Top 10 Reasons to Scrap the Tax Code

zimmer · Apr 12, 2009

Scrap the Code | Top Ten Reasons to Scrap the Code

If Libs were honest, reasons #4 & #9 would convert them.

The ability for Leftists to use the tax code as a political weapon, and to control people isn't a big enough trade off for that ever to happen.

.

obvious Child · Apr 12, 2009

And again Zimmer shows he doesn't understand what he talks about.

1) A complex tax code is merely a reason to simplify, that's reform, not scrapping.

2) Is merely a side effect of complexity. Reforming the tax code will make it significently easier to understand. Again, reform, not scrap.

3) The IRS actually is too small and underfunded. Roughly around $500 billion annually is not reported to the IRS. Meaning, if we had a sufficiently staffed and funded IRS, we essentially could have avoided deficits for the past decades. Audits of individuals have significently declined over time yet fraud has almost certainly increased. What we are seeing is similar to what happened to the SEC. Lack of funding and lack of staff let all kinds of **** through and we pay for it in the end. The simple answer is to actually fund and staff the collection agency that is the IRS.

4) This one is particularly amusing. There's absolutely nothing to stop congress from corrupting the next tax code system. Yammering on the current one for this problem when it affects all things Congress can enact is rather idiotic.

5) Uh, a flat tax would do the same thing. Every level of sales would be equally taxed, resulting in profits being taxed multiple times. By the time the dividend was distributed, it can be taxed well more than two times. A flat sales tax doesn't change this.

6) Taxes as a form of social policy isn't inherently a bad idea. Smoking costs the nation billions in healthcare and billions in lost productivity. Furthermore, tax as a social policy lead to renewable energy systems which are getting us off foreign fossil fuels. I notice your article didn't mention that. I also notice how your article did not mention how the Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy by allowing bonus depreciation. That was a use of tax as social and economic policy. Your beef is more with those who use it rather than it as a tool.

7) Your article is as ignorant as most people here about taxes. Marginal tax rates don't tell us much. What we want to look at is the effective tax rates.

How Marginal Tax Rates Work ? Get Rich Slowly

A bit of a primer. What our system does now is to encourage rich people to change how their get their income, not by working but by investing which IMO is actually pretty good as we need rich people to provide capital. By encouraging them to earn their money by passive methods we ensure that there will be large private capital reserves to fund new businesses and new ideas.

8) Those numbers look real suspect. 5.9% of $20,000 is around $1,180. That's roughly 7 hours at a partner rate of $125. That's an absolute lie. Similarly, 0.5% of $200,000 is $1,000. That may be more reasonable especially if that person has a private business. But the notion that someone barely paying any taxes has that kind of tax bill is completely insane. Someone earning $20,000 probably has one W-2, maybe a handful of interest statements and that's about it. I can do that tax return in about 10 minutes and charge them at MOST $50.

9) Again, what makes you think that Congress won't find ways to mess around with the next system? Besides, what you state is merely a problem with Congress and money. Not Congress and the Tax code. As many have stated, if we remove money from Congress we'll fix a great many ideas. Scrapping the code won't fix the underlying problem.

10) LOL. The last one belongs in the conspiracy section. Both parties have used the tax code for their own means.

Try again Zimmer or you could just stop pretending you understand taxes. I take it you won't reply to my rebuttal on your last tax rant?

vonmannheim · Apr 12, 2009

There is no tax code which requires any american to file taxes. However, I'm owed a refund, so I'm filing this time.

zimmer · Apr 13, 2009

Obvious Child... you sound like you enjoy being a slave for the state.
Really love Mommy DC Dearest.

Let's start here because you contradict the remainder of your post with one little sentence.
ROTFLMAO.

7) Your article is as ignorant as most people here about taxes. Marginal tax rates don't tell us much. What we want to look at is the effective tax rates.

TILT.

"IGNORANT"... LOL... you socialist busybodies are a hoot to listen to.

First you say the tax code is just fine, needs a little brushing up, and then you claim we are too stupid to understand it... which is it?

I haven't laughed this hard in a while.
Thanks.

.

ashurbanipal · Apr 13, 2009

I generally consider myself liberal, but I agree with at least some of the points in this article. The tax code is too complex, and it is used in some startlingly corrupt ways. Then again, I think that characterizes the entire corpus of law in the United States.

The main point with which I disagree is point 7. I suggest a thorough and reflective reading of Book 1, Chapter 8 of The Wealth of Nations by Adam Smith to understand why.

obvious Child · Apr 13, 2009

zimmer said:
Obvious Child... you sound like you enjoy being a slave for the state.
Really love Mommy DC Dearest.

And of course Zimmer has no argument, just mindless insults. More evidence that Zimmer is genetically incapable of backing up anything he says.

Let's start here because you contradict the remainder of your post with one little sentence.
ROTFLMAO.

How? I clearly know more than most people. And you haven't done anything to refute me whatsoever. Nor have you provided any evidence for a better system that would be free of the exact same problems that plague our system now.

All you are doing is ranting and getting pissed off when someone blows holes through your petty and poorly conceived temper tantrums. It's a reason why most people ignore you.

TILT.

"IGNORANT"... LOL... you socialist busybodies are a hoot to listen to.

First you say the tax code is just fine, needs a little brushing up, and then you claim we are too stupid to understand it... which is it?

I haven't laughed this hard in a while.
Thanks.

.

Are you reading impaired? I never said it was "fine." That would be a lie on your part. What I stated was that it needed reform. You clearly refused to admit this. If you wish to broadcast that you are a liar and cannot discuss things civilly and based on facts, than that is your right. No one will respect you or consider you of any value, but that is your right.

If you wish to discuss things as a mature adult instead of just tossing out terms you clearly do not understand and rely upon lies and fabrications, people are welcome to that. Otherwise, other than humiliation you're not worth talking you.

zimmer · Apr 13, 2009

obvious Child said:
And of course Zimmer has no argument, just mindless insults. More evidence that Zimmer is genetically incapable of backing up anything he says.

