What is the fair share? How much income tax should a person pay? (illegal aliens, boycott)

[gallowsCalibrator]

Originally Posted by NY_refugee87

That's an easy one. I'll take that! I would put stuff in my businesses name, I wouldn't own a damn thing on paper. It's all a business asset I like that

Which is why it's business and individual.

So assets in your business's name would still be accounted for in its net worth for tax purposes.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by greywar

I love how you call yourself a working class hero....while ignoring that the taxes you suggest would be overwhelmingly bad for actual working class americans.

Consumption taxes are a great example of how to shift the tax burden onto them.

You'd give a sliding rebate on necessities. Food, housing, clothing, energy etc. Start out at 100K who get 1% back down to the poverty line that get 100% back.

To keep this simple you'd use averages on what they should be paying for their region.

What is important about consumption tax is the tax is exposed to the consumer each and every time they buy something. This is why liberals do not like the idea.

[lifeexplorer]

Originally Posted by elan

" What is the fair share? How much income tax should a person pay? "

Income tax? I think everyone should pay 15%.

What about those who don't have any income? What's their fair share, besides free loading?

[greywar]

Originally Posted by thecoalman

You'd give a sliding rebate on necessities. Food, housing, clothing, energy etc. Start out at 100K who get 1% back down to the poverty line that get 100% back.

To keep this simple you'd use averages on what they should be paying for their region.

What is important about consumption tax is the tax is exposed to the consumer each and every time they buy something. This is why liberals do not like the idea.

No, thats not why liberals dont like the idea. Sigh. Nothing there would be a trigger for "liberals"

We don't like the idea because most of them would fail on the details. The 100K-pegged to inflation? Thats critical. Same with the deductions.

Now what about someone who simply ships everything in from overseas? IE I buy a shipping container of food, etc. The DETAILS matter.

And it fails to resolve the growing wealth inequality issue. And that kind of matters. not from a right or wrong standpoint, but because its getting worse, and eventually its going to cause people to get crazy.

Well...crazier.

And much more. Its a nice theory. But in practice? It would quickly be horrifically abused.

[thecoalman]

Originally Posted by greywar

No, thats not why liberals dont like the idea. Sigh. Nothing there would be a trigger for "liberals"

To clarify I'm not talking about liberals in general but liberals in Congress. Many people may not understand they are paying huge sums of tax hidden in the cost of the product but they most certainly will understand an itemized receipt. When Joe Schmoe walks into the store and sees that tax on their bill instead of hidden in the cost of the product it becomes a whole other ballgame.

The 100K-pegged to inflation? Thats critical. Same with the deductions.

It was an example, perhaps it should be lower or perhaps it would be higher. Pegging the upper limit to inflation seems appropriate for obvious reasons.

Now what about someone who simply ships everything in from overseas? IE I buy a shipping container of food, etc. The DETAILS matter.

If it were me we are eliminating business and corporate tax across the board and you would pay a tax on that purchase. You are effectively shifting some of the tax burden from US companies to foreign companies improving the competitiveness of US companies. <lightbulb>

And it fails to resolve the growing wealth inequality issue. And that kind of matters. not from a right or wrong standpoint, but because its getting worse, and eventually its going to cause people to get crazy.

I understand your complaint but being poor in the US is not exactly a huge hardship. Expanding the middle class is not an easy task and will only get harder as time progresses because of automation. In inevitably we will have to shift to some sort of guaranteed income. Business's and the people that buy their products are intertwined, you need both for robust economy. Serious issues are going to arise for business as those that can buy their products decline.

[Roboteer]

Originally Posted by greywar

Depends on the level of benefit you get.

You have made a brilliant and fundamentally correct point.

And then you proceeded to completely demolish your own statement, implying that a person's payments should be related solely to his income level.

If you advocate any scheme where some people pay more than the benefits they actually receive; and other people pay far less that what they receive, you will never be able to arrive at any "fair" outcome. Never.

[camaro69]

I'm far from money rich, but those who are pay most of the taxes now.

Stop it with paying their fair share.

[NY_refugee87]

Originally Posted by momonkey

Most cuts to the top income tax rate happened while Democrats controlled both houses of Congress.


Your turn.

What does that have anything to do with what I posted?

It doesnt.

[NY_refugee87]

Originally Posted by gallowsCalibrator

Which is why it's business and individual.

So assets in your business's name would still be accounted for in its net worth for tax purposes.

With how the tax system currently is it would all be a write off.
House? It wouldn't be in my name, businesses name.
Vehicles? Business name.
Appliances? Business name.
How? I rent the dwelling from the business.
As a Tennant the business is responsible for the appliances in the lease contract. Along with the structural integrity of the house and maintenance of the property.
In which case anything that is an expense on the businesses side would be tax deductible.

I'd have no net worth. Everything that was purchased as a business expense currently is tax deductible.

On paper 0 net worth. Unless you're proposing an audit and a complete revision to where nothing is tax deductible...

In which case you screwed alot of blue collar mechanics hardcore who've walked onto the Snap-On MAC Matco truck who've acquired 200k-1mil in tools over x amount of years... or a nurse whose scrubs, shoes, and education to further their career...

As it currently is, everything would go under the businesses name, be a tax deduction from the dwelling, the appliances, the TVs, utilities.

2% of nothing=nothing.
I wouldn't put cash in the bank.
I would draw a paycheck which would be cashed.
Buy everything I want that has value with cash. From guns and ammo, to a Rolex.
If you aren't taxing income and going by "net worth" with no audit, you just created a huge loophole for anyone savvy to hide assets.
Every year major repair or renovations on the house would be a business expense...
Every vehicle would be registered to the business. And since I'm not into luxury or exotics and into trucks lifted/lowered every single truck would be a business write off.

So instead of a Lamborghini, I'd have a twin turbo LS Silverado on air ride listed as a "work truck"
All money sunk in that toy would be justified as modifications necessary for advertising purposes, and to have the ability to tow and haul properly...
Same with a 54 bel air chopped and channeled. Advertising...

[YourWakeUpCall]

Originally Posted by NekoLogic

A flat tax not a percentage based.

Yep. I've said this many times and I'm not sure why almost nobody gets it.