U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 10-18-2011, 09:30 AM
 
66,145 posts, read 29,998,597 times
Reputation: 8573

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Your link showed expenditures based on the total government budget.
It showed the federal government's sources of revenue.
What are the federal government's sources of revenue?

The individual income tax has been the largest single source of federal revenue since 1950.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 10-18-2011, 09:33 AM
 
39,941 posts, read 24,181,628 times
Reputation: 12537
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
51% of this country's income earners DO NOT pull their own weight.

Flat tax. Everyone pays, proportionately. Earn very little; pay very little. Earn A LOT; pay A LOT. It's completely unethical to argue against everyone paying their fair share.
Oh, please. Get real. You don't think that a flat tax was entertained by lawmakers originally? Of course it was! A graduated tax system was implemented because it's more fair than a flat tax system. Someone makes $20,000 a year, and you take 9% of that, that's $1,800. That $1800 is going to have a huge impact on that person. You take $18000 from someone who makes $200,000 a year, and that's a big amount, but it's not going to affect whether they can put a roof over their head, whether they can buy food, whether they can pay their utility bills. It's ridiculous and UNINFORMED when you don't consider the relative impact that taxes have on people at different income levels.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 09:39 AM
 
66,145 posts, read 29,998,597 times
Reputation: 8573
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
Oh, please. Get real. You don't think that a flat tax was entertained by lawmakers originally? Of course it was! A graduated tax system was implemented because it's more fair than a flat tax system.
More fair? COMPLETELY fair would be a head tax, in which everyone pays the same amount and shares the costs, equally. Modified fair is the flat tax in which everyone pays the same rate. Earn very little; pay very little. Earn A LOT; pay A LOT. Some will still be paying MUCH MORE than others, but the proportion would be fair.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 09:55 AM
 
39,941 posts, read 24,181,628 times
Reputation: 12537
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
More fair? COMPLETELY fair would be a head tax, in which everyone pays the same amount and shares the costs, equally. Modified fair is the flat tax in which everyone pays the same rate. Earn very little; pay very little. Earn A LOT; pay A LOT. Some will still be paying MUCH MORE than others, but the proportion would be fair.
If the fair proportion causes someone to starve, you think that's FAIR????

The fact is that a flat tax disproportionately affects people at different income levels. THAT's a FACT. Your proportionate argument is UNFAIR because it fails to address that FACT.

The fact is that we will always have people at different income levels, that people who work in chicken-processing plants, or who clean up after others, or who work in nursing homes or fast-food restaurants, work very, very hard, and not for much pay. There will always be people who will work those jobs for not much pay. Because the number of people seeking work outnumbers the jobs available. The number of people seeking work outnumbers the jobs available. The number of people seeking work outnumbers the jobs available. It's the most salient fact of labor, and it's fundamental to making capitalism work.

Flat taxes are a rich person's wet dream. Because the more money you have, the less impact a flat tax has on your bottom line. Flat taxes aren't fair, because their impact is not proportionate. Never have been. And in the end, the flat tax has to be a high enough percentage to cover the government's costs. I don't think 9% will do that. But even if it does, that tax will break some people, people with low incomes, people with large families. I don't thrill at the idea of punishing people for being poor, I think it's wrong and that's what a flat tax does, the wrong thing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 10:04 AM
 
66,145 posts, read 29,998,597 times
Reputation: 8573
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
If the fair proportion causes someone to starve, you think that's FAIR????
Income earners starve? Utter hyperbole. If they're THAT low-income, their federal income tax bill will be commensurately low.
Quote:
The fact is that a flat tax disproportionately affects people at different income levels.
Actually, no, it affects everyone at exactly the same RATE.

Want to pay less than even a very small amount? Rein in government spending.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 10:06 AM
 
Location: Phoenix, AZ
6,175 posts, read 3,480,638 times
Reputation: 3798
Quote:
Originally Posted by Earlyretired View Post
High school dropout here that made my $$$ honestly through HARD WORK in a steel forge shop....

I could see this coming 20 years ago and invested accordingly...

Id be rehired If I wanted to work before one of these winey punks would...

Do these people really think they would be appealing to a businessman looking for an employee???
Hmm ... I'm curious. Did you belong to a union?

Since you are retired and presumably have the time, why don't you try to get "rehired" just for grins and giggles? Please report back to us. I've a feeling your old job was outsourced or will be soon.

Chances are not too many "businessmen" would be interested in hiring these "punks" because all they have to do is legally import workers from China, India, the Phillipines, etc with H1B visas and pay them peanuts.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 10:32 AM
 
39,941 posts, read 24,181,628 times
Reputation: 12537
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
Income earners starve? Utter hyperbole. If they're THAT low-income, their federal income tax bill will be commensurately low.
Actually, no, it affects everyone at exactly the same RATE.

Want to pay less than even a very small amount? Rein in government spending.
The same RATE disproportionately affects people at the lower part of the spectrum. Just because the slice of pie is the same size percentage-wise doesn't mean that the size of the pie is the same. If you have a four-inch pie that's supposed to serve you and your family, and Mrs Walton has a four-hundred-inch pie, when you give up your 9% of that pie, it means your family goes hungry, while Mrs Walton doesn't even miss that 9% of her pie. Because the flat-tax disproportionately affects people who have smaller pies to begin with.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 10:39 AM
 
66,145 posts, read 29,998,597 times
Reputation: 8573
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The same RATE disproportionately affects people at the lower part of the spectrum.
No, it does not. It affects them at EXACTLY the same rate.
Quote:
Just because the slice of pie is the same size percentage-wise doesn't mean that the size of the pie is the same.
The truth in that is higher income-earners would be paying MUCH, MUCH MORE ...in fact MANY MULTIPLES MORE, even though it would be the same exact rate.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 10:51 AM
 
39,941 posts, read 24,181,628 times
Reputation: 12537
Quote:
Originally Posted by InformedConsent View Post
No, it does not. It affects them at EXACTLY the same rate. The truth in that is higher income-earners would be paying MUCH, MUCH MORE ...in fact MANY MULTIPLES MORE, even though it would be the same exact rate.
The same rate is irrelevant. A four-inch pie doesn't go very far to begin with. Take a tenth of it away, and some people will go hungry. A four-hundred-inch pie, take away a tenth of it, and the person eating that pie is still not going to go hungry, won't even miss it.

That's the fact of disproportionate impact. A flat tax has a disproportionate impact. It hurts people. That's why flat taxes don't work.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 10-18-2011, 11:04 AM
 
66,145 posts, read 29,998,597 times
Reputation: 8573
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge View Post
The same rate is irrelevant. A four-inch pie doesn't go very far to begin with.
Work harder/smarter to earn more pie. The incentive to NOT do so is introduced by continuing to give people freebies. To wit: those receiving public assistance have a birth rate 3 times higher than everyone else. Why? Because they DON'T have to incur cost of caring for their children. Someone else pays. Hence, excessive over-breeding of the dependent class abounds.
Quote:
That's the fact of disproportionate impact.
We're not talking about a disproportionate system, which is what we now have. We're talking about a flat tax. Everyone pays the same rate. Earn very little; pay very little. Earn A LOT; pay A LOT. Paying one's fair share is an ethical responsibility.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. | Please obey Forum Rules | Terms of Use and Privacy Policy

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top