How? I clearly know more than most people. And you haven't done anything to refute me whatsoever. Nor have you provided any evidence for a better system that would be free of the exact same problems that plague our system now.

All you are doing is ranting and getting pissed off when someone blows holes through your petty and poorly conceived temper tantrums. It's a reason why most people ignore you.

Are you reading impaired? I never said it was "fine." That would be a lie on your part. What I stated was that it needed reform. You clearly refused to admit this. If you wish to broadcast that you are a liar and cannot discuss things civilly and based on facts, than that is your right. No one will respect you or consider you of any value, but that is your right.

If you wish to discuss things as a mature adult instead of just tossing out terms you clearly do not understand and rely upon lies and fabrications, people are welcome to that. Otherwise, other than humiliation you're not worth talking you.

LOL.

You make a defense of not scraping and starting over.
It's possible.

You state the flat tax isn't possible, except numerous countries use it with great success. To keep wealth in the country and attract wealth and investment for the country.

You claimed we were "ignorant" and couldn't understand taxes, but Geithner, Daschle, Rangel, Killifer, Solis, Jefferson, Sebelius all had tax problems.
If D's can't do their taxes, it's time to simplify the code... for your sake.

PS. Don't blame me for your contradictory statements in one post... your stepping in it.

I find it hilarious... both your initial post, and now this one.
Funny is funny, and this has been a barrel of laughs.

.

DeeJayH · Apr 13, 2009

obvious Child said:
And again Zimmer shows he doesn't understand what he talks about.

1) A complex tax code is merely a reason to simplify, that's reform, not scrapping.

is OC too much of a douche to see that scrap is taken from the linked articles title

obvious Child · Apr 13, 2009

zimmer said:
LOL.

You make a defense of not scraping and starting over.
It's possible.

One has to wonder if you can read. Or at least understand what is written.

What I stated is that the tax code needs reform. I did not state it needed to be scrapped or started over.

You state the flat tax isn't possible, except numerous countries use it with great success. To keep wealth in the country and attract wealth and investment for the country.

Your ignorance is astounding. An actual flat tax doesn't occur. The alleged countries you claim to have a flat tax actually have progressive systems that merely appear to be flat and their legislative processes act in much of the same fashion we do in promoting or disfavoring certain behaviors. For instance, many countries have phase outs for what level of income starts being taxed with the poor having no taxation and the rich having their entire exempted phased out. That ain't flat. A flat tax in theory is possible, but there are serious downsizes to always have an actual flat tax.

You claimed we were "ignorant" and couldn't understand taxes, but Geithner, Daschle, Rangel, Killifer, Solis, Jefferson, Sebelius all had tax problems.

So did Linda Chavez and numerous Bush administration nominees. I see you are ignoring that post. You know that wash rinse repeat isn't a good way of getting your point across, unless your point is that you're a fool...

If D's can't do their taxes, it's time to simplify the code... for your sake.

Can't do their taxes? Or were too lazy to do them? Or their accountants sucked? You assume a lot yet you have essentially no knowledge to assume from. Hence why most of your posts are a joke.

PS. Don't blame me for your contradictory statements in one post... your stepping in it.

You have yet to show me a single place where I made such a statement. You are currently lying.

I find it hilarious... both your initial post, and now this one.
Funny is funny, and this has been a barrel of laughs.

.

Who's the one who has failed to provide a rebuttal?

You or me? Hmmmm. Self declared victory as normal eh Zimmer?

obvious Child · Apr 13, 2009

DeeJayH said:
is OC too much of a douche to see that scrap is taken from the linked articles title

Come again? Zimmer has argued for scrapping it. The article argues for scrapping it. How can I be a douche when both Zimmer and his article argued for the same thing? The article is stupid and Zimmer is ignorant to thinking that it is a good article on the subject to support scrapping and replacing with a flat tax. It is common practice for people who post articles to assume responsibility for backing them up. Zimmer clearly refuses to do this likely due to his ignorance of the subject.

Care to provide a rebuttal to my post or are you just going to hope Zimmer gets lucky for a change rather than having his *** handed to him as normal?

Wessexman · Apr 13, 2009

A major reason to greatly reform tax codes, two words: Henry George.

zimmer · Apr 14, 2009

obvious Child said:
One has to wonder if you can read. Or at least understand what is written.

You know, I was wondering the same about you.
I also wonder about your contradicting statements, which negate the premise of your argument.

Something you try to skate away from... wonder why... LOL.
Don't blame me for your giving yourself a suicide pass.

What I stated is that the tax code needs reform. I did not state it needed to be scrapped or started over.

I know, you want to play with the edges... I want it uprooted and replaced.
You say it's not necessary, blah, blah, blah... and that... we are "ignorant"...

Your article is as ignorant as most people here about taxes.

Yes, and it seems most people are "ignorant" about the 44,000 pages of taxes... including the IRS, the Democrat Cabinet Nominees, Leaders of the Democrat Party which includes the Secretary of the Treasury.

Of course... these people have professional tax hand holders, as do many Americans so they comply with the State.

I think we can reduce the massive labyrinth known as the tax code down to a fraction of its mammoth size... but doing so would not only make life easier

You have yet to show me a single place where I made such a statement. You are currently lying.

I posted in in nice big letters in my first post.
You can dispute it all you like, but you made a hilarious contradiction that made your post moot.

Your ignorance is astounding. An actual flat tax doesn't occur. The alleged countries you claim to have a flat tax actually have progressive systems that merely appear to be flat and their legislative processes act in much of the same fashion we do in promoting or disfavoring certain behaviors.

Point being... their tax codes are largely based on a flat tax, and their codes are both far simpler and less punitive.

I know eastern Europe well... funny to watch Old Europe surrounded by Flat tax states... and being more American than America in this respect.

You may want to whine about the fact some aren't perfectly flat... but the basic premise of much simpler codes of taxation, less punitive rates for the accumulation of wealth and attracting jobs is real.

