Re: Romney's tax plan- raise taxes on the middle class, cut them for the rich
I agree with you there, except in response to violations of WTO orders by trading partners.
And, I'll agree with you, that tariffs should be used in terms of punishment for violations...
A flat tax would have to be far higher than 15% and would amount to an enormous tax hike on the poor and middle class and a huge tax cut for the moderately wealth.
Only if you look at current spending rates, and low employment/workforce participation rates...
Given the other policies I've espoused you'd get major growth for companies, and more people desiring to get back to work... which would both increase revenue and decrease expenditures... as well as other revenue sources, such as the conversion to fee for service for many governmental services, the sale of naming rights, and the sale of public land not being used which has been requested for use by fracking companies which could lead to massive flooding of the fossil fuel market, dropping prices dramatically, enough to spur more growth, and less personal finance trouble for many Americans...
You'd also have to cut spending in many areas... which I think should happen...
However, even during the Obama adminstration there have been numerous studies which have shown that a 12% flat tax is doable...
I'm also not against letting those who have earned the money keep it and spend it the way they've earned the right to...
Our effective corporate tax rate is already quite low relative to OECD countries. I would have no problem lowering the marginal rate and eliminating loopholes in a revenue neutral manner.
We have the highest nominal rate, and one of the lowest purchase to power parity rates in the world... making it an awful spot to do business in the new global economy... we need to drop our corporate rate down to be more competitive with the countries like China, Hong Kong, Taiwan, Japan, Korea, Brazil, etc.
This would also involve closing the loopholes most corporations take to get around it... The large corporations that are meant to be punished by the high corporate tax rate get around it, and the small companies struggling to get by pay it...
Dropping the corporate tax rate to 20% would allow you to eliminate all those loopholes as well...
So you claim to be against progressivity and you accuse others of class warfare ... but want to maintain this tax only on the wealthy? Where is the logic?
I'm against punishing the rightful acquisition of wealth based off of success of ones actions here on this earth... I also know many small businesses use capital gains to grow their businesses, and dont deserve to be taxes as highly as they are currently...
However, far too many rich use capital gains to use their existing wealth to grow wealth, without actually earning it, and they use the capital gains to enhance the lives of their children, and set them up where they have unfair advantages at earning wealth... That's not what America is about...
Drop --> Bucket. I can hardly wait for the first session of the K-Y Jelly Congress at the Hyundai Capitol Building.
Right... because the Capital Building is the only federal property... :roll:
First off, the sale of public lands that have been shown to be excellent locations for the extraction of oil shale is a win-win-win, by recovering revenue with the sale of the land, creating growth for the economy which will lead more revenue, and by dropping fuel prices for people so they're less cash strapped and dependent on the government for assistance with heating/ac
Secondly, the US Government happens to own the largest collection of interconnected highways and bridges of anywhere in the world... Many local state transportation departments and metropolitan transportations systems are already using sale of naming rights to increase revenue... The US Government could do the same thing... You're right, it would likely only be a drop in the barrel... but with all the potential nameable roadways, bridges, etc. I'm sure you could general $100B/yr... enough to offset that bogus healthcare plan... (and I mean Medicare Part D... the other one has to go)
Thirdly, the US Government could make use of an official car company, an official airline, and an official such and such... and cut deals with those companies for exclusive travel, purchase, etc. at discounted rates... saving operating costs, etc.
Well simply, rather than taxing everyone so there is money for a service... only provide the service for those who pay for it optionally...
The USPS and AMTRAK are along these lines... making stamps and parcel costs cover the true cost of postal service, making train fares cover the true cost of rail transport, etc.
However, there are numerous things the government does as services for people, that cost the government operating costs...
The National Park system has fees for camping permits. It's meant to cover some of the cost of the clean-up and maintenance of the facilities.
The Social Security Administration, for instance... create fees for issuing Social Security cards, raise the fee as a penalty for losing and needing a duplicate copy of your Social Security card.
IRS choses who they audit, and often nothing is found wrong... but if you're found guilty in an audit of purposeful tax evasion, you should have to pay for the cost of the audit (more of a tax penalty there). However, if you need duplicate copies of your tax returns from the IRS, or other such forms that are above the required form for filing taxes, have a fee for that service.
There's numerous other things that I'm sure could be found if I dragged a fine tooth comb over the budget...
It's definitely more applicable at the local level, though... for licensing, beach stickers, parking stickers, gun permits, hunting licenses, marriage licenses, etc. However, with most states borderline bankrupt atm... encouraging states to become more fee for service oriented will cover their own revenue troubles, in order to cut the demand on federal assistance...
There is already a work requirement, two year limit, and five year lifetime limit for TANF. I think community service is worth exploring, but there would be many problems (child care, interfering with permanent job search, education, etc.).
As much as I like that TANF came into being... since it cut down on a lot of the abuse that was happening... it was really just a first step, that needs more strict requirements, and stricter enforcement...
The work requirement in TANF is so weak, it's ridiculous. Also, they just kick you off, and then when you reapply, they treat it like a new case... Besides, they have a 2 year requirement to get a job... but there's no requirement to be actively looking for that job. They should have to prove 5 verifiable legitimate job searches within their field for each day of the work week.
20 hrs performed over the 7 day week does not interfere with a permanent job search... in fact it only provides incentive to get the job, and get off assistance, so they only have the job and no community service hours...
So you don't get it... TANF has a work requirement, but not a strict from the get go insistence on proving that you truly do NEED the assistance, and that you aren't going to the government as a first choice option, rather than the last choice option it ought to be...
Welfare is a very minor part of the budget and minor improvements won't do much to alleviate our debt problems. This is typical Republican pap of demonizing the poor and less fortunate while bending all the rules against them.
Wrong... Welfare, Unemployment, etc. makes up over $500B of the US budget... The third largest chunk, behind Social Security and Defense... And there's a lot of fat and abuse which can be elimated from all 3...
I'll guarantee you that $350B of that is unecessarily given out, to people who are not taking the first job offer, or applying for every job they could be working, while sitting on extended unemployment benefits... or people who sit around doing drugs all day, living off section 8 and food stamps...
Section 8 = $18B/yr... (with a maximum voucher rate of $2200/mo, which is over twice my rent!!!)
Food Stamps = $80B/yr... (has been $50B, & I don't have a problem w/ it if there's a work search & community service requirement)
Right, like Romneycare? Obama has done absolutely nothing to expand welfare that Romney didn't do in Massachusettes.
CommonwealthCare as constituted under Romney actually cut MA healthcare expenses from $415M to $115M... While allowing impoverished who could not afford health insurance to purchase health insurance at subsidised rates, so they could take part in paying for a pool coverage that allowed them individual insurance rather than stiffing the hospital emergency rooms with the bills... or letting people who had enough money to pay for the health services they received to do so either...
Obama's plan is only minimally like the plan Romney created in MA... and we don't even know yet, because it hasn't been tested... Part of the major problem with the bill... taking a chance with the governments finances on an untested program...
Romney represents a culture of entitlement and greed -- full stop.
You've even been off your normally poor game tonight... and that still rates as the most ridiculous thing you've said on this site by far...
I'll give you a chance to retract it... before responding to it...