Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:13 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,161,983 times
Reputation: 17209

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
Have you ever signed up for a cell phone or internet plan? Terms and Conditions Apply, Not Everybody Qualifies.
Cell phone yes, but I've never seen a qualification for internet service.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:25 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,440,907 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by UNC4Me View Post
What is your point with this thread? Please explain clearly what your personal situation with your internet connection has to do with consumption taxes. I'm not getting the link.
It's quite simple:

Spending Is Not The Same As Consumption. Poor people often pay more than the middle class while getting less ("utility" if you will).

For example, Bob and Carol might not have a car or a nearby supermarket, perhaps they walk to Ray's Rapacious Ripoff for groceries, and buy 3 pounds of California oranges for $3.99. In a middle class neighborhood across town, Ted and Alice shop at at SuperMegaMart and buy 5 pounds of Florida oranges for $3.49.

Ted and Alice clearly "consumed" more than Bob and Carol, considering that they got 5 pounds of superior oranges while Bob and Carol got 3 pounds of inferior oranges...pay less, get more, and pay less tax to boot.

I figure it's bad enough to be poor and to have fewer consumer options, but to also pay more tax while getting less, that's too much for me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:29 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,161,983 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
It's quite simple:

Spending Is Not The Same As Consumption. Poor people often pay more than the middle class while getting less ("utility" if you will).

For example, Bob and Carol might not have a car or a nearby supermarket, perhaps they walk to Ray's Rapacious Ripoff for groceries, and buy 3 pounds of California oranges for $3.99. In a middle class neighborhood across town, Ted and Alice shop at at SuperMegaMart and buy 5 pounds of Florida oranges for $3.49.

Ted and Alice clearly "consumed" more than Bob and Carol, considering that they got 5 pounds of superior oranges while Bob and Carol got 3 pounds of inferior oranges...pay less, get more, and pay less tax to boot.

I figure it's bad enough to be poor and to have fewer consumer options, but to also pay more tax while getting less, that's too much for me.
IMO taxing food is always immoral.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:30 PM
 
Location: Dallas, TX
31,767 posts, read 28,804,560 times
Reputation: 12341
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
IMO taxing food is always immoral.
How about clothing? Shelter?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:34 PM
 
79,913 posts, read 44,161,983 times
Reputation: 17209
Quote:
Originally Posted by EinsteinsGhost View Post
How about clothing? Shelter?
Clothing? Good question. Truthfully I have never considered it. I'll have to think on it.

Housing? We have to. We don't directly tax shelter though. You don't pay a tax on rent. You do pay property tax on a house if you own it though. That pays for local schools, roads and infrastructure.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:38 PM
 
Location: Los Angeles
14,361 posts, read 9,782,455 times
Reputation: 6663
Quote:
Originally Posted by freemkt View Post
I have the worst internet provider in North America. I'm paying for broadband and getting median speed slower than dialup. My neighbor Chris is getting something like 30x my speed and my data transfer and he's paying less than I am.

Whose consumption is greater, and who should pay more tax?
You need to switch to Chris' provider. This isn't a good example of applied flat taxation.

Chris buys a 2013 Lambo and you buy a 2013 Ford Focus, who should pay more tax?

Food (groceries) should never be taxed unless it's prepared, then it becomes more of a luxury than a necessity, unless of course, it's caviar and champagne.

A fair flat tax makes perfect sense. Much better than income tax with a VAT heaped on top of all the other fees we pay. We could see top earners paying 70% or more and this is stealing.

As far as clothing goes; People who make less buy accordingly (Walmart, Kohls, Target), so their taxes will be less. Wealthy people buy Coach, Armani, Gucci, Chanel...etc. They don;t buy clothing, they buy fashion and thus would pay through the nose for their habits.

Last edited by steven_h; 06-11-2012 at 03:51 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:44 PM
 
Location: Prepperland
19,013 posts, read 14,186,291 times
Reputation: 16727
The question is at fault.

In America, governments are instituted to secure rights. Ergo, rights are never subject to taxation.
Government can only levy a tax on the privileges it grants.

So what transformed one's right to consume (buy / sell) into a revenue taxable privilege?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:46 PM
 
33,016 posts, read 27,440,907 times
Reputation: 9074
Quote:
Originally Posted by pknopp View Post
Cell phone yes, but I've never seen a qualification for internet service.

It's called Comcast.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:46 PM
 
29,407 posts, read 21,994,436 times
Reputation: 5455
Hack into your neighbors connection and problem solved.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 06-11-2012, 03:49 PM
 
6,734 posts, read 9,337,482 times
Reputation: 1857
Things may have changed, but I thought all you need is a heartbeat to qualify for a cell phone.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:35 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top