Come again? Zimmer has argued for scrapping it. The article argues for scrapping it. How can I be a douche when both Zimmer and his article argued for the same thing? The article is stupid and Zimmer is ignorant to thinking that it is a good article on the subject to support scrapping and replacing with a flat tax.

You know, NOWHERE did I advocate the Flat Taxin my OP... you threw it in there... there are many viable alternatives to the existing beast of a tax code...where... The Internal Revenue Code contains more than 3.4 million words.

It is common practice for people who post articles to assume responsibility for backing them up. Zimmer clearly refuses to do this likely due to his ignorance of the subject.

LOL... you are the one who blew your very first post... claiming the code needs brushing around the edges and then stating "ignorant as most people here about taxes".

Which is it?
Is the tax code only in need of a little brushing?
Or does it need a major overhaul because we are too stupid, and the likes of Geithner, Daschle, Rangel, Jefferson, Solis, Killefer and Sebelius are not bright enough to figure out how to "pay their fair share"?

Care to provide a rebuttal to my post or are you just going to hope Zimmer gets lucky for a change rather than having his *** handed to him as normal?

You've handed nothing... except perhaps a 12 incher from Scotty at Quizno's...

This is what Obvious Child finds

Here are 10 reasons to Scrap the Code:
1. The Code is Too Complex.
The non-partisan Tax Foundation reports that the entire tax code with regulations in 2005 was over 9,097,000 words.

2. The Code is Beyond Comprehension.
No single person knows or understands the entire tax code-- not even IRS Employees!

3. The IRS is Too Big.

The IRS employed 90,647 people in 2008. It had operating costs of $11,207,223,000.

Obvious Child believes:
"The IRS actually is too small and underfunded."

Click to expand...

4. The Code Corrupts the Culture in Washington. DC.

Lobbying is the biggest business in Washington. About $3.2 billion was spent in the 2008 on lobbying.
What would be America's single most effective move to clean up the swamp of special interests in Washington? Scrapping the code and replacing it with a fair and simple one.

Obvious Child believes:
This one is particularly amusing. There's absolutely nothing to stop congress from corrupting the next tax code system.

Zimmer replies:
So... we should do little so we can end up right back where we started from?
No. Massive overhaul is needed so it takes eons to pervert it again... and so people get a taste of what it's like to tell Congress to buckle up.

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

5. The Code Taxes Some Income Two or More Times.

Our code taxes certain types of income twice.

6. Congress Uses the Tax Code to Legislate Morality.

Under a fairer and less easily manipulated tax system, government couldn't pick winning and losing industries as we have witnessed recently.

Obvious Child replies:
Taxes as a form of social policy isn't inherently a bad idea.

Zimmer replies:
Socialists love the use of tax codes to usurp our freedoms and to get the masses to behave as Government wishes; it doesn't affect the wealthy in society at all... only the plebes.
Very fair system... LOL.

Click to expand...

7. High Marginal Tax Rates Penalize Success.
Our current code destroys the incentive of the most productive to work hard.

Shouldn't we be trying to give incentive to the most productive to continue working rather than taxing so much of their income away that they no longer think it's worth working hard?

8. Complying with the Code Costs Americans Billions.

Compliance is a multi-billion dollar industry and 59 percent of all individuals filing taxes hire someone else to do it for them totaling to 81 million returns done by accountants last year.

9. The Code Drives Political Donations
The Congressman on the House Ways and Means Committee Received $55,157,458 in the 2008 Election Cycle.

The Ways and Means Committee deals with taxes. It's the busiest committee and it's membership during the 2008 election cycle received $55,157,458 in campaign contributions.

If we scrapped the code, the committee members would lose their power to manipulate the code in order to pay off their campaign contributors.

10. Laws Should Rest on Principles of Justice.

The tax code is modified every few years along no reasonable principle. The code is arbitrary and unpredictable, and is morphing from its stated purpose-- efficiently raising government revenue-- into an instrument that Congress uses to instill fear, punishment, and political control.

Yeah Obvious Child... playing with the edges will keep us close to Marx... you like him dontcha?

.

DeeJayH · Apr 14, 2009

obvious Child said:
Come again? Zimmer has argued for scrapping it. The article argues for scrapping it. How can I be a douche when both Zimmer and his article argued for the same thing? The article is stupid and Zimmer is ignorant to thinking that it is a good article on the subject to support scrapping and replacing with a flat tax. It is common practice for people who post articles to assume responsibility for backing them up. Zimmer clearly refuses to do this likely due to his ignorance of the subject.

Care to provide a rebuttal to my post or are you just going to hope Zimmer gets lucky for a change rather than having his *** handed to him as normal?

it is a pathetic point to hang an argument on. its semantics

obvious Child · Apr 14, 2009

zimmer said:
You know, I was wondering the same about you.
I also wonder about your contradicting statements, which negate the premise of your argument.

Something you try to skate away from... wonder why... LOL.
Don't blame me for your giving yourself a suicide pass.

Generally pretending things that don't exist do exist when everyone else can see they don't exist is a sign of mental illness.

I know, you want to play with the edges... I want it uprooted and replaced.
You say it's not necessary, blah, blah, blah... and that... we are "ignorant"...

One has to wonder if you can understand the written word. I gave several arguments for reform and why repealing it with a flat tax won't solve the concerns with the current. You have yet to provide a rebuttal. You wonder why people think you're a joke? Well, it ain't hard to figure out.

Yes, and it seems most people are "ignorant" about the 44,000 pages of taxes... including the IRS, the Democrat Cabinet Nominees, Leaders of the Democrat Party which includes the Secretary of the Treasury.

It's actually well more then 44,000 pages. And much of that is court cases and regulations rather than direct IRC writings. Again, you don't understand squat. I already addressed your point. Simply pretending I didn't and repeating your argument verbatim doesn't make it suddenly valid. Right now, you look like a young Earth Creationist. Simply repeat the same refuted bull**** and hope no one remembers you got slammed the last time you made the same argument.

