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.
A flat tax of say, 15%, no deductions, the first, say $25000 of income is tax free - everyone taxed the same over -
This is what I support
Which means people who make $30-$50 K per year pay a higher percentage of their income toward subsistence than anyone else.
Here is a supposition. Let's propose it costs someone $500 a month for a place to live.
For someone making $500 dollars a week, that is exactly 1/4 of their income. (25%).
For someone making $100, it's only 12.5%.
At $4K a week, the amount is a minuscule 3.13% of their salary. For a person to pay the same percentage of their income, that person would have to have an apartment worth $4K a month!
There is nothing fair about "fair" flat taxes. It penalizes those who have the least.
A flat tax of say, 15%, no deductions, the first, say $25000 of income is tax free - everyone taxed the same over -
This is what I support
I would agree that this would be much more fair than our current system, however, this does not remove the power structure that uses the tax system to modify behavior or simply for their own personal interests. Take a look at the Fair Tax and you'll see how much better this would be for the country, removing a large portion of the underground economy, providing incentives for oversees businesses to move back to the U.S., and no more avoiding the system by being paid under the table, like many illegal aliens.
To get back on the topic of the thread, this would help the poor by providing more jobs by making all taxes discretionary. If one wants to live a lavish lifestyle, they would pay for it in sales taxes. How much more equitable could this be?
smackie94 let's see your figures on what has been spent in Iraq?
I wouldn't give a sh*t what Clinton or any of those idiots in Congress voted for, they are ALL greedy, slimeball, crooks IMO
dont have figures nor do i claim too. but the whole premise for the war was never a lie, was never about financial gain. mistakes happen in war and in intelligence. but this war has been conducted by far ten times any other war historically.
but the support for the war has been drooping because its the new fad, when most people are so disgustingly ignorant of what when why where and how its happening, but they jump on the band wagon and say crap like
its a war for oil
bush lied
there was never WMD (straight up bull****)
he did it for personal gain
nobody ever supported it and he did it anyway
there are so many points that are so easy to refute, but NOBODY WILL PAY ATTENTION TO the facts.
Here's some info on what the war costs, according to the Seattle Times (dated today); it appears to be about 1trillion dollars, if I am reading correctly.
regarding the cost, i keep hearing the reason we should leave is becasue the cost of the war in dollars and human life...
throw stats out to the public to scare the populace into voting for democrats
if you cant see that this is the goal you are blind
congress all agreed to this from the get go and immediately turned around changed there mind to try and gain political favor.
there is alot more at stake in this war then just iraq, nobody sees that. it is part of the war on terror, and all people keep saying is...Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11
[Mod cut}
Last edited by ontheroad; 10-24-2007 at 01:46 PM..
Reason: I suggest you learn how to address people here, or be issued an infraction!
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.