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.
The tax code need to go. It has to be replaced with a consumption tax. Consumption tax is the only fair tax.
To who? Take two households:
Household A - Annual Income: $25K (spends nearly 100% of earnings on necessities)
Household B - Annual Income: $250K (spends nearly 100K of earnings on necessities)
What's the difference when ExxonMobil gets 4 BILLION in tax loopholes every year yet gas prices are near $4?
ExxonMobil isn't the only company. I'd rather give it to working Americans that may need it than a bunch of companies getting billions back while paying CEO millions plottinG ways to get around company losses by passing it on to the taxpayers aka Chase, BOA, BP ETC.
>The tax code need to go. It has to be replaced with a consumption tax. Consumption tax is the only fair tax.<
YES THATS IT! the poor should pay a higher rate than the rich!
Willy Workingpoor making 20K spends ALL just trying to survive. He will pay the highest rate.
Ed Entrepeneur (say 80K) spends most but saves some so he pays a slighly lower rate.
Herbie Hedge fund manager "invests" almost all of it so pays next to nothing...
Vinnie Venture Capitalist invests almost all and honestly anything he makes actually doing venture capitalism SHOULD be at a lower rate. Note venture capitalism = creating a US company and employing US citizens. (not vulture capitalism or buying stock zzz that already exists, or even worse, screwing around with commodity prices)
Unfortunately the GOP is completely unwilling to differentiate between Vinny and Herbie. Low tax rate for Vinnie? I say heck yea! Herbie? Thats what we have now. Herbie actually creates NOTHING and gets a lower tax rate than Ed, even though Ed HAS contributed.
>If people need charity to survive, that's why we have religious institutions and other charities.<
LOL this one shows just how far off the deep end the wingnut end of the spectrum has become. The GOP has become a caricature that the leftie moonbats 20 years ago whined about back then. During the Reagan era, working poor were "at least trying to make it" vs. welfare users. Now they are just losers who dont have a masters degree and should just go find a rock to die under. The charity thing is a guarantee people will actually starve under this delusional scenario. Now, I will give props to any right wingers that have the cahones to actually say "good, then they will die and not be a problem". But mostly we hear utterly unrealistic scenarios. yes I know, your private police will shoot all the food rioters.
As pointed out in others. EITC and Child tax credit are largely GOP creatures DESIGNED TO REDUCE WELFARE.
The point of "it allows companies to pay less than survival..." false. They will pay the lowest they can get away with and that is well below survival.
Lets of course add in all the buzz words of marxist, socialist, theft, big screen TV credit... Of course the majority spouting dont really know any working poor and many have never been true adult working poor. NOTE: the first 2 years after you graduated from the college with a degree your daddy paid for DO NOT COUNT! Of course I will get a bunch of (mostly lies) of I paid for it all with 5 jobs a day 36 hours a day while doing a triple major...
The delusions are shown also in the statements about people getting food stamps... This threshhold is MUCH lower than EITC and Child tax credits I see mentioned on the following posts. This is shown in other threads where some right winger claims he saw some woman use food stamps to buy 10 lobsters then get into a new Cadillac... I actually know working poor (like say the Groceriy store cashier), the thing food stamp people ARE actually guilty of is using their other money to buy WAY too much junk food. But you wouldnt know that since that cashier who checks you out at the grocery stores is unworthy of anything but a scowl for taking too long. I actually know several GC cashiers, UGH! scumbags too because they are UNION MEMBERS.
What's the difference when ExxonMobil gets 4 BILLION in tax loopholes every year yet gas prices are near $4?
ExxonMobil isn't the only company. I'd rather give it to working Americans that may need it than a bunch of companies getting billions back while paying CEO millions plottinG ways to get around company losses by passing it on to the taxpayers aka Chase, BOA, BP ETC.
Great companies to work for if you're a cfo or ceo.
>The tax code need to go. It has to be replaced with a consumption tax. Consumption tax is the only fair tax.<
YES THATS IT! the poor should pay a higher rate than the rich!
Willy Workingpoor making 20K spends ALL just trying to survive. He will pay the highest rate.
Ed Entrepeneur (say 80K) spends most but saves some so he pays a slighly lower rate.
Herbie Hedge fund manager "invests" almost all of it so pays next to nothing...
Vinnie Venture Capitalist invests almost all and honestly anything he makes actually doing venture capitalism SHOULD be at a lower rate. Note venture capitalism = creating a US company and employing US citizens. (not vulture capitalism or buying stock zzz that already exists, or even worse, screwing around with commodity prices)
Unfortunately the GOP is completely unwilling to differentiate between Vinny and Herbie. Low tax rate for Vinnie? I say heck yea! Herbie? Thats what we have now. Herbie actually creates NOTHING and gets a lower tax rate than Ed, even though Ed HAS contributed.