Of course... these people have professional tax hand holders, as do many Americans so they comply with the State.

What makes you think they didn't do the tax themselves? Furthermore, do you have evidence that it wasn't their employers who screwed up in providing the information their W2s and other relevant tax documents?

I fully realize you have absolutely no understand of the subject.

I think we can reduce the massive labyrinth known as the tax code down to a fraction of its mammoth size... but doing so would not only make life easier

You respond with discussions about reform and simplification. Notice that I argued FOR simplification. It is simply easier for you to pretend I never made such a statement because you'd have to admit you were wrong. Which you won't ever do.

I posted in in nice big letters in my first post.
You can dispute it all you like, but you made a hilarious contradiction that made your post moot.

And that post made no sense. I already refuted your alleged claim. You refuse to address the rebuttal and claiming that you're still right is rather weak. You are essentially saying I'm right despite the rebuttal proving me dead wrong and I wish to pretend that rebuttal doesn't exist.

Again, there's a reason why we don't think much of you.

Point being... their tax codes are largely based on a flat tax, and their codes are both far simpler and less punitive.

Ah, the fallacy of raising the bar. Now it's just largely rather than actual flat tax. And again, it's not flat because it treats different levels of wealth differently. How can it be "flat" when the poor aren't taxed and the rich have all of their income taxed? How can it be flat when the poor pay no sales tax and the rich pay all on what they buy?

Flat implies everyone is treated the same. That is simply not the case and your lack of any understanding of the subject is painfully clear.

I know eastern Europe well... funny to watch Old Europe surrounded by Flat tax states... and being more American than America in this respect.

It would help if you had any understanding of flat tax, which you clearly don't. Thinking that a system which taxes the poor at zero and the wealthy at the highest tax level is 'flat' is a complete misunderstanding of the entire concept. An ACTUAL flat tax is one where everyone pays a % of their income or sales tax regardless of their wealth. A poor person would pay 15% of their income with no deductions or exempted as would a rich person. Good luck finding that.

You may want to whine about the fact some aren't perfectly flat... but the basic premise of much simpler codes of taxation, less punitive rates for the accumulation of wealth and attracting jobs is real.

Whine? Apparently everyone who disproves you is simply "whining." Zimmer losing another argument? What's new? Oh wait. That's actually expected. Just because we aren't flat doesn't mean it can't be simple. Furthermore, you have yet to deal with how a flat tax isn't susceptible to congressional shenanigans. And you won't.

You know, NOWHERE did I advocate the Flat Taxin my OP... you threw it in there... there are many viable alternatives to the existing beast of a tax code...where... The Internal Revenue Code contains more than 3.4 million words.

Fair enough, too bad that you have come out in support of a flat tax and offered nothing else as an alternative. Good job on fail.

LOL... you are the one who blew your very first post... claiming the code needs brushing around the edges and then stating "ignorant as most people here about taxes".

LOL. What I actually stated was that it needed reform because it was too complex. What I rejected was scrapping. Apparently you are either too dishonest or too illiterate to figure that out. Your current claim is nothing more than a lie and a lie you have repeatively made. Therefore you are a compulsive liar. Certainly not the first one here, but you do a pretty bad job trying to hide it.

Which is it?
Is the tax code only in need of a little brushing?

Did I ever state "a little brushing" or are you lying as usual?

Please show me where I said that. Failure to do so constitutes undeniable proof you have engaged in several acts of lying.

You prove it, take it back or accept you are a liar.

You've handed nothing... except perhaps a 12 incher from Scotty at Quizno's.

lol. Gotta wonder who's laughing at you right now.

This is what Obvious Child finds

The IRS is in fact underfunded and understaffed. Considering their budget, the amount of collections divided by the expenditures is roughly $2,636 per dollar spent on funding. Find me another government organization that has that kind of income to cost structure. The often totted monies spent to get dead beat dads to pay for child support is blown clear away by that amount.

Even the corporate sector has a hard time catching that. An average staff auditor is expected to bring in $250,000 in business in some markets, $500,000 in others. At an average salary of $40,000 that's at max $12.5 per dollar in funding. Worse when you consider non-income costs like healthcare.
The Post Office loses money on funding. Most government programs do. The IRS however is one of the few that bring in more money than they spend and they bring in vast amounts more than many private sector firms can boast.

So... we should do little so we can end up right back where we started from?
No. Massive overhaul is needed so it takes eons to pervert it again... and so people get a taste of what it's like to tell Congress to buckle up.

Massive overhaul of what? Until you fix the Congressional problem with money, you will keep getting the same problem. Blaming the code for underlying problems is lying blaming the farmer for not taking his animals to the doctor when the water is contaminated with heavy metals. You fix the underlying problem, not keep replacing the side effects. It's a key reason why the GOP is a joke now. It does nothing to deal with the underlying problem.

Socialists love the use of tax codes to usurp our freedoms and to get the masses to behave as Government wishes; it doesn't affect the wealthy in society at all... only the plebes.
Very fair system... LOL.

And you clearly ignore the rest of my post explaining why. I see you clearly wish to avoid how use of tax codes stimulated the economy under Bush. I see you clearly wish to avoid how tax codes can stimulate renewable energy. I see you clearly wish to actually respond to anything I wrote.

At this point, talk to yourself, you clearly don't give a **** about what other people write. You just fabricate what you wish they wrote and attack them on it. Pathetic really.

This is why you constantly lose arguments. You don't use facts. You don't understand the relationships. You don't use logic or reasoning. Knee Jerk reactions may earn you praise from the partisans but those in the middle laugh at your failures.

Yeah Obvious Child... playing with the edges will keep us close to Marx... you like him dontcha?

.

LOL. I still think it's funny how you think a Communist system has a tax code. Clearly and massive ignorance about Marx and his thoughts.

obvious Child · Apr 14, 2009

DeeJayH said:
it is a pathetic point to hang an argument on. its semantics

On the contrary it was the pin that Zimmer's idiotic argument hung on. It makes every sense to show how he's wrong. Not that he'll ever admit he's wrong much less even respond to what people actually write. His entire last post was nothing more than him making up arguments, pretending I made them and attacking me on his own lies.

American · Apr 14, 2009

obvious Child said:
And again Zimmer shows he doesn't understand what he talks about.

1) A complex tax code is merely a reason to simplify, that's reform, not scrapping.

2) Is merely a side effect of complexity. Reforming the tax code will make it significently easier to understand. Again, reform, not scrap.

3) The IRS actually is too small and underfunded. Roughly around $500 billion annually is not reported to the IRS. Meaning, if we had a sufficiently staffed and funded IRS, we essentially could have avoided deficits for the past decades. Audits of individuals have significently declined over time yet fraud has almost certainly increased. What we are seeing is similar to what happened to the SEC. Lack of funding and lack of staff let all kinds of **** through and we pay for it in the end. The simple answer is to actually fund and staff the collection agency that is the IRS.

4) This one is particularly amusing. There's absolutely nothing to stop congress from corrupting the next tax code system. Yammering on the current one for this problem when it affects all things Congress can enact is rather idiotic.

5) Uh, a flat tax would do the same thing. Every level of sales would be equally taxed, resulting in profits being taxed multiple times. By the time the dividend was distributed, it can be taxed well more than two times. A flat sales tax doesn't change this.

6) Taxes as a form of social policy isn't inherently a bad idea. Smoking costs the nation billions in healthcare and billions in lost productivity. Furthermore, tax as a social policy lead to renewable energy systems which are getting us off foreign fossil fuels. I notice your article didn't mention that. I also notice how your article did not mention how the Bush tax cuts stimulated the economy by allowing bonus depreciation. That was a use of tax as social and economic policy. Your beef is more with those who use it rather than it as a tool.

7) Your article is as ignorant as most people here about taxes. Marginal tax rates don't tell us much. What we want to look at is the effective tax rates.

How Marginal Tax Rates Work ? Get Rich Slowly

A bit of a primer. What our system does now is to encourage rich people to change how their get their income, not by working but by investing which IMO is actually pretty good as we need rich people to provide capital. By encouraging them to earn their money by passive methods we ensure that there will be large private capital reserves to fund new businesses and new ideas.

8) Those numbers look real suspect. 5.9% of $20,000 is around $1,180. That's roughly 7 hours at a partner rate of $125. That's an absolute lie. Similarly, 0.5% of $200,000 is $1,000. That may be more reasonable especially if that person has a private business. But the notion that someone barely paying any taxes has that kind of tax bill is completely insane. Someone earning $20,000 probably has one W-2, maybe a handful of interest statements and that's about it. I can do that tax return in about 10 minutes and charge them at MOST $50.

9) Again, what makes you think that Congress won't find ways to mess around with the next system? Besides, what you state is merely a problem with Congress and money. Not Congress and the Tax code. As many have stated, if we remove money from Congress we'll fix a great many ideas. Scrapping the code won't fix the underlying problem.

10) LOL. The last one belongs in the conspiracy section. Both parties have used the tax code for their own means.

Try again Zimmer or you could just stop pretending you understand taxes. I take it you won't reply to my rebuttal on your last tax rant?

Stalinists never want to change the corrupt status quo, like a tax code, because it feeds their narcassitic agenda.

obvious Child · Apr 15, 2009

American said:
Stalinists never want to change the corrupt status quo, like a tax code, because it feeds their narcassitic agenda.

More mindless commentary from the peanut gallery.

Partisan hacks never want to think about what is actually written because it would challenge their narcissistic view that what they say is actually true.

I see you, like the rest don't want to talk about the benefits from having a tax code that can be changed by congress.

I have praised the bonus depreciation allowed specifically under the Bush Stimulus after 9/11 to jump start the economy. Without a tax code that can be changed specifically for such reasons, we wouldn't have been able to quickly rebuild from that disaster. Tax incentives for renewable, specifically solar power has allowed us to increase our population at the same time our quality of life increases without drastic increases in electrical demand, saving us billions in fuel costs, not increasing the power of governments diametrically opposed to our mere existence and fueling industry.

I have stated the current system has problems, but I'm the only one here praising a Republican President for good use of tax policy to help the economy.

Not to mention that I have stated that the problem lies within Congress and money and how replacing the tax code without fixing that problems fixes essentially nothing as Congress will monkey around with the new system.

Clearly, none of you give a **** about facts.

And unilaterally redefining terms doesn't make you a good debater.
[ame]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stalinism[/ame]

zimmer · Apr 15, 2009

American said:
Stalinists never want to change the corrupt status quo, like a tax code, because it feeds their narcassitic agenda.

Taxes are about control.
Lose the ability to endlessly jerk the tax code and they simply would lose power to do the socialist things they want.

To think it started in 1916 and they said they'd only tax the wealthiest... a tiny fraction of a percent, and look where it's gone.

Obvious Child,

You're Obviously a Child of Marx.
You defend the code, you defend social engineering, you think the IRS is too small, and you say we on the right are "ignorant"?

The tax code could be scrapped and redone. Entire countries are crawling out of much worse due in part to total restructing and simplification of their code.

In 2005 Paul Kirchoff, respected economist and Merkel advisor suggested the code in Germany be overhauled, 400+ tax loopholes closed and having a tax form no bigger than a beer mat. In fact he proposed a "flat tax".

If we can change the climate and if we can run an economy on green energy (that won't fulfill our needs), massively overhauling the tax code is a snap.

.

PeteEU · Apr 15, 2009

zimmer said:
Taxes are about control.
Lose the ability to endlessly jerk the tax code and they simply would lose power to do the socialist things they want.

To think it started in 1916 and they said they'd only tax the wealthiest... a tiny fraction of a percent, and look where it's gone.

You do know taxes have been around since before Jesus was born right?

You do know that it was conservative political forces that first implemented the "tax" right?

You do know that those horrible taxes go to fund the right wing projects like wars and a bloated military right? Oh and the electrical grid, dams, roads, and many many other things. But I guess you can live without them right?

The tax code could be scrapped and redone. Entire countries are crawling out of much worse due in part to total restructing and simplification of their code.

Name one. While I agree tax codes should be far more simple, name one country who has slashed the tax code and redone it. Oh let me guess, you will mention the eastern European countries that went from a communist dictatorship to a democracy and have implemented flat tax systems. You do know the economic conditions of said countries right now..... right?

In 2005 Paul Kirchoff, respected economist and Merkel advisor suggested the code in Germany be overhauled, 400+ tax loopholes closed and having a tax form no bigger than a beer mat. In fact he proposed a "flat tax".

And a flat tax is a neo con pipe dream that has never been proven to work. The only nations that have implemented it are eastern block nations who came from a communist economic system. The same countries that now are hurting big time due to the credit crunch.

As for Paul Kirchoff... great role model you got there. He is a far right (non neo nazi) German conservative, and believes among other things that a woman's place is in the home where she should produce children.... He is also considered the reason that Merkel almost lost the 2005 election because he proposed what you mentioned. So a great role model there.

zimmer · Apr 15, 2009

PeteEU said:
You do know taxes have been around since before Jesus was born right?

Before Jesus was born.

The Persians had a saying, "when taxes were low, revenues were high, and when taxes high, revenues were low."

You do know that those horrible taxes go to fund the right wing projects like wars and a bloated military right?

That is what they are allowed for under the Constitution.

Oh and the electrical grid, dams, roads, and many many other things. But I guess you can live without them right?

Three... 3-TRILLION dollars is not required annually to fund infra or the military.

It's social engineering the money is being wasted on.
If we only spent on infra, military/police/intel, and had a small porgram for those that truly can't help themselves... you know those that are severely mentally or physically handicapped... we would require a fraction of the government we have. And what we would have focused money on would be easier to manage and have work in a half assed fashion.

Name one. While I agree tax codes should be far more simple, name one country who has slashed the tax code and redone it.

Virtually every former Soviet country.

New Zealand.

[T]ax reform in New Zealand would provide a good model for the United States to follow... At the beginning of the 1980s, [New Zealand] had a system of high rates and lots of loopholes. This... led to economic stagnation, high unemployment and fiscal disarray.

The 1980s Lange-Douglas Labour Government adopted a Reaganesque formula for tax reform... The top personal income tax rate was reduced from 66 per cent to 33 per cent. The tax base was extended and most loopholes removed... The corporate tax rate was also lowered from 45 per cent to 33 per cent.

The alignment of the corporate and the top rate of personal tax, along with the integration of dividend income through the imputation system, produced a system with no double taxation of corporate income...

The results of economic liberalisation were striking. Along with strong economic growth, unemployment dropped and Budget deficits turned into surpluses.

Pretty radical change, but No, no, no... but implementing a new tax scheme is not possible in America. LOL.

Enough?

You do know the economic conditions of said countries right now..... right?

I've been through and lived in a couple of them so I know first hand.

Think how prosperous they'd have been without the Soviets "helping" them?
They have huge holes to dig out of... one Obama is steering us towards.

And a flat tax is a neo con pipe dream that has never been proven to work. The only nations that have implemented it are eastern block nations who came from a communist economic system. The same countries that now are hurting big time due to the credit crunch.

We had a better tax code in 1916.

As for Paul Kirchoff... great role model you got there. He is a far right (non neo nazi) German conservative, and believes among other things that a woman's place is in the home where she should produce children.... He is also considered the reason that Merkel almost lost the 2005 election because he proposed what you mentioned. So a great role model there.

I followed the election closely.
Merkel won, but not enough to team with the FDP.

Merkel indeed had an unbelievable 50% about 12 weeks before the election... Schroeder with the Terrorist Joschka Fischer of the CommiGreenssaid they would half unemployment and instead they doubled it... and this bit of handiwork was achieved during decent economic times elsewhere.

Kirchhof, a professor of tax law at the University of Heidelberg, has in the past advocated placing a 25% tax on all income, both corporate and personal, above $22,000 a year and eliminating virtually all loopholes and deductions.

When Kirchoff proposed slashing, simplifying taxes and closing loopholes... the Leftist Press went ballistic.
It was the perfect cover for Schroeder to go hiding behind, and it is True Merkel's numbers fell to 36%.
The press played hatchetman... as they so often do for their Leftist candidates.

Flat Tax never proven to work... but we can control the climate...

Hoover Institution - Daily Report Archives - Where the Flat Tax Goes from Here
In April 2002 Singapore proposed a major restructuring of its tax system.
Hong Kong maintains a flat tax of 15 percent on personal income.
The Channel Islands of Jersey and Guernsey impose a 20 percent flat tax.
... LOL...
The biggest flat tax success story comes from Russia. In 2001 a 13 percent flat tax took effect, replacing three brackets with a top rate of 30 percent. The new code improved incentives and compliance.

Europe Circles The Flat Tax

It works, and the simpler the system the better.

.

zimmer · Apr 15, 2009

obvious Child said:
The IRS is in fact underfunded and understaffed.

IRS employees at all levels is approximately 115000, making it our largest federal bureaucracy

And you want more... LOL.
Good on ya mate.

A flat tax where everyone would pay "X"% above a certain level of income would work just fine. We can send a man to the moon and can control the climate but... no, no, no... we cannot scrap the tax code over a period of years and find something vastly simpler and more efficient?
LOL.

Can we phase out the Ponzi/Madoff Scheme called social security?
Yes we can... my bet is you'd say No we can't.

I don't care what it's called... it can be done, and the same goes for SSC.
What's needed is political will and we won't ever have it with a majority of SAPs (Socialists of America Party) running the show.

For them it's impossible because it is where these folks derive their power.
Just look at The Obamanator and his bandits in The House and Senate.

.

American · Apr 15, 2009

PeteEU said:
You do know taxes have been around since before Jesus was born right?

You do know that it was conservative political forces that first implemented the "tax" right?

You do know that those horrible taxes go to fund the right wing projects like wars and a bloated military right? Oh and the electrical grid, dams, roads, and many many other things. But I guess you can live without them right?

Name one. While I agree tax codes should be far more simple, name one country who has slashed the tax code and redone it. Oh let me guess, you will mention the eastern European countries that went from a communist dictatorship to a democracy and have implemented flat tax systems. You do know the economic conditions of said countries right now..... right?

And a flat tax is a neo con pipe dream that has never been proven to work. The only nations that have implemented it are eastern block nations who came from a communist economic system. The same countries that now are hurting big time due to the credit crunch.

As for Paul Kirchoff... great role model you got there. He is a far right (non neo nazi) German conservative, and believes among other things that a woman's place is in the home where she should produce children.... He is also considered the reason that Merkel almost lost the 2005 election because he proposed what you mentioned. So a great role model there.

Why do you act so arrogantly, and then followed by exaggerated fault by association?

obvious Child · Apr 15, 2009

zimmer said:
IRS employees at all levels is approximately 115000, making it our largest federal bureaucracy

Good job on ignoring how they bring in more money than any other bureaucracy per dollar of funding.

And you want more... LOL.
Good on ya mate.

Click to expand...

You do realize you've only attempted to reply to less than 1% of my entire posts?

Do you really expect to win an argument when you outright refuse to address what people write and instead resort to compulsive lying?

[qupte]A flat tax where everyone would pay "X"% above a certain level of income would work just fine. We can send a man to the moon and can control the climate but... no, no, no... we cannot scrap the tax code over a period of years and find something vastly simpler and more efficient?
LOL.[/quote]

And you again ignore the reasons why.

Essentially you're a radio station with a two song rotation.

Try reply to actual arguments rather than just repeating your own inane thoughts for a change.

Can we phase out the Ponzi/Madoff Scheme called social security?
Yes we can... my bet is you'd say No we can't.

Click to expand...

You're right. We can't. Because politicians are too scared to do what is necessary. It's also a reason why we'll never get our budget in order. Neither party has the balls to raise taxes and cut spending.

I don't care what it's called... it can be done, and the same goes for SSC.

Click to expand...

LOL. You want to FURTHER depower the SEC?

Do firms like Enron, WorldCom and Tyco ring any bells in your head?

Apparently removing accurate reporting standards from the market is something you think will improve the economy. You ***** about the fraud that is Social Security yet you move to encourage fraud across the entire financial sector.

Get your thoughts straight for a change.

For them it's impossible because it is where these folks derive their power.
Just look at The Obamanator and his bandits in The House and Senate.

.

Click to expand...

LOL. Republicans are just as at fault for the things you decry. Your massive hyperpartisanism prevents you from acknowledging it. I see you STILL refuse to admit that several of Bush's nominees had tax issues. Joke, you are.

obvious Child · Apr 15, 2009

zimmer said:
Taxes are about control

Incorrect. Government is about control.

Lose the ability to endlessly jerk the tax code and they simply would lose power to do the socialist things they want.

And yet you lose powerful tools to stimulate the economy, get us off oil and move the nation towards prosperity.

You constantly wish to ignore everything that contridicts and disproves you does not exist.

It's a reason you never win any arguments here and most of us don't think highly of you.

To think it started in 1916 and they said they'd only tax the wealthiest... a tiny fraction of a percent, and look where it's gone.

Apparently you don't understand the history of taxes. Taxation actually has switched from clobbering the poor to hitting the rich. Serfs were essentially taxed to death for thousands of years. Notice you don't say much about that because the tax system favored the wealth yet literally enslaved people.

Obvious Child,

You're Obviously a Child of Marx.

LOL. Care to define what Marx wrote or are you going to badly pretend you even understand what the man wrote?

oh wait. You won't. Because you can't back up anything you say. This thread is perfect evidence of your inability to hold your own in any discussion.

You defend the code, you defend social engineering, you think the IRS is too small, and you say we on the right are "ignorant"?

I defend what the code can do for the country. I have stated and as you have clearly ignored, that it has problems that stem from greater issues. And social engineering is not an inherently bad idea.

Getting off of a system that funds those trying to kill us is in my opinion, a good thing. Maybe you think that favoring spending that props up those trying to KILL US is a good thing. But then again, I don't hate America. You clearly do.

The tax code could be scrapped and redone. Entire countries are crawling out of much worse due in part to total restructing and simplification of their code.

Give a decent reason why and back it up.

In 2005 Paul Kirchoff, respected economist and Merkel advisor suggested the code in Germany be overhauled, 400+ tax loopholes closed and having a tax form no bigger than a beer mat. In fact he proposed a "flat tax".

Did I say a flat tax was inherently bad? No. Stop lying.

If we can change the climate and if we can run an economy on green energy (that won't fulfill our needs), massively overhauling the tax code is a snap.

Except that the businesses that run America won't support it.

So, I take it you're against Big Business? Down with GE? Down with Walmart? Down with every firm in the DJA 40?

zimmer · Apr 16, 2009

This is the value of free speech.
Post for post you reinforce your socialist leanings and defense of the status quo... playing with the fringes of the tax code is the status quo.

Incorrect. Government is about control.

Take away the ability to jerk the code and you take power away from government.
You weaken it precisely where it should be weak.

If they stuck to Founding Principles, we wouldn't have 3 Trillion dollar annual budgets largely laden with legislation geared at social programs nowhere to be found or defended in The Constitution.

Not that The Constitution means anything to folks like you.

And yet you lose powerful tools to stimulate the economy, get us off oil and move the nation towards prosperity.

The bolded should read:
And yet the government loses powerful weapons to do short and long term harm the economy.
That's the reality.
Look at New Zealand.

The powerful engine that drives everything is the people... free of government intrusion into their lives and business... this is where you and Obama are dead wrong.

Look at what the Unions and government have done to the auto industry.
Screwed it badly.

get us off oil and move the nation towards prosperity.

