• 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!

Which tax system is most 'fair'

Which tax system is most 'fair'?

  • Progressive Tax

    Votes: 28 46.7%

  • Regressive Tax

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Flat Percentage Tax Rate

    Votes: 14 23.3%

  • Flat Dollar Tax

    Votes: 4 6.7%

  • Other

    Votes: 14 23.3%
  • Total voters
    60
The founders did not support income redistribution. Whine all you want, the founders were not interested in being forced by the government they created to have their wealth taken to pay for "the unfortunates"
 
I am of the libertarian mind if you can't tax fairly the poor then there should be no taxes.

Basically you complain about taxes on the wealthy but no worry about tax burden on the poor. Really quite hypocritical.
 
tell us gabriel-what do you do for a living-assuming you have a trade. I need to get a perspective
 
Gabriel said:
I don't think that the constitutional architects has the L curve in mind when they wrote that. It would be interesting to see that they say unambiguously where poor should pay the same taxes as the ultra rich.
Click to expand...

Article I Section IX Clause IV

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

They said it and codified into the supreme law of the land. They believed in a meritocracy where those that deserved wealth would earn it and those that didn't work to better themselves would not. A lot of famous and rich people started with nothing to end up becoming billionaires and presidents. They advanced themselves based upon their merit alone.
 
TurtleDude said:
income redistribution
Click to expand...

OMFG.. go away you comunist totalitarian. I don't know where you guys come from but income redistribution in America has already been tryed and none liked it. Go back to russia!
 
The_Patriot said:
Article I Section IX Clause IV

No Capitation, or other direct, Tax shall be laid, unless in Proportion to the Census or enumeration herein before directed to be taken.

They said it and codified into the supreme law of the land. They believed in a meritocracy where those that deserved wealth would earn it and those that didn't work to better themselves would not. A lot of famous and rich people started with nothing to end up becoming billionaires and presidents. They advanced themselves based upon their merit alone.
Click to expand...

Thats it I'm going libertarian.. no taxes for anyone. If you want to overburden the poor then we should skip libertarianism and go for anarachy. Why the hell not working poor won't be that much worse off.
 
Gabriel said:
I don't think that the constitutional architects has the L curve in mind when they wrote that. It would be interesting to see that they say unambiguously where poor should pay the same taxes as the ultra rich.

Click to expand...
That is an interesting video.

According to that, it would seem the income tax targets the vast majority whose income is $1,000,000 or less per year, as those with the greater wealth don't actually earn income in any great amounts.

Is the current incarnation of the income tax fair?
 
Gabriel said:
OMFG.. go away you comunist totalitarian. I don't know where you guys come from but income redistribution in America has already been tryed and none liked it. Go back to russia!
Click to expand...

you need a new schtick kid-that one wasn't funny to start with.
 
The Mark said:
That is an interesting video.

According to that, it would seem the income tax targets the vast majority whose income is $1,000,000 or less per year, as those with the greater wealth don't actually earn income in any great amounts.

Is the current incarnation of the income tax fair?
Click to expand...

Well as a percent the top 10% own roughly 70% of the wealth in america. Certainly the L curve is not a result of redistributive efforts.

dist_uswealth_thumb.gif
 
Gabriel said:
Thats it I'm going libertarian.. no taxes for anyone. If you want to overburden the poor then we should skip libertarianism and go for anarachy. Why the hell not working poor won't be that much worse off.
Click to expand...

I'm not a libertarian, but I am a Constitutionalist. The reason why the system for taxes was done the way it was is to allow the states to interpose themselves against unfair taxation done by the federal government. Under the way the founding fathers had taxation done was the money was collected by the state government and sent to Washington DC. However, Congress of the United States had to spell out exactly what they needed the money for to the states and the people. If the people and the states didn't like the bill they would not pay their taxes and the federal government could do nothing about it. This kept the federal government in check.
 
Gabriel said:
OMG your a socialist parisite. Go back to russia you commie welfare bum. No one likes socialist parisites.. its already been done and none likes it..
Click to expand...

