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.
It's fair IF property owners are free to sell the waitress a home she can afford to buy.
If property owners are not free to sell the waitress a home she can afford to buy, government has artificially inflated her cost of living and effectively imposed on her a regulatory tax which should be credited against the 'flat' rate you want her to pay.
So taxing someone who makes minimum wage and someone who is a billionaire hedge fund manager at the same rate is "fair?"
Please make that a GOP sales pitch in 2014. We'll enjoy taking the House back.
Yes. Taxing everyone at the same rate is fair. And thanks for being unable to disprove that taxing everyone at the same rate is fair. It makes me feel good that I've finally stumped you.
The immediate effect would be to reduce disposable income of working poor and lower middle class people by 15% or more depending on what credits they were taking, while dramatically increasing net income for the very rich. The hit would be so severe it would render millions of families unable to buy enough food, or pay the rent or the light bill. It would be better to be on public assistance than to work so millions of them would flood the welfare rolls and turn to crime to make ends meet.
I am not sure what the rich would do with their landfall - maybe give it to charity to help with the third world style poverty that would spread across the land. Right, LOL..
The immediate effect would be to reduce disposable income of working poor and lower middle class people by 15% or more depending on what credits they were taking, while dramatically increasing net income for the very rich. The hit would be so severe it would render millions of families unable to buy enough food, or pay the rent or the light bulb. It would be better to be on public assistance than to work so millions of them would flood the welfare rolls and turn to crime to make ends meet.
I am not sure what the rich would do with their landfall - maybe give it to charity to help with the third world style poverty that would spread across the land. Right, LOL..
Your scare tactics are ridiculous. Then again, fear-mongering is one of the staples of liberalism.
I'm all for this concept with some changes. I don't have a problem with those just trying to start off in life not paying as much as those who are doing better.
I agree completely that income should be taxed as income period. No separate rates for the guy making his money sitting at his computer making trades and the guy sitting at his computer inputing production figures.
That said I would make everyone invested and my plan would make the tax you pay a flat percentage of your income but I would graduate it.
These numbers are simply off the top of my head for example sake.
You need to change your wording since you're not actually wanting it to be "fair"
Use the correct wording and make that a DEM sales pitch in 2014. Then we're back at a stalemate.
I think both parties are full of crap.
My tax plan imposes a universal minimum tax to ensure everyone pays something then taxes discretionary income at a flat rate.
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.