The socialist in you keeps oozing through your posts.
Oil is the driving engine for our prosperity.
It is cheap, abundant and plentiful.

Government isn't the one to decide when oil is no longer viable.
The market is.
Our energy sources have changed due to available technologies, and we have none capable of replacing oil and driving our economy.

Nuke, a viable option is blocked at every turn.

You constantly wish to ignore everything that contridicts and disproves you does not exist.

I look to the clear lessons of history... which you prefer to ignore.
Just look at your "oil" remark above. Totally disregards history.

Also... LOL... you think we can engineer the economy to run on energy sources that cannot do the job... but scrapping the existing tax code in its entirety is not possible.
LOL.

For this and other reasons, Libs are much like Fruit Flies, both have about the same memory capacity when it comes to history.

It's a reason you never win any arguments here and most of us don't think highly of you.

ROTFLMAO.

I wear it as a Badge of Honor that folks like you disagree with me and may even find me intolerable.
If so, I'm doing something right! LOL.

I know who you are as I was once like you folks.
I repudiate what I once was politically.

Apparently you don't understand the history of taxes. Taxation actually has switched from clobbering the poor to hitting the rich. Serfs were essentially taxed to death for thousands of years. Notice you don't say much about that because the tax system favored the wealth yet literally enslaved people.

Yawn... not relevant to taxation in the here and now.
The only relevant bit of history to measure taxation is through that document Libs find so reprehensible... The Constitution.

Find me where progressive, Marxist taxation and redistribution is cited in The Constitution?

LOL. Care to define what Marx wrote or are you going to badly pretend you even understand what the man wrote?

Why define it... it's all over the internet.
We've been discussing one of his key points... Progressive, punitive taxation... or did you miss that?

oh wait. You won't. Because you can't back up anything you say. This thread is perfect evidence of your inability to hold your own in any discussion.

LOL.... Incoming!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
See directly below.

I defend what the code can do for the country.

Progressive, punitive taxation... and redistribution with government as the middle man.

Throwing sand in the gears of commerce...

Tell me, you don't really believe the trillions wasted annually by government wouldn't be better in the hands of the citizens?

LOL.

I have stated and as you have clearly ignored, that it has problems that stem from greater issues. And social engineering is not an inherently bad idea.

Let me repeat: It's not bad, it's awful.
Some folks need help, the severely handicapped, but outside of that the public groups can do a better job for less.

Look at Freddie and Fannie... combined with ACORN and Carter and The Clinton's laws forcing banks to make bad loans... isn't that wonderful social engineering?... tanking the economy with their social engineering?

Just wait until the SSC feces hits the fan... and aren't Medicare and medicaid wonderful programs that are well run and cost effective... LOL.

I hope you get to enjoy their splendor... big spender.

Forcing the free market to be a social program?

LOL... yeah, just a miraculous system.

Look at the Vienna Ghettos at the turn of the last century... caused by?
GOVERNMENT!
When it got out of the way... the problem was on its way to being solved.

Recent forays into Social engineering has given us Ghettos. The projects, whether in Paris, Stockholm or Detriot have given us bastions of hell on earth.

These "Projects", when created were seen as Utopian solutions... CELEBRATED FOR THEIR HUMANITY
Now? After the ribbons cut, speeches were made, backs slapped and all felt so good about themselves...
... look at the putrid mess they created... the busybodies.

You never hear Leftists speak of their once Grand schemes.
WHY?
Because they are abysmal failures. Epic failures.

Or do you believe the recipients of such governmental love have benefited from this excursion into social engineering?

Think these people would have been better off without government "help"?

Getting off of a system that funds those trying to kill us is in my opinion, a good thing. Maybe you think that favoring spending that props up those trying to KILL US is a good thing.

Say what?

But then again, I don't hate America. You clearly do.

I love America.
Having traveled the world for almost a half century, since I was a youth.. and continuing to do so, I know her greatness, and it doesn't come from government... it comes from free people... people free of the oppressive fist of government.

This freedom was once an American Hallmark.

Of course YOU define "Freedom" differently to come to such a conclusion.
You have to.

Give a decent reason why and back it up.

1. It's my money. I worked for it. I earned it. It's the fruit of my labor they are thieving for social engineering. I prefer to engineer my own life... thank you... and the defense for this mentality is found in ...

2. ... The Constitution. I can't find Progressive taxation and redistribution anywhere in The Constitution. Can you?

3. The code is unfair. UnAmerican. Progressive taxation is Marxist. Equally under law means equal... equal justice in court, equal rights, but not equal financial outcomes... which is what progressive taxation seeks to achieve at best... at worst it is a weapon... and we've seen it hauled out often in the first weeks of Obama's Reign of Error.

Did I say a flat tax was inherently bad? No. Stop lying.

You said it doesn't work. Period... and defended this position.
You crapped all over Kirchoff.
Now you support it...? LOL.

Except that the businesses that run America won't support it.

Clarify.

So, I take it you're against Big Business? Down with GE? Down with Walmart? Down with every firm in the DJA 40?

No, I love business... commerce.
Why would I hate commerce?
I love Wal Mart ... Sam Walton was an American original... a man with a winner's mentality and one hell of a hard worker. I respect him and his no nonsense, no frills manner of running his business. Read Made in America, and you might find a guy who loves America deeply.

GE... like them too, especially when Welch was at the helm.
Straight from the Gut was a good read.

.

.

Top 10 Reasons to Scrap the Tax Code

Educating the Ignorant

Equal Opportunity Hater

New member

Educating the Ignorant

Equal Opportunity Hater

Educating the Ignorant

Equal Opportunity Hater

Equal Opportunity Hater

Dorset Patriot

Educating the Ignorant

Equal Opportunity Hater

Equal Opportunity Hater

Trump Grump Whisperer

Equal Opportunity Hater

Educating the Ignorant

Educating the Ignorant

Educating the Ignorant

Trump Grump Whisperer

Equal Opportunity Hater

Equal Opportunity Hater

Educating the Ignorant