Moderator's Warning:
Gabriel has been thread banned. Please adhere to the temporary thread ban rules, or there will be further consequences.
 
Gabriel said:
Well as a percent the top 10% own roughly 70% of the wealth in america. Certainly the L curve is not a result of redistributive efforts.

dist_uswealth_thumb.gif
Click to expand...
For that matter, even a "flat tax" income tax rate would tax the richest less than what the tax rate percentage of what they actually take in per year would be.

As they aren't actually earning "income"....
 
CaptainCourtesy said:
Moderator's Warning:
Gabriel has been thread banned. Please adhere to the temporary thread ban rules, or there will be further consequences.
Click to expand...

**** you...........
 
I'll say...
 
samsmart said:
Well, we may have 50% of the working population not caring how tax dollars are being spent, but that may not necessarily be because they have no personal stake in it. Even if they had a personal stake in it does not mean they would care. Neither does it mean that they would no longer be ignorant on the subject.
Click to expand...

I dunno- I make a middle-class income, and pay around 10,000 yearly just in federal income taxes- same with my husband. We pay almost 20,000 yearly plus SS and medicare taxes, then all the other forms of taxes we pay to the state and locally. I really do care where it goes, because I could use that extra money. When you're making 50-55,000 per year, and you don't have a huge mortgage, kids as dependents, don't own a business, and just pay your taxes, it really adds up. It would be nice if the feds were as cautious with my money as I am.
 
lizzie said:
I dunno- I make a middle-class income, and pay around 10,000 yearly just in federal income taxes- same with my husband. We pay almost 20,000 yearly plus SS and medicare taxes, then all the other forms of taxes we pay to the state and locally. I really do care where it goes, because I could use that extra money. When you're making 50-55,000 per year, and you don't have a huge mortgage, kids as dependents, don't own a business, and just pay your taxes, it really adds up. It would be nice if the feds were as cautious with my money as I am.
Click to expand...

Well said Lizzie. :applaud
 
lizzie said:
I dunno- I make a middle-class income, and pay around 10,000 yearly just in federal income taxes- same with my husband. We pay almost 20,000 yearly plus SS and medicare taxes, then all the other forms of taxes we pay to the state and locally. I really do care where it goes, because I could use that extra money. When you're making 50-55,000 per year, and you don't have a huge mortgage, kids as dependents, don't own a business, and just pay your taxes, it really adds up. It would be nice if the feds were as cautious with my money as I am.
Click to expand...

<Channeling Milton Friedman>
No one is better with your money than you are.
 
The Fair Tax is the most fair. Here's what it entails:

1/6/2009--Introduced.Fair Tax Act of 2009 - Repeals the income tax, employment tax, and estate and gift tax. Redesignates the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 as the Internal Revenue Code of 2009.Imposes a national sales tax on the use or consumption in the United States of taxable property or services.
Click to expand...
Don't know if it's been introduced again this year, but has been for five or six years until now. The proposed rate on this Fair Tax (basically a national sales tax) is 23%...with rebates back to taxpayers who meet certain income/family size criteria.

This tax would abolish the Internal Revenue Service saving billions and and dismantle an entire industry whose billions are made helping people fill out the IRS's ever-more-confusing Income Tax Returns. No more tax cheats.
 
lizzie said:
It would be nice if the feds were as cautious with my money as I am.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly.

However, how cautious politicians are with how they spend tax revenue is mutually exclusive to the tax system the government uses to calculate taxes.
 
Not if those same politicians notice the taxes being removed from their own pockets.

Or at least, I would think not so much.
 
The Mark said:
Not if those same politicians notice the taxes being removed from their own pockets.

Or at least, I would think not so much.
Click to expand...

It's not taxes politicians put into their own pockets. It's campaign contributions. It's those contributors whose pockets they put tax money into.
 
samsmart said:
It's not taxes politicians put into their own pockets. It's campaign contributions. It's those contributors whose pockets they put tax money into.
Click to expand...
Point...

But still, one would think the reduction in campaign fund total would be noticed...or perhaps not, depending on how much they actually pay in taxes.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom