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.
Wow, you gave up on the fairness argument really quickly. What about a sales tax exemption for people who spend more than $X per year? Is it really fair that people who spend more have to pay more taxes?
The FairTax proposal has a monthly prebate but that still doesn't help those who have to live paycheck to paycheck based on their pay rather than who willingly do so.
Quote:
Well nowadays the rich are starting to buy electric cars and paying no fuel tax.
Electric cars are penetrating into the market but too much. I do see your point though.
I already proven that the sales tax ISN'T ideal at all. It favors the rich who do not SPEND a majority of their paychecks the way the it does for the poor and middle class. Wait isn't this the same point I just said with the gas tax?
Your missing the point... it's not just the rich... it those that are thrifty, frugal, make do with what they have, repair rather than toss... etc.
When I do buy new... I look for value which is often quality...
I have not bought a new appliance or electronic item in decade... not counting a cheapy Acer for $199.
Bless those that find joy in buying new or having the latest and greatest... just look at all the made in China Christmas stuff kids get about a month after Christmas... most of it gets tossed... I know because the dumpsters at the property I managed was overflowing new junk.
If you want to see and avocado washer dryer pair or a harvest gold refrigerator.... come to my home with it's 1950 linoleum floors and Formica counters.
Maybe people would be more careful when shopping with a higher sales tax?\
I'm not rich and a high sales tax would most definitely favor me...
Heck, I still own the $800 72 Plymouth Valiant I bought in High School....
I'm looking out at the parking lot at work and the most well to do are driving Leafs, Prius and Tesla... yes have two Teslas in the parking lot right now... before they were driving 12 cylinder BMW and Mercedes with even a Ferrari or two in the mix... looked great with my 72 Valiant next to them... even had the boss tell me I can afford better and of course she was right... then I reminded her how much my thrifty ways have saved the company and she agreed with one caveat... park my car in the far corner of the lot and maybe no one will think I work here???
All but one have solar at home and have not paid a utility for a kW in years...
There will always be people living from paycheck to pay check... I always amazed at how much some people can blow through and have nothing to show for it...
I'm on the other side of the fence. I'd rather do away with income taxes and raise the sales tax. I wouldn't mind having our sales tax increase from the 6.35% to say 9% or so if they did away with income taxes. In my state income tax literally slaughters your income. If I could take home more money and then be taxes on the things I actually buy and use then it would not only benefit me but I think would allow a lot more people to be more fiscally educated to make the right decisions.
I just think that even though a person might bring home more money they would be more conscience about what they are buying since the cost of goods is now increased. Buying things you "need" and save for those you "want". I guess it applies more to lower wage individuals but I know if I was bringing home more $ with the income tax I'd actually be buying more, not necessarily different brands but different products such as home improvements, landscaping stuff, etc.
Which state "slaughters" your income?
I live in New York. You have some pretty big shoes to fill. The effective tax rate here is 5-6%. New York is the highest income tax in the country I believe.
My point stands. Income tax is the most efficient way to extract revenue from the well-off. Sales tax just doesn't work. A man only needs so much.
The most efficient way to extract revenue from the rich is with a tax on assets. Having assets is the definition of being rich. If they don't spend it, it doesn't help the economy. Why should they get a tax break just because they don't help the economy?
Besides that, taxes should pay for what we get from government. If you have assets, you have them only so long as the government considers them to be yours, and is willing to defend them for you. Without that attitude from government, any random stranger could come along, consider your assets to be his, and bring with him a large group of heavily armed friends, to rescue his assets from you. What you get from government is police to attack your attackers, courts to resolve the issue of what belongs to whom, etc. The more assets you have, the more use you make of that kind of stuff from government, and the more taxes it would be fair for you to pay, to pay for that kind of stuff. Even when you don't have any court cases, the fact that you could is part of what protects your assets. Just like carrying a gun can protect you without ever firing it.
The trouble with income tax is that it's too easy to cheat, because the definition of income is too complicated. Such as if you have a business with certain gross receipts and certain costs of doing business, and you can easily avoid taxes by shifting things around to make it seem that you don't really have real income, because your complicated costs of doing business can actually exceed your complicated gross receipts, even if you have effective income, depending on how you define it in all the complications. But the definition of assets is not nearly so complicated. Its main complications come from people who want tax breaks, and convince their legislators to add complications to tax laws to favor those people. But that happens with all kinds of taxes.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,576 posts, read 81,167,557 times
Reputation: 57813
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankMiller
Wow, you gave up on the fairness argument really quickly. What about a sales tax exemption for people who spend more than $X per year? Is it really fair that people who spend more have to pay more taxes?
Well nowadays the rich are starting to buy electric cars and paying no fuel tax.
That loophole is being "fixed". Our state now charges an additional $100 on their registration to make up for the loss of road use taxes normally collected through gas sales. The legislature is also considering a move to a mileage based tax that would include electric and hybrid vehicles at the same rate as gas & diesel.
With the exception of the Tesla, most people I know that drive electric or hybrid vehicles are not rich, they are middle class liberal environmentalists.
That loophole is being "fixed". Our state now charges an additional $100 on their registration to make up for the loss of road use taxes normally collected through gas sales. The legislature is also considering a move to a mileage based tax that would include electric and hybrid vehicles at the same rate as gas & diesel.
With the exception of the Tesla, most people I know that drive electric or hybrid vehicles are not rich, they are middle class liberal environmentalists.
The median income in the US is about $25k per year. If you can afford an electric car, you're richer than most. Although definitely not necessarily rich in the "1%" sense.
That loophole is being "fixed". Our state now charges an additional $100 on their registration to make up for the loss of road use taxes normally collected through gas sales. The legislature is also considering a move to a mileage based tax that would include electric and hybrid vehicles at the same rate as gas & diesel.
With the exception of the Tesla, most people I know that drive electric or hybrid vehicles are not rich, they are middle class liberal environmentalists.
LOL, that's what you think. Why make an exception for Tesla?
They shouldn't charge an extra fee. Simply raise the gas tax accordingly. It will just coerce people into buying more efficient vehicles. (What a horrible side effect )
... A rich person and a poor person use the same gasoline at about say 8K. The rich person makes say 250K, the poor person makes say 25K. The poor pay 32% of their income while the rich pay 3.2% of income.
Now tell me why it is a fair system.
It is fair because they pay the same dollars.
Moreover, it is good because there is an incentive for that poor person to acquire more skills to make more money.
Location: East of Seattle since 1992, 615' Elevation, Zone 8b - originally from SF Bay Area
44,576 posts, read 81,167,557 times
Reputation: 57813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Opin_Yunated
LOL, that's what you think. Why make an exception for Tesla?
They shouldn't charge an extra fee. Simply raise the gas tax accordingly. It will just coerce people into buying more efficient vehicles. (What a horrible side effect )
Yes, it's what I think, as I said, based on the people I know. The Tesla is not being bought for efficiency or
environmental reasons, at $60k and up it's bought for performance and prestige.
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.
)
