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.
I made two points for #1. To explain the latter, a person with no wealth, living in poverty has little or nothing to lose. A rich person has a lot to lose.
“When the rich plunder the poor of his rights, it becomes an example of the poor to plunder the rich of his property, for the rights of the one are as much property to him as wealth is property to the other and the little all is as dear as the much. It is only by setting out on just principles that men are trained to be just to each other; and it will always be found, that when the rich protect the rights of the poor, the poor will protect the property of the rich.”
-Thomas Pain To explain the former, a person making $1m/year is in a far better position to contribute 20% of that income in taxes than a person making $25K. This isn't debatable. It can be experienced, and I have, not in that proportion, but even with only a far smaller multiplication of income I could notice it.
Makes sense.
I asked earlier how you feel about a national sales tax.....I'll use the fair tax as it is the most advocated currently. Their literature and quite a few independent sources claim the system would be revenue neutral and progressive...obviously if you buy more stuff, but pay more taxes. The prebate would exist up to the poverty level in the form of essentially a monthly stipend to poorer families effectively
nulling them out up to 20 or 25k annually I believe.
Boston University compiled this study which aims to show it's "progressivity" (not sure if thats a real word but you know what I mean) and it appears conincide with other studies i've seen.
It's problem is tax evasion...But it is hard to tell how much would go on without seeing the system in action.
Here is another question...Under the assumption that it is revenue neutral...Do you think more progressives would support the fairtax as a replacement for our current system? If not, why?
Hard earned could be debated for centuries, so we'll just say "sure".
I've already posted the Forbes analysis that over 2/3 of the 400 richest Americans are self-made. 6 of the top 10 are self-made entrepreneurs. And The Millionaire Next Door clearly cites the fact that about 80% of millionaires are first-generation wealthy. So, yes, overwhelmingly, the wealth is indeed hard-earned.
Quote:
And everybody in this society helps make those wealthy folks "hard-earned" bucks work for them.
Yes, because they desire more than they have. Just two pieces of evidence: the out of control mobs on the day after Thanksgiving, the push for more extravagant public schools, etc.
6. Should states have more autonomy over their affairs than the federal government?
Absolutely not. If that were to be the case why have a national government in the first place. Having said that, we've experimented with that concept twice, first with the Articles of Confederation and the Confederate States, it was a bloody failure in both instances.
I suspect we are in the minority on this one.
Autonomy is redundancy X 50 political fiftums.
( Leave the gun and pot thing out of it for this discussion)
I asked earlier how you feel about a national sales tax.....I'll use the fair tax as it is the most advocated currently. Their literature and quite a few independent sources claim the system would be revenue neutral and progressive...obviously if you buy more stuff, but pay more taxes. The prebate would exist up to the poverty level in the form of essentially a monthly stipend to poorer families effectively
nulling them out up to 20 or 25k annually I believe.
Boston University compiled this study which aims to show it's "progressivity" (not sure if thats a real word but you know what I mean) and it appears conincide with other studies i've seen.
It's problem is tax evasion...But it is hard to tell how much would go on without seeing the system in action.
Here is another question...Under the assumption that it is revenue neutral...Do you think more progressives would support the fairtax as a replacement for our current system? If not, why?
I don’t.
It is a series of “prebates” that leads us to progressive taxation. And the very concept of prebate with so called fair taxation spells out the issue with it, while also successfully hiding the implications as incomes step beyond poverty levels. Essentially, it shifts burden on lower income groups who spend most of their incomes on necessities.
I don’t see an issue with me paying a higher tax rate at higher incomes than someone making less than me.
( Leave the gun and pot thing out of it for this discussion)
Not necessarily. State and local tax rates vary. And people vote with their feet. Witness the exodus of high income earners out of Wisconsin and the influx of welfare-dependent to reap Wisconsin's generous welfare benefits... http://www.wpri.org/Reports/Volume%201/Vol1no5.pdf
Seek solution. I can only help propose one: Move to a remote island, or a country that will "spare" you.
Going Galt. I like it. So do many others. Witness Wisconsin with their high income earners leaving the state and the welfare-dependent flocking to the state.
Oh, but problem for you... If too many of us leave, who's going to provide the capital to fund the public projects?
What is the single most important difference between Articles of Confederation and US Constitution? Why was the former replaced by the latter, as opposed to merely tweaked?
Lack of federal power. Period.
The AOC was a mess No federal court system, no congressional enforcement,
no regulation of trade - states had ALL the power.
It was replaced because James Madison was the smartest dude on the planet at the time
Knock on wood... The notion that Libertarians want no federal government today or yesterday
is just that, a notion. It's called balance of which we do not have today. It has been eroded.
I particularly like this: Injustice of the laws of the States.
"If the multiplicity and mutability of laws prove a want of wisdom, their injustice betrays a defect still more alarming: more alarming not merely because it is a greater evil in itself; but because it brings more into question the fundamental principle of republican Government, that the majority who rule in such governments are the safest Guardians both of public Good and private rights. To what causes is this evil to be ascribed?
These causes lie 1. in the Representative bodies. 2. in the people themselves.
"Representative appointments are sought from 3 motives. 1. ambition. 2. personal interest.
3. public good. Unhappily the two first are proved by experience to be most prevalent"
2. A still more fatal if not more frequent cause, lies among the people themselves."
I'd agree with you if the additional taxes they paid were an extra little bit. However, they're not.
Look at the IRS's latest average effective federal income tax rates by income group:
Top 0.1%: 22.84%
Top 1%: 23.39%
Top 5-10%: 11.98%
Top 10-25%: 8.70%
Top 25-50%: 6.01%
Yet Warren, Buffet, koch Bros and the thousands of Romneys pay a lesser effective tax rate than I do and I am solid middle class.
It reminds me of Hannity's whine and cheese. He claims he pay 60% of his income in taxes and blames Obama.
It's been published he receives about $20 million a year from his radio program.
$? Fox News
$? Web site ads
$? Books
$? public Speaking
$? Capital Gains
Not bad for a guy with only a high school degree, eh.
Assuming an idiot is managing his money, he's paying no more than 35% in federal taxes, assuming no deductions. This is not a cent more than he paid during the Bush years and yet he whines and blames Obama.
He chooses to make his living in NYC and so he's paying NYC and state taxes.
He chooses to live in a high end property on Long Island and so he's paying high property taxes.
He must be consuming a lot and paying a heck of a lot of sales tax, too.
He could also choose to move to a state with no income tax and live in a less extravagant home and commute, during the week. Easy enough to include the cost of an apartment in his contracts. Not like he's has the time to help kids with their homework or change the filter on his furnace when he's home.
Or maybe, his numbers just don't compute.
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.
