the same "who was really a fascist/communist" argument that we have every two weeks, let's try to keep it on topic.


    Quote Originally Posted by rally2xs View Post
    Supposing this is true, is it a good thing to simply "have more jobs?" I mean, I found a pay stub from one of my Dad's jobs during the 30's depression. He was making 38 cents an hour. Would it be a good thing to simply remove the minimum wage, and allow employers to beat up workers like that again?
    .38 cents an hour in the 30's is the equivalent of $6/hr today. Your dad had a job during the worst depression in history and still made $6/hr. That's not getting beaten up on.

    So, you've got full employment - I mean something like 2.9% jobless rate - and... nobody's got any money left over to buy new cars, big-screen TV's, maybe not even an Ipod.
    And you're basing this on...?

    Think logically - what percent of people actually have their salary impacted by the minimum wage. If you work in an office making $35/hr and the minimum wage goes up or down a dollar, it's unlikely that that will have much of an impact on your salary.

    Maybe people are demanding that their workplace install showers, so they can get cleaned up before they go to work, because there's no shower where they live, which is under the railroad bridge on the other side of town.


    There's something to be said, I think, for making it illegal to beat up workers with predatory wages anywhere in the USA. If you can't pay someone $7.50 an hour, then maybe the enterprise you have in mind isn't really worth doing.
    So everyone who doesn't generate more than that in revenue should be forever unemployed?

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    It used to be the general consensus that the earth was flat as well.
    Great analogy.

    David Card and Alan B. Krueger have already made national news with their pathbreaking research on the minimum wage. Here they present a powerful new challenge to the conventional view that higher minimum wages reduce jobs for low-wage workers. In a work that has important implications for public policy as well as for the direction of economic research, the authors put standard economic theory to the test, using data from a series of recent episodes, including the 1992 increase in New Jersey's minimum wage, the 1988 rise in California's minimum wage, and the 1990-91 increases in the federal minimum wage. In each case they present a battery of evidence showing that increases in the minimum wage lead to increases in pay, but no loss in jobs.

    A distinctive feature of Card and Krueger's research is the use of empirical methods borrowed from the natural sciences, including comparisons between the "treatment" and "control" groups formed when the minimum wage rises for some workers but not for others. In addition, the authors critically reexamine the previous literature on the minimum wage and find that it, too, lacks support for the claim that a higher minimum wage cuts jobs. Finally, the effects of the minimum wage on family earnings, poverty outcomes, and the stock market valuation of low-wage employers are documented. Overall, this book calls into question the standard model of the labor market that has dominated economists' thinking on the minimum wage. In addition, it will shift the terms of the debate on the minimum wage in Washington and in state legislatures throughout the country.
    Again, citing one study from 1997 does not outweigh the much more substantial body of evidence coming out the other way. I really don't know how to explain this any further to you. You're going about this entirely the wrong way - deciding what you think would be good policy, searching for a study that supports it, and then clinging to that in the face of logic and reason.

    Minimum Wages - The MIT Press

    This is a comprehensive analysis of over 300 studies on the minimum wage, including the one you cite. It concludes that the minimum wage "reduce[s] employment opportunities for less-skilled workers and tend[s] to reduce their earnings; [is] not an effective means of reducing poverty; and [] appear[s] to have adverse longer-term effects on wages and earnings, in part by reducing the acquisition of human capital."

    Look, it even has its own blubs!

    "This is a superb book, notable for both breadth and depth of coverage, on one of the most fundamental topics in economics ... Summing Up: Essential. Economics collections, upper-division undergraduate through professional."
    —J. P. Jacobsen, Wesleyan University, Choice

    Endorsements

    "Beyond covering previously sparsely treated issues such as effects on prices, inflation, profits, and inequality, Neumark and Wascher demonstrate the overwhelming weight of careful U.S. evidence and other evidence showing the detrimental effects of minimum wages on low-skilled workers. The volume is a must for anyone interested in research on labor markets."
    —Daniel S. Hamermesh, Centennial Professor of Economics, University of Texas at Austin

    "Neumark and Wascher provide what will be the post-Card and Kreuger consensus on the new economics of the minimum wage. Minimum Wages is an extraordinary synthesis of the new empirical literature on the employment and distributional consequences of minimum wage legislation. It is an A to Z review of the history of minimum wage legislation, the motives of supporters and opponents, and how such laws affect all of us."
    —Richard V. Burkhauser, Sarah Gibson Blanding Professor of Policy Analysis, Cornell University

