What would happen if we scrapped the income tax brackets and replaced it with a flat 15.3% income tax (2013, recession)

[freemkt]

Originally Posted by KS_Referee

Would that level be the same in New York City as it is in Rottencrotch Kansas?

I haven't worked out that part, but I would be reluctant to have more than one standard.

[InformedConsent]

Originally Posted by mmmjv

No it is not fair. It would increase taxes on those who can least afford to pay them and it would decrease taxes on those most able to afford them.

Hey, look! Yet another advocate of the "protect the 1%ers' income tax revenue; keep the poor oppressed because they pay little or nothing" club.

I've already explained how such a belief incentivizes the federal government to promote as much of an income disparity as possible:
//www.city-data.com/forum/28408183-post447.html

I remain hopeful that you'll eventually catch on to how you've been had...

[workingclasshero]

Originally Posted by freemkt

And get this...can you just see the bias dripping


19.34.010 Purpose.

It is the purpose of this chapter to regulate the establishment of accessory dwelling units within or in conjunction with single-family dwellings while preserving the character of single-family neighborhoods. The primary purpose of this chapter shall be to permit establishment of additional living quarters within single-family residential neighborhoods in order to:
A. Make it possible for adult children to provide care and support to a parent or other relatives in need of assistance; and/or
B. Provide increased security and companionship for homeowners; and/or
C. Provide the opportunity for homeowners to gain the extra income necessary to help meet the rising costs of home ownership; and/or
D. Provide for the care of disabled persons within their own homes; and/or
E. Provide for a more diverse and affordable housing stock. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).




NOTHING about providing the opportunity for renters to enjoy affordable ownership opportunities necessary to help meet the rising cost of housing. (Renters clearly have greater need, as median homeowner income is 2x median renter income.)

oh I get it...you think its unfair


have YOU EVER OWNED A THING IN YOU LIFE....do you understand MAINTENANCE.....

ever had to BUYa hot water heater for an apartment....bet you havent

ever had to repace a central AC/HEAT unit for a dwelling....bet you havent

ever had to replace the toilet, that the NASTY RENTERS broke...because it wasnt theirs.....bet you havent

[KS_Referee]

Originally Posted by freemkt

I haven't worked out that part, but I would be reluctant to have more than one standard.

The folks in NYC and southern California might have a problem with the idea given they have a very high cost of living. But I am certain you already know that.

[Quick Enough]

Originally Posted by GregW

I would approve of a Flat Tax so long as it included all income for all sources and excluded the bottom 95th percentile of the population. This tax would place the burder of maintaining and defending the country on the people that own the income from this country. That would be a fair flat tax.

Being you have proposed this many time I am sure you have the amount of money your idea would bring in.

what is it?

The gov't could never survive with so little money.

[Quick Enough]

Originally Posted by KS_Referee

Just curious... Who would define discretionary and non-discretionary income amounts? The same people currently on the Ways and Means committee? People like Charlie Rangel?

We can always bring back the Illinois dem Rostenkowski. He was so honest!

"Rostenkowski's political career ended abruptly in 1996 when he pleaded guilty to charges of mail fraud and was fined and sentenced to 17 months in prison."
Dan Rostenkowski - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Just another "honest" politician fro Illinois.

[wjtwet]

Originally Posted by freemkt

Enumclaw, Washington:

19.34.030 Accessory dwelling unit.

An “accessory dwelling unit (ADU)” is a habitable living unit added to, created within, or detached from a single-family dwelling that contains facilities for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and sanitation. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).


19.34.080 Subdivision.

The accessory dwelling unit, or the land on which the accessory dwelling unit is located, shall not be subdivided or otherwise segregated in ownership from the principal dwelling unit or the land on which the principal dwelling unit is located. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).


Chapter 19.34 ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS

19.34.010 Purpose.

It is the purpose of this chapter to regulate the establishment of accessory dwelling units within or in conjunction with single-family dwellings while preserving the character of single-family neighborhoods. The primary purpose of this chapter shall be to permit establishment of additional living quarters within single-family residential neighborhoods in order to:
A. Make it possible for adult children to provide care and support to a parent or other relatives in need of assistance; and/or
B. Provide increased security and companionship for homeowners; and/or
C. Provide the opportunity for homeowners to gain the extra income necessary to help meet the rising costs of home ownership; and/or
D. Provide for the care of disabled persons within their own homes; and/or
E. Provide for a more diverse and affordable housing stock. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).
19.34.020 Intent.

