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 07-01-2016, 07:15 AM
 
4,491 posts, read 1,978,122 times
Reputation: 1987

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBulletZ06 View Post
Which side has consistently voted or pushed for a flat tax, which side is vehemently opposed to such a law? Why do people get a home tax credit, an EITC, and a child credit but single renters who make money will pay significantly more in taxes. It's not just a rich/poor thing. It's a tax code that was made with all sorts of carveouts to buy the VOTERS, rich and poor, because people in power want to remain in power. Any change to this is met with "taxing the poor" "regressive" and "wants poor single moms to pay the same rate as rich people".
I'm not disagreeing that our tax code is severely flawed. Though let's be clear, you made it about politics. Not me.

Libertarians do have a pretty consistent view on what taxes should be. Democrats and Republicans seem a bit schizophrenic by contrast.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:21 AM
 
Location: louisville
4,754 posts, read 2,405,406 times
Reputation: 1715
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
So who will write the laws in your paradise where the wealthy have stupendous amounts of power? Do you think the average Joe like yourself will have a say in this? Or are you also claiming to be among the billionaire class like the poster above here?
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic View Post
Well, sure, but the scale isn't the same. A middle class homeowner who has a few kids and donates to the church might get some money back, but he probably doesn't have enough kids to pay $0 in income tax. If so, he should sue the condom company and get even more.

And certainly, no argument that our tax system is flawed. A goody and kind of stupid as Rand Paul's little commercial about putting the tax code in a wood chipper was, his point is one I agree with. The tax code should not need to be as long as it is. But even if their are complexities and 'loopholes' for people in all tax brackets, it remains nearly impossible to deny that people on the very top have a disproportionate amount of benefits when compared to every other tax bracket.
Here's one biggie: repeal the 16th amendment and replace with a national sales tax. % debatable but that eliminates all individual loopholes

Replace with a nominal corporate, llc, small business tax. % debatable but not to exceed 7%. Haven't got through how the small business purchase does not pay sales tax so that they aren't paying twice (ex: my store needs a new tablet and I send employee to Best Buy).

Eliminates 95% of the IRS. States still have license to tax income via the 10th amendment
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:23 AM
 
Location: annandale, va & slidell, la
9,267 posts, read 4,308,747 times
Reputation: 8452
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
Joe Sixpack claiming to be rich again? This is pathetic.
Listen Skippy, I lived and worked in Washington. I did it to take advantage of all that was available there. The patent attorneys I had as clients were extremely wealthy. The rank and file government employees that work at the patent offices have incomes way higher than most locales. Your thesis is unnecessarily deep, and sounds like you are frustrated with the system.
Life is a game. If you don't know the rules, you won't advance.
Whining about unfairness is a waste of your time. But have at it.
Bye Bye
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:23 AM
 
Location: louisville
4,754 posts, read 2,405,406 times
Reputation: 1715
Here's another: repeal the 17th amendment and go back to the states selecting their senatorial rep vs general election. Takes a lot of money out of election cycles. I understand it was intended to break up the party 'machines' but technology and communication can do that today.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:25 AM
 
23,253 posts, read 13,808,064 times
Reputation: 13687
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove View Post
Anyone know what this rant is about?
No, I'm not sure at all.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:26 AM
 
Location: louisville
4,754 posts, read 2,405,406 times
Reputation: 1715
Quote:
Originally Posted by thedirtypirate View Post
if you truly believe this, and believe the Citizen's United should be overturned, then Clinton is the clear right choice.
Do what? Neither major party clown, yes puppet clown, is a clear choice.

I'll do what I've done the last 4: write in my candidate.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:26 AM
 
14,224 posts, read 5,973,722 times
Reputation: 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by finalmove View Post
Listen Skippy, I lived and worked in Washington. I did it to take advantage of all that was available there. The patent attorneys I had as clients were extremely wealthy. The rank and file government employees that work at the patent offices have incomes way higher than most locales. Your thesis is unnecessarily deep, and sounds like you are frustrated with the system.
Life is a game. If you don't know the rules, you won't advance.
Whining about unfairness is a waste of your time. But have at it.
Bye Bye
So you have no arguments. Just claims that you are so rich that you can buy politicians and think it is great that democracy is becoming a meaningless joke. This is just pathetic posturing.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:28 AM
 
Location: louisville
4,754 posts, read 2,405,406 times
Reputation: 1715
Quote:
Originally Posted by skepticratic View Post
I'm not disagreeing that our tax code is severely flawed. Though let's be clear, you made it about politics. Not me.

Libertarians do have a pretty consistent view on what taxes should be. Democrats and Republicans seem a bit schizophrenic by contrast.
Although one would probably assign me as 'libertarian', I'm not a fan of them either as much of their message is often 40 year old college arguments. No substance.
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:31 AM
 
14,224 posts, read 5,973,722 times
Reputation: 6051
Quote:
Originally Posted by Stymie13 View Post
Here's another: repeal the 17th amendment and go back to the states selecting their senatorial rep vs general election. Takes a lot of money out of election cycles. I understand it was intended to break up the party 'machines' but technology and communication can do that today.
So basically you are claiming that we can promote policies that transfer wealth and power to the ultra rich, through the tax system, the declining power of the people can enact policies that strengthen the people's power over the political system?
Rate this post positively Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-01-2016, 07:31 AM
 
Location: MS
4,396 posts, read 4,511,187 times
Reputation: 1555
Quote:
Originally Posted by PCALMike View Post
This is just totally unrealistic. You are saying that in a society where the super rich can steamroll over anyone, we will just create a law that prevent their power from getting out of hand? How will this be done? Who controls the politicians, the donations? Who controls the judiciary in this society? Who controls the media? You have to choose, its either massive income and wealth inequality or democracy.
The super rich you speak of do not directly influence people. They influence government which then will steamroll anyone they ask. I want to remove that power from government. Government at each level should stick to their specific powers as defined in their chartering documents and nothing more. That takes away the majority of the influence you speak of.

Also, I provided a specific example. Can you provide one and how you want things changed?
Rate this post positively 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

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:56 PM.

© 2005-2021, 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