    "Over the past twenty years, the focus of research on the minimum wage has changed from federal to state minimum wages as the key policy variable, and from effects on teen employment to a broader range of outcomes. David Neumark and William Wascher have been important contributors to these innovations. Minimum Wages combines a very accessible summary of their research with helpful discussions of others' work."
    —Charles Brown, Professor of Economics, University of Michigan
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  6. #346
    Girthless
    RightinNYC's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    New York, NY
    Last Seen
    01-23-11 @ 11:56 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Slightly Conservative
    Posts
    25,894

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    I am speaking of people that work full-time. If a person is valuable enough to be kept as a full-time worker, they deserve a living wage.
    Let's say my labor as a high school graduate is only worth $8-10/hour. Under your proposed system, I would be forever unemployed, because no company is going to pay me $12/hour when I'm only worth $8-10. But hey, "living wage" sounds progressive, right?
    People sleep peaceably in their beds at night only because rough men stand ready to do violence on their behalf.

  7. #347
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    melbourne florida
    Last Seen
    09-24-15 @ 12:15 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Very Conservative
    Posts
    13,156

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

    Quote Originally Posted by RightinNYC View Post
    Let's say my labor as a high school graduate is only worth $8-10/hour. Under your proposed system, I would be forever unemployed, because no company is going to pay me $12/hour when I'm only worth $8-10. But hey, "living wage" sounds progressive, right?
    I graduated High School and never went to college and I make 50 thousand a year.

    The living wage will do more harm to small Business and the economy then it will help. People need to get off their ass and not be satisfied with low wages.

  8. #348
    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 Harry Guerrilla View Post

    Can you not see the difference in how insane things have gotten?
    The rates during our most prosperous times were much higher than they are today. So that argument doesn't work for me.


    Not true, a "living wage" is entirely subjective, what happens when one person can live on $8 an hour while another needs $20 an hour.
    $8 to $20 huh? The current minimum federal wage is $7.25 an hour. States may set a higher minimum wage to account of higher living costs in there states.
    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. #349
    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 Harry Guerrilla View Post
    Those are only regressive because they are not progressive.
    Yes, they are in fact opposites.

    National sales tax and flat taxes are naturally progressive and don't need to be manipulated by politicians.
    They are sold as being less onerous on the middle class which does not betray that they will be more onerous on the middle class. That is why they are regressive from the point of view of the middle class.
    The rich will still pay more regardless.
    As they should since they own a majority of the wealth. The problem is that with the National sales tax more burden will be shifted to the middle class.

    Who do you think the 3 trillion dollar war to conquer the middle east for their oil is going to benefit the most? Or the 1 trillion in tax cuts for the rich that Bush gave away?
    Last edited by Catawba; 01-12-10 at 03:56 PM.
    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

  10. #350
    Sage
    Harry Guerrilla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Not affiliated with other libertarians.
    Last Seen
    09-01-17 @ 02:38 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    28,955

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

    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    The rates during our most prosperous times were much higher than they are today. So that argument doesn't work for me.
    Prosperity isn't what this is about, having to forfeit 1/3 of your income to pay taxes on services you don't use isn't reasonable, rational or fair.

    On the other end of the spectrum, lobbying for more benefits at the expense of someone else is unethical, the perverse incentive has been created that we can add as much government programs and dump the costs on the rich.

    That is of course after the middle and lower classes defer the costs for multiple decades until it becomes to much to ignore or borrow for.


    Quote Originally Posted by Catawba View Post
    $8 to $20 huh? The current minimum federal wage is $7.25 an hour. States may set a higher minimum wage to account of higher living costs in there states.
    Yep, but what if someone doesn't need $7.25 an hour to live?
    What if their personal living wage is lower than $7.25?

    There is no such thing as a static living wage for everyone.
    I was discovering that life just simply isn't fair and bask in the unsung glory of knowing that each obstacle overcome along the way only adds to the satisfaction in the end. Nothing great, after all, was ever accomplished by anyone sulking in his or her misery.
    —Adam Shepard

Page 35 of 90 FirstFirst ... 2533343536374585 ... 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
  •