A maximum of one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted as subordinate to a new or existing single-family dwelling unit if the accessory dwelling unit and lot meet the requirements of this chapter. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).



(These are standard provisions in zoning codes.)

19.34.010 Purpose.

It is the purpose of this chapter to regulate the establishment of accessory dwelling units within or in conjunction with single-family dwellings while preserving the character of single-family neighborhoods. The primary purpose of this chapter shall be to permit establishment of additional living quarters within single-family residential neighborhoods in order to:
A. Make it possible for adult children to provide care and support to a parent or other relatives in need of assistance; and/or
B. Provide increased security and companionship for homeowners; and/or
C. Provide the opportunity for homeowners to gain the extra income necessary to help meet the rising costs of home ownership; and/or
D. Provide for the care of disabled persons within their own homes; and/or
E. Provide for a more diverse and affordable housing stock. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).
19.34.020 Intent.

A maximum of one accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted as subordinate to a new or existing single-family dwelling unit if the accessory dwelling unit and lot meet the requirements of this chapter. (Ord. 2119 § 1, 2001).
So you want to buy an addon to another house?

[Mircea]

Originally Posted by freemkt

Yes, the same Congress that decided our tax raates and brackets woould decide the level at which discretionary income begins.

Congress is incapable of doing that.

You want proof......here it is......

Let's compare San Fransisco with Cincinnati.

Two people, each receiving $1,100/month in Social Security Disability or Retirement....

equals $2092.95 per month in Cincinnati
equals $761.07. per month in San Fransisco

....due to the differences in Cost-of Living and Purchasing Power.

Liberals think that is funny. Liberals think it is cool that one person suffers, while another is unjustly enriched and rewarded. Liberals will shout you down and condemn you and call you a racist if you even think about or suggest taking any action to ameliorate this grotesqueness disparity.

Two people, each receiving $1,100/month in Social Security Disability or Retirement....

Suppose those two people were not on Social Security...suppose they earned the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour....then their gross monthly income would average $1256.67 per month.....and so....

Federal Minimum Wage in Cincinnati = $2,389.77 per month
Federal Minimum Wage in San Fransisco = $660.12 per month

Originally Posted by freemkt

Based on asking prices and rents during the summer of 2012, buying is now 45% cheaper than renting in the 100 largest U.S. metros, on average – that’s a savings of $771 a month. If you plan to stay in a home for 7 years, which is the average time that Americans traditionally live in a home before moving again, it is more affordable to buy than to rent in ALL of the 100 largest metros in the U.S.

Buying A Home Is 45% Cheaper than Renting | Trulia Trends

Monthly Rent Vs Monthly Mortgage Payment - Business Insider

I call bull-****.....I don't even have to do the math......Trulia is just hoping for another real estate bubble to cash in on.

Originally Posted by Jean71

It is fair.

Like it or not, you live in a federal republic consisting of 50 sovereign countries, each an economy unto itself, and each averaging about 100 economies internally...

...accordingly, nothing federal could ever be fair....not now....not ever.

Originally Posted by le roi

i'm still waiting for right-wing shills "Alpha Male" and "Informed Consent" to rebut this


*crickets*

Well, then while you're waiting, maybe you can grow a pair and address this....

Let's compare San Fransisco with Cincinnati.

Two people, each receiving $1,100/month in Social Security Disability or Retirement....

equals $2092.95 per month in Cincinnati
equals $761.07. per month in San Fransisco

....due to the differences in Cost-of Living and Purchasing Power.

Liberals think that is funny. Liberals think it is cool that one person suffers, while another is unjustly enriched and rewarded. Liberals will shout you down and condemn you and call you a racist if you even think about or suggest taking any action to ameliorate this grotesqueness disparity.

Two people, each receiving $1,100/month in Social Security Disability or Retirement....

Suppose those two people were not on Social Security...suppose they earned the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour....then their gross monthly income would average $1256.67 per month.....and so....

Federal Minimum Wage in Cincinnati = $2,389.77 per month
Federal Minimum Wage in San Fransisco = $660.12 per month

Do you see how Liberals are willing to sacrifice Americans, stomp Americans to the curb, and throw Americans under the bus in the name of their ideas?