>If people need charity to survive, that's why we have religious institutions and other charities.<
LOL this one shows just how far off the deep end the wingnut end of the spectrum has become. The GOP has become a caricature that the leftie moonbats 20 years ago whined about back then. During the Reagan era, working poor were "at least trying to make it" vs. welfare users. Now they are just losers who dont have a masters degree and should just go find a rock to die under. The charity thing is a guarantee people will actually starve under this delusional scenario. Now, I will give props to any right wingers that have the cahones to actually say "good, then they will die and not be a problem". But mostly we hear utterly unrealistic scenarios. yes I know, your private police will shoot all the food rioters.
As pointed out in others. EITC and Child tax credit are largely GOP creatures DESIGNED TO REDUCE WELFARE.
The point of "it allows companies to pay less than survival..." false. They will pay the lowest they can get away with and that is well below survival.
Lets of course add in all the buzz words of marxist, socialist, theft, big screen TV credit... Of course the majority spouting dont really know any working poor and many have never been true adult working poor. NOTE: the first 2 years after you graduated from the college with a degree your daddy paid for DO NOT COUNT! Of course I will get a bunch of (mostly lies) of I paid for it all with 5 jobs a day 36 hours a day while doing a triple major...
The delusions are shown also in the statements about people getting food stamps... This threshhold is MUCH lower than EITC and Child tax credits I see mentioned on the following posts. This is shown in other threads where some right winger claims he saw some woman use food stamps to buy 10 lobsters then get into a new Cadillac... I actually know working poor (like say the Groceriy store cashier), the thing food stamp people ARE actually guilty of is using their other money to buy WAY too much junk food. But you wouldnt know that since that cashier who checks you out at the grocery stores is unworthy of anything but a scowl for taking too long. I actually know several GC cashiers, UGH! scumbags too because they are UNION MEMBERS.
A total redistribution of wealth is indeed taking place now and has become blatant during the last few decades. Wealth is being redistributed from the creators to the owners who are not even willing to support the system making them the wealthiest parasites on the planet. Our entire welfare bill pales in comparison to the interest paid on just credit cards.
We need to drastically revise our Income Tax system. First we should eliminate all of the absurdly complex system with all of its complicated deductions. It should be replaced by a system based on all income from all sources (wages, interest, dividends, rents, inheritance, sales or anything else) with corporations basing their income on retained profits. From that amount a deduction equal to the 90th percentile (currently around 300k) would be subtracted and a flat, or progressive, tax paid on the remainder.
The result of this system would be a major boost in our economy as 90% of our people had a substantial amount of money to save, invest or spend. The banks, stock brokers and manufacturers would see a vast increase in cash flow. The plutocrats that are currently the beneficiaries of our wealth transfer system would indeed see wealth being transferred from them to the system that protects their future wealth. They would not be made poor by any stretch of the imagination but would no longer be guaranteed financial ascendancy by the system. They would actually have to work for their wealth.
How would higher taxes on investments encourage growth? If you want to get less of something tax it, if you want to get more of something, don't tax it.
Why not just reduce government size, scope, regulations and spending which would allow people and companies to keep more of their money which would grow the economy.
A bit of an exaggeration. I pay 3.3K a year in property taxes on my home, it would be 4.2K if it was rental property. In some tax years that is deductable, other years I just use the standard deduction.
A renter would probably pay a $100 extra a month to rent my home than he would with equitable property taxes.
A little context would help:
Quote:
Originally Posted by cw30000
The tax code need to go. It has to be replaced with a consumption tax. Consumption tax is the only fair tax.
The problem here isn't the $100 extra a month [thought it would probably be a lot more than that], it's the consumption tax on top of the rent - a consumption tax than the homeowner doesn't pay when he buys an existing house.
Let's say you have a $1000 mortgage payment (before taxes and insurance), if you rent it out you will probably want $1500 to cover your prop tax and insurance (to use a round number to make calculations easier).
Let's say there is a 25% consumption tax, that's an extra $375 on top of the rent month after month after month - a tax that homeowners largely avoid. (Part of the mortgage interest would be taxed, plus goods for maintenance and such.) The renter pays your property taxes, bundled into the rent, and then pays consumption tax on top of it all. But homeowners pay property taxes without any consumption tax on top of it.
With tax season just around the corner it’s time for my blood to start boiling. It seems that every year I here about working poor getting huge refunds via the earned income credit also know as the big screen TV stimulus plan.
Why should anyone get back more than they paid in?
You should get no more then you paid in. Earning $4,000 on part-time employment, should not net you getting a refund check for $2,000.
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.
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.
