• 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!

A good piece on why Flat Taxes or the Fair Tax is regressive, and raises inequality.

Re: A good piece on why Flat Taxes or the Fair Tax is regressive, and raises inequali

I don't think the rich whom the "social democracy" types want to steal from are envious of the parasites. THe dog should scratch and better yet get some insecticide

The theft talking point. It's as if he's on autopilot!
 
Re: A good piece on why Flat Taxes or the Fair Tax is regressive, and raises inequali

Riiiiight.


Answer me this please, if I asked you to read 134 pages of text, would you do it? And not 'speed read'...read every word?

Yes or no, please?

You asked for studies. I gave them. I wouldn't be naïve enough to asked you for economic studies, since you clearly know of none. So the answer is: your talking point is exposed again.
 
Re: A good piece on why Flat Taxes or the Fair Tax is regressive, and raises inequali


Complete removal of all federal taxes and replacing it with an LVT tax.

"The advantages...

A NATURAL SOURCE OF PUBLIC REVENUE. All land makes its full contribution to the Exchequer, allowing reductions in existing taxes on labour and enterprise.
A STRONGER ECONOMY. If we tax labour, buildings or machinery and plant, we discourage people from constructive and beneficial activities and penalise enterprise and efficiency. The reverse is the case with a tax on land values, which is payable regardless of whether or how well the land is actually used. It is a payment, based on current market value, for the exclusive occupation of a piece of land. In the longer term, this fundamentally new and different approach to revenue raising will stimulate new business and new employment, reducing the need for costly government welfare.
MARGINAL AREAS REVITALISED. Economic actitivities are handicapped by distance from the major centres of population. Conventional taxes such as VAT and those on transport fuels cause particular damage to the remoter areas of the country. Land Value Tax, by definition, bears lightly or not at all where land has little or no value, thereby stimulating economic activity away from the centre - it creates what are in effect tax havens exactly where they are most needed.
A MORE EFFICIENT LAND MARKET. The necessity to pay the tax obliges landowners to develop vacant and under-used land properly or to make way for others who will.
LESS URBAN SPRAWL. Land Value Taxation deters speculative land holding. Thus dilapidated inner-city areas are returned to good use, reducing the pressure for building on green-field sites.
LESS BUREAUCRACY. The complexities of Income Tax, Inheritance Tax, Capital Gains Tax and VAT are well known. By contrast, Land Value Tax is straightforward. Once the system has settled down, landholders will not be faced with complicated forms and demands for information. Revaluation will become relatively simple.
NO AVOIDANCE OR EVASION. Land cannot be hidden, removed to a tax haven or concealed in an electronic data system.
AN END TO BOOM-SLUMP CYCLES. Speculation in land value - frequently misrepresented and disguised as "property" or "asset" speculation - is the root cause of unsustainable booms which result periodically in damaging corrective slumps. Land Value Taxation, fully and properly applied, knocks the speculative element out of land pricing.
IMPOSSIBLE TO PASS ON IN HIGHER PRICES, LOWER WAGES OR HIGHER RENTS. Competition makes it impossible for a business producing goods on a valuable site to charge more per item than one producing similar goods on less valuable land - after all, producers and traders at different locations are paying different rents to landlords now, yet like goods generally sell for much the same price and employers pay their workers comparable wages. The tax cannot be passed on to a tenant who is already paying the full market rent.
AN ESTABLISHED AND PROVEN SYSTEM. Local government variants of Land Value Taxation, known as Site Value Rating, are accepted practice in, for example, Denmark and Australia."

What is LVT?
 
Re: A good piece on why Flat Taxes or the Fair Tax is regressive, and raises inequali

You asked for studies. I gave them. I wouldn't be naïve enough to asked you for economic studies, since you clearly know of none. So the answer is: your talking point is exposed again.

Lol.

Really?

Considering it is impossible for you to know what information I do or do not possess, I would be most curious to know how you 'know' that I 'clearly know of none (economic studies)'.

One heck of a Ouija board maybe?

If you have such a board, maybe you could tell me the scores of the NFL games this weekend, I want to win the pool in the sports thread?
 
Last edited:
Re: A good piece on why Flat Taxes or the Fair Tax is regressive, and raises inequali

Lol.

Really?

Considering it is impossible for you to know what information I do or do not possess, I would be most curious to know how you 'know' that I 'clearly know of none (economic studies)'.

One heck of a Ouija board maybe?

If you have such a board, maybe you could tell me the scores of the NFL games this weekend, I want to win the pool in the sports thread?

It's amusing that you've lost the thread of the argument.

You asked for support for the claim that income gaps result in recession. I gave it to you. You whined. Next issue.
 
JP Hochbaum, for another point of view:
Jaeger19, I'm pleased that you asked this question.
Progressive income taxes are not, (as conservatives wish us to believe), all that progressive. Due to the waivers, exceptions, and exclusions or reductions of tax rates upon favored classes of taxpayers or income sources, the character of our federal individual income tax system's progressive tax rates are less progressive than otherwise and less equitable among income tax payers.

I'm among those believing on that Fair-tax proponents are correct, in aggregate, wealthier individuals would be subject to as much or more net taxes if any proportion of our current progressive income tax system were transformed to a sales tax.

In my opinion, what's problematic are:
(1) I doubt the U.S. Congress would enact and in the future retain sufficient Pretax-refunds to compensate the poor that currently are not subject to income taxes.
(2) I don't believe we can or should attempt to effectively enforce a federal sales tax rate to sufficiently replace all federal revenues due to taxes based upon net incomes, wages, and payrolls, or even upon only individuals' net incomes and wages.
(3) Most Fair-tax proponents insist on the transformation be accomplished in a single step.

In my opinion, #3 should not be considered.
If the federal taxes are incrementally and simultaneously transformed, after one of the incremental steps, sales tax will approach an unacceptable rate and further increases will not be enacted.
If I'm incorrect, all federal taxes upon individuals' net incomes and wages would be eliminated. Conceivably, in that case, all enterprises' taxes upon net incomes and payrolls could also be eliminated.

Respectfully, Supposn
 
Back
Top Bottom