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 11-13-2007, 09:45 PM
 
Location: Near Manito
20,169 posts, read 24,330,946 times
Reputation: 15291

Advertisements

Here's a fun calculator:

Flat Tax Calculator -- FreedomWorks.org
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-13-2007, 09:49 PM
 
9,891 posts, read 10,825,432 times
Reputation: 3108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yeledaf View Post
I like it, although I think 17% is high! still think the consumption tax might make more sense.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2007, 09:51 PM
 
Location: OKC, OK
640 posts, read 461,530 times
Reputation: 133
I like it. It's much lower than the rate I pay now.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2007, 09:54 PM
 
Location: Sacramento
14,044 posts, read 27,222,159 times
Reputation: 7373
But, what is the generated revenue vs what is currently corrected today?

As a fellow investor, how do you justify leaving off investment income for tax purposes?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2007, 11:26 PM
 
2,507 posts, read 8,563,840 times
Reputation: 877
A flat tax is a regressive tax. There is a reason that regressive taxation went out with the Guilded Age. It has ramifications for this country beyond taxes. 70% of the national economy is consumer based, do we really want to toy with that? The highest tax rate is somewhere in the 30% decile. Even 100 years ago, with robber barons and Wall Street manipulators, it was in the 70% decile. Then we wonder why the middle-class is taxed out. I know, a sufficient portion of the middle-class voted with their aspirations and not their realities. NewToCalif. has a good point also. It is the difference between wages and income. Stock dividends, et. cetera are taxed at an even more pathetic rate than income. This nation is reverse socialist -- our workers pay for our rich. Laissez-faire economics my ass. A flat tax makes that quasi-socialism even worse.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-13-2007, 11:26 PM
 
Location: SW Kansas
1,787 posts, read 3,850,541 times
Reputation: 1433
I like it! I'd much rather pay 17% than what I am paying now.

Leave off investment income? Why? I would think all earned income, including interest would be taxed?

I don't like the consumption tax, unless there were a lot of exemptions, which just makes the whole process complicated, time consuming, and expensive - just like what we already have.

I would rather pay more tax upfront on my income than be penalized for spending my money. I don't like paying taxes on my income, paying taxes when I spend my income, paying taxes for owning vehicles and property etc. Under our current system of taxation you will never truly own anything (like property) that the government can not take away from you for not paying your taxes. To me, that just isn't right. It's like paying rent to the government for something you "own".
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2007, 05:13 AM
 
3,570 posts, read 3,758,430 times
Reputation: 1349
1) Myth - The more people have, the more they spend.
Realty - People who have a lot more money INVEST their money.

REALTY - The less money one has, the more one spends on consumer goods.

Last time I checked, Milk was almost $4. There is no discount for poor people, nor is it hiked for rich people.

ERGO - Flat tax is REGRESSIVE where it will tax the MIDDLE CLASS and POOR the majority of your income.

Said another way that some people might understand:

The poor spend all of their income on consumption, just to live - 100% taxation.
The middle class spend 80% of their income on consumption, just to live - 80% taxation.
The more well off spend 50% of their income on consumption, just to live - 50% taxation.
The rich spend 20% (or less) of their income on consumption, and invest ther rest.

ERGO - FLAT TAX equals REGRESSIVE tax.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2007, 05:41 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,783,759 times
Reputation: 24863
I have suggested any tax include a deductible that would effectively exclude all wage earners from Federal income tax. (In this day and age about 3 times the median income) The tax would be levied on all income from ALL sources. (Including inheritances, dividends, capital gains, bribes, and dope sales – I really mean ALL income).

I would also consider a Federal sales tax if the same deductible were applied and all items (same list as before) were counted. I do not favor this as much because of the record keeping involved. In either case the most important consideration is to relieve the tax burden from the working and lower middle class.

In any case I believe the hyper wealthy (we are currently in a new Golden Age as far as income distribution is concerned) should pay for the government that protects their assets. The people that own the economy should pay for it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2007, 05:59 AM
 
2,970 posts, read 2,259,631 times
Reputation: 658
Quote:
Originally Posted by silas777 View Post
I like it, although I think 17% is high! still think the consumption tax might make more sense.
I agree Silas, the fair tax makes so much more sense, but I'd take the flat tax over what we have. Unfortunately I think either will be a hard sell, for various reasons, not the least of which is some people simply fear change.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-14-2007, 06:29 AM
 
Location: Londonderry, NH
41,479 posts, read 59,783,759 times
Reputation: 24863
Addendum to my proposal: In addition to the huge deductible i think the tax rates should range from 30% to 0ver 90% for the billionaires. There should also be a net worth tax on all real or financial property held by an American anywhere on the planet with about a 10 million deductible.
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.

© 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