• 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!

Should ther be a "Flat Tax"?

Should there be a "Flat Tax"?


  • Total voters
    36

DashingAmerican

Civil Libertarian
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 23, 2009
Messages
3,357
Reaction score
986
Location
Alabama
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian
Should there be a "Flat Tax"?

A tax that would be 10 - 15% or whatever number for EVERYONE across the board.
 
Yes, it's the only fair tax possible. End of story. :)
 
flat, fair, simple, whichever, almost anything is better than the behemoth we have in place now.
 
flat, fair, simple, whichever, almost anything is better than the behemoth we have in place now.
A national sales tax is worthy of discussion.
But, are our business-men ready to become tax collecters ??
Forgetting that they already are....(local, state)
 
We already have flat taxes. Sales tax, cigarette taxes, alcohol tax, FICA tax, vehicle registration tax, inheritance tax, and I'm sure others.

The advantage of the current income tax system is that it is totally incomprehensible so the federal government can do as they damn well please.
 
No.

15% of 15,000 hurts alot worse than 15% of 500,000
 
Absolutely not. A flat income tax is regressive and as 'Your Star' points out, penalises the most vulnerable tax paying demographic. Take a look around the developed nations of the world, and note how many (if any) employ a flat rate of income tax.
 
This is simply another plank in the right wing platform. Eventually, the platform will be finished and the American class will see that it is a scaffold. And then they will take a walk up the stairs.
 
Not a flat tax but a Natioanl Sales Tax, get rid of the IRS that would save billions, then you could collect corporate income tax.
No tax on Food period.
The poor who buy less would feel little pain where the Rich who buy exspensive Cars, Homes, boats go to resturants, exspensive clothes, bags Ect.. will pay a large portion. This removes the need for the IRS and Loopholes the rich use to wittel their current tax liability from 55% down to 19% (this is total liability after refunds) the middle class liability is about 10% and the poor receive about 12% in earned income tax credits. this by the way would be the only peice that would stop a national sales tax because you could not redistribute the wealth to the poor in this manor. I know this because my 25 year old daughter had two kids and they live with me, she is a single mom with no income other than child support and she receives $6000.00 back in taxes.
 
yes, with only one rule: NO TAX LOOPHOLES. Then with a 15% tax rate across the board, we'd be rid of all debt and the economy would be booming again.
 
This is of course speaking 'ideally' - I mean, going straight to a 15% flat tax would hurt too much from our current position; I'm not heartless- we'd need to do it in steps so those not paying ANY tax, those 48% of income earners, would be able to adjust and perhaps start working more.

On the flip side, I often like to think: What would an 'ideal' nation look like? If I could start a nation today, what tax system would I use? Well... it would be flat tax. But not what you're thinking. I'm thinking a flat dollar figure. say $2,000 for adults, $1,000 for children. It would be so low because the majority of government expenses would not exist in my country. I came to this conclusion based on the following thought process: Why is it fair that, when you work 30 hours and I work 60, that I have to pay $3,000 and you pay $1,500? What extra am I getting from the national government that you are not? If I am to provide a government that is truly fair, I will charge everyone the same amount. No more or less. No loop holes for the rich or assistance for the poor. This is what a flat tax is to me.
 
No.

15% of 15,000 hurts alot worse than 15% of 500,000

so it's more about hurting people for you than it is about revenue collection or economic growth?
 
flat, fair, simple, whichever, almost anything is better than the behemoth we have in place now.

And why would a flat tax be simpler? Please think before posting. For a change.

Hint: It won't be. Second hint: Consider how businesses treat income.
 
And why would a flat tax be simpler? Please think before posting. For a change.

Hint: It won't be. Second hint: Consider how businesses treat income.

you are setting up a strawman. I don't pretend it will be so-easy-a-caveman-could-do-it. I claim it would be much, much simpler than the disastrous hydra that we have in place now.
 
Not a flat tax but a Natioanl Sales Tax, get rid of the IRS that would save billions, then you could collect corporate income tax.
No tax on Food period.
The poor who buy less would feel little pain where the Rich who buy exspensive Cars, Homes, boats go to resturants, exspensive clothes, bags Ect.. will pay a large portion. This removes the need for the IRS and Loopholes the rich use to wittel their current tax liability from 55% down to 19% (this is total liability after refunds) the middle class liability is about 10% and the poor receive about 12% in earned income tax credits. this by the way would be the only peice that would stop a national sales tax because you could not redistribute the wealth to the poor in this manor. I know this because my 25 year old daughter had two kids and they live with me, she is a single mom with no income other than child support and she receives $6000.00 back in taxes.

Hello?

Can you explain why so many people believe the letters IRS stand for "Income Tax Revenue Service"?

Turn today's graduated tax silliness into a flat tax, or a national sales tax, and the government is still going to need clerks to count it.
 
This is of course speaking 'ideally' - I mean, going straight to a 15% flat tax would hurt too much from our current position; I'm not heartless- we'd need to do it in steps so those not paying ANY tax, those 48% of income earners, would be able to adjust and perhaps start working more.

Ah.

So you're claiming that the people earning in the lowest tax brackets will jump for joy and rush out and work harder when they're given the opportunity to pay taxes on what they earned.

That certainly is an unusual possibility neither the Mayor nor most others have considered.

Makes one wonder why they're not rushing out and working harder when they're able to keep all their money today, doesn't it?
 
No.

15% of 15,000 hurts alot worse than 15% of 500,000

So what you're saying is that if everyone paid something closer to their fair share of the tax burden, that there'd be more people paying closer attention to the crap the government currently wastes their money on and the push to dismantle the Nanny State would grow, right? That's what you mean by "hurts"?
 
Absolutely not. A flat income tax is regressive and as 'Your Star' points out, penalises the most vulnerable tax paying demographic. Take a look around the developed nations of the world, and note how many (if any) employ a flat rate of income tax.

Nothing regressive about requiring people to pay their fair share.

Nothing constitutional about creating artificial distinctions between citizens based on their incomes. You land might be different, the United States requires everyone recieve equal treatment under the law.

It is as equally unfair to tax a man for having money as it is to tax him for being black.

Charlie Rangel thinks so, look at how he cheats on his taxes, and he's former Chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee.
 
This is simply another plank in the right wing platform. Eventually, the platform will be finished and the American class will see that it is a scaffold. And then they will take a walk up the stairs.

You mean it's different than the plank the Pirates of the DNC have hanging off the side of their canoe?

Perhaps what you're implying is that the Democrats are the sharks in the water below?
 
Goodness no! Certainly not. We're not a group of strangers all out for ourselves. We're a team that plays fair.

The poor shouldn't pay any taxes because they get no benefit of being a citizen. They could just get by in any country.
 
You mean it's different than the plank the Pirates of the DNC have hanging off the side of their canoe?

Perhaps what you're implying is that the Democrats are the sharks in the water below?

Go back and read your post. The pirate bit is YOUR metaphor - so I am implying nothing of the kind.
 
Goodness no! Certainly not. We're not a group of strangers all out for ourselves. We're a team that plays fair.

The poor shouldn't pay any taxes because they get no benefit of being a citizen. They could just get by in any country.

the poor are not protected by the military? the poor are not allowed to use public currency? they do not drive on public roads? their children do not attend public education? they do not recieve money from medicaid, welfare, food stamps, etc.? Police refuse to arrest those who prey on them? they aren't allowed to vote?
 
Back
Top Bottom