Originally Posted by MTAtech

That graph looks like the grades I used to hand out....the Top 1% got an A+.

What of it?

Well.....let's hope Liberals don't get a wild hair up their ass and start trying to redistribute IQ Scores.

Originally Posted by GregW

Those graphs prove the Golden Rule.

Those with the Gold make the Rules.

Those graphs also prove that you are complicit, an accessory before, during and after the fact, your tacit consent, and your total apathy and complete lack of intestinal fortitude.

If the people with the Gold make the Rules, it's because you let them......and it isn't like you haven't been forewarned.....Marx proved that time and time again throughout history, so to be forewarned, is to be foretold.

Just as soon as "We the People..." get off of their lazy asses and start participating in the representative democracy in which they live, and do so without bias and prejudice, then you'll have a Constitutional Amendment for the Separation of Special Interest & State....

...and the the people with the Gold won't be able to make the Rules....but Reality™ says your graph won't change.

Originally Posted by MTAtech

I still don't haven't read what problem the flat tax solves.

It doesn't solve any problems.....it's just feel good talk...like Obamacare™.....and like Obamacare™ it creates more problems than it solves.

Originally Posted by alphamale

Everyone should have skin in the game.

I wouldn't disagree.....I would just add that those who cost the most should have more skin in the game than those who don't.

Originally Posted by lycos679

Not everything would be subject to taxation...

A Straw Man is the only thing they got. Of the States that have a VAT/National Sales Tax, legal services are not subject to the tax, and neither are medical services (although some do tax elective procedures like laser eyeballs and certain types of contact lenses, and cosmetic surgeries), and none tax housing -- to be purchased or let --- and none tax food, so long as the food is not "prepared."

Many States, the UK being one of them, also make special exemptions for infants and toddlers --- no VAT on car seats, infant/toddler clothing and other things required for infants/toddlers like cribs and bedding and such. Physically disabled are also exempt from being taxed on certain non-medical purchases related to their physical disability.

Originally Posted by hooligan

Then this becomes, by definition, NOT a flat tax.

Ooops.

Curving...

Mircea

[le roi]

Originally Posted by Mircea

Well, then while you're waiting, maybe you can grow a pair and address this....

Let's compare San Fransisco with Cincinnati.

Two people, each receiving $1,100/month in Social Security Disability or Retirement....

equals $2092.95 per month in Cincinnati
equals $761.07. per month in San Fransisco

....due to the differences in Cost-of Living and Purchasing Power.

i can address that.

it's primarily due to the cost of land.

Liberals think that is funny. Liberals think it is cool that one person suffers, while another is unjustly enriched and rewarded. Liberals will shout you down and condemn you and call you a racist if you even think about or suggest taking any action to ameliorate this grotesqueness disparity.

do they?

maybe romanian liberals, or albanian liberals, or wherever you're from. but i don't see what your argument is as it relates to american politics.

Two people, each receiving $1,100/month in Social Security Disability or Retirement....

Suppose those two people were not on Social Security...suppose they earned the federal minimum wage of $7.25/hour....then their gross monthly income would average $1256.67 per month.....and so....

Federal Minimum Wage in Cincinnati = $2,389.77 per month
Federal Minimum Wage in San Fransisco = $660.12 per month

Do you see how Liberals are willing to sacrifice Americans, stomp Americans to the curb, and throw Americans under the bus in the name of their ideas?

uh.. no, i don't see that. i can see that you're pointing out how some places are more expensive than others... and blaming that on 'liberals' , i guess ?

I'm not sure what your point is, hopefully it isn't that simple, hopefully there's bigger picture you're trying to get across.

[hnsq]

Originally Posted by VTHokieFan

Well for starters, it would at least collect as much as the payroll tax since that's a flat tax for the exact same percentage of just wages (up to a certain amount) that already brings in 950 billion. But due to the fact that there would be no income cap, plus gifts dividiends, capital gains, and other income etc would be taxed at that rate, I argue that just a 15.3% income tax with 0 deductions or exemptions would bring in more than our current individual income tax, not to mention it's fair.

I, along with the vast majority of the middle class would pay a hell of a lot more in taxes every year, and the wealthy would spend a hell of a lot less on taxes.