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.
Basically todays rates except.
Drop Corp rate to ~23%
End carried interest for hedge fund managers.
Find a way to reward true venture capitalists hardcore and punish the Bains and Lamperts tax wise.
Tax cap gains at 25% except for true venture capitalism.
if we are talking a flat tax...10% or maybe 15% at most... no person should pay a different percentage than the other...we are all equal, tax us equally
no one or entity should pay more than 15%...if the government cant run on 15% of everyone income...then the government has a spending problem
personally I would rather see the income tax go the way of the Dinosaur , taxing income, especially when 17% to 52% of income is never reported (people working off the books)... I would rather a consumption tax (a federal sales tax)....
research www.fair-tax.org this is the way to go in my humble opinion
What about the UPWARD redistribution effected by state and local governments? e.g. regressive state/local taxes and policies. I believe there should be just enough progressivity in federal taxes to offset state/local regressivity - in my world, the way to make federal taxes flatter would be to make state/local taxes flatter (less regressive).
A consumption tax is egregiously regressive to rent serfs.
A standard 10% income tax and a consumption tax. Both rates could be adjusted as necessary.
I like the idea of no more TurboTax. Anyone can figure out 10%. Also, a minimal IRS. The consumption tax cuts down on waste and is blind to whomever is spending.
How so? Every consumption tax I've seen proposed in this country taxes owners and renters differently.
Renters already pay a steep consumption tax in their rent.
Is it fair to charge one person $4 for a gallon of milk but charge another person $400 for it? How is that fair? They're both getting the same thing.
Zoning is kinda like that. Zoning effectively sets an economic floor for home ownership. All those unable to meet the minimum price of ownership must rent and pay a premium for temporary, impaired use of property.
Kinda like saying if you can't afford a $4 gallon of milk you have to pay $2 per quart.
What I don't understand is, if "fair" in the post-war period into the 70's, was considered to be around 65% for upper-middle class, why isn't that "fair" now? That's what people mean when they said "fair share". It was a graduated tax, that's what made it fair. And there was enough money for infrastructure, college grants, medical & science research, safety net coverage, space program, a postal service, Medicare, and so forth. People paid their 50% or 60% (there were no loopholes, just standard deductions, and the cap gains tax was between 15-20%) and still lived comfortable lives. They didn't like paying that much, but they paid it and lived well. Maybe now, instead of having the highest rate be 90%, as it was then, the highest could be 70%, so that most people would be paying 50% or less.
The more I work, the more I get paid. I think I would drastically cut down my hours with this system. As it is now, even with the current tax structure I always factor in the taxes when deciding how much I want to work. If I knew I would only get 30%, I would choose to just go home instead of working the extra hours. I would be done with my 20 hour days for good, in exchange for 8 hour days, and I would be taking 10 weeks vacation a year.
if we are talking a flat tax...10% or maybe 15% at most... no person should pay a different percentage than the other...we are all equal, tax us equally
no one or entity should pay more than 15%...if the government cant run on 15% of everyone income...then the government has a spending problem
personally I would rather see the income tax go the way of the Dinosaur , taxing income, especially when 17% to 52% of income is never reported (people working off the books)... I would rather a consumption tax (a federal sales tax)....
research www.fair-tax.org this is the way to go in my humble opinion
If you want a flat tax then you are no working class hero. Giving the rich a HUGE tax break will only make us all un-equal. Our progressive tax system (although flawed) is the best we have right now. Now, a consumption tax would hurt the working class even more. I'm not sure you are thinking this through. I base this assessment on your moniker.
What I don't understand is, if "fair" in the post-war period into the 70's, was considered to be around 65% for upper-middle class, why isn't that "fair" now? That's what people mean when they said "fair share". It was a graduated tax, that's what made it fair. And there was enough money for infrastructure, college grants, medical & science research, safety net coverage, space program, a postal service, Medicare, and so forth. People paid their 50% or 60% (there were no loopholes, just standard deductions, and the cap gains tax was between 15-20%) and still lived comfortable lives. They didn't like paying that much, but they paid it and lived well. Maybe now, instead of having the highest rate be 90%, as it was then, the highest could be 70%, so that most people would be paying 50% or less.
back then there were a lot more deductions
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.
