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.
Well before the 1913 soft coup of the United States Government otherwise known as the Federal Reserve Act there was no income tax or I.R.S. The one came with the other.
So before you can answer your question Congress would have to abolish the Act and begin issuing non-interest bearing money based on population and/or GDP growth like Franklin said the colonies did when they issued colonial script.
Of course "they" would not like that too much which is why it will not happen.
When the interrogator presses Rakovsky for Illuminati notables to approach with an initiative, Rakovsky is sure of only two who are now deceased: Walter Rathenau, the Wiemar foreign minister, and Lionel Rothschild. He says Trotsky is his source of information.
Others he insists are speculation:
"As an institution, the bank of Kuhn Loeb & Company of Wall Street: [and] the families of Schiff, Warburg, Loeb and Kuhn; I say families in order to point out several names since they are all connected ... by marriages; then Baruch, Frankfurter, Altschul, Cohen, Benjamin, Strauss, Steinhardt, Blom, Rosenman, Lippmann, Lehman, Dreyfus, Lamont, Rothschild, Lord, Mandel, Morganthau, Ezekiel, Lasky....any one of the names I have enumerated, even of those not belonging to "Them" could always lead to "Them" with any proposition of an important type." (272)
By allowing bankers the privilege of creating money, we have created an insatiable vampire. If you could manufacture money, imagine the temptation to own and control everything, including thought! This is the ultimate meaning of Communism.
I know what the argument is, I happen to disagree with it. 10% for all.
It is math, you can't disagree with it.
You can, of course, discount it as a consideration in a tax strategy; feel free to do that.
If I make $40,000 a year and you take away $4,000 that limits my spending for food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. I have $36,000 which covers those basics for my family but I'm tapped out.
Another guy makes $400,000 a year and you take away $40,000. He has $360,000 to spend. He spends the same $36,000 as I spend for basics, but he still has $324,000 to spend anyway he wants on better food, nicer clothes, bigger shelter, vacations, faster transportation and so on.
You can double his tax rate so now he has only $284,000 to spend after basics and taxes and you have lots more revenue coming in without a big impact on his happiness.
I'm sure I have not changed your mind on wanting to simplify taxation, but perhaps you can see why a flat tax has more impact on the poor.
It is math, you can't disagree with it.
You can, of course, discount it as a consideration in a tax strategy; feel free to do that.
If I make $40,000 a year and you take away $4,000 that limits my spending for food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. I have $36,000 which covers those basics for my family but I'm tapped out.
Another guy makes $400,000 a year and you take away $40,000. He has $360,000 to spend. He spends the same $36,000 as I spend for basics, but he still has $324,000 to spend anyway he wants on better food, nicer clothes, bigger shelter, vacations, faster transportation and so on.
You can double his tax rate so now he has only $284,000 to spend after basics and taxes and you have lots more revenue coming in without a big impact on his happiness.
I'm sure I have not changed your mind on wanting to simplify taxation, but perhaps you can see why a flat tax has more impact on the poor.
I can 100% disagree with it, math aside. Taxes have become a political lever for Dems and Republicans to pull where they manipulate the rich and the poor to "buy" their votes. 10% eliminates that, sorry if you want to be black and white about it with only using math as an example, but its a poor and short sighted argument.
Countries have different values. Higher taxes are fairer if the society generally expects many efficient public services. Lower taxes are fairer if the society generally expects less.
In other words, most people would rather drive on rough roads than to pay higher gas taxes to better maintain them.
Nobody should be paying taxes on the money or property they have earned.
In other words, you want the national income tax repealed and replaced with a national sales tax of around 23%. Too bad for you President Trump isn't interested in doing that.
Part of me likes the idea of paying no taxes (there is a little bit of Libertarian in us all I guess!)...who wouldn't like that??? ...but then you would have to fund Defense spending,
Veteran Care, Police Departments, Fire Departments and Public Education, and infrastructure upkeep then there is that horrible, huge Deficit that they have ran up, that needs to be addressed.
I like the idea of a sales tax, but wonder if it would be enough. Maybe a ten percent straight tax?
I think Millionaire's and Billionaires could afford a bit more though...maybe fifteen percent or twenty percent....if your income exceeds certain amounts....it would still be less than what they are suppose to be paying right now.
I can 100% disagree with it, math aside. Taxes have become a political lever for Dems and Republicans to pull where they manipulate the rich and the poor to "buy" their votes. 10% eliminates that, sorry if you want to be black and white about it with only using math as an example, but its a poor and short sighted argument.
You are unconvinced by the math. I get that. A flat rate to you means no fiddling with the rate structure. Okay. That leaves a question, should the impact of taxation be equitable across the broad range of income in this country? You have answered with a resounding, NO!
(we're not going to discuss VAT in this class, are we?)
In other words, you want the national income tax repealed and replaced with a national sales tax of around 23%. Too bad for you President Trump isn't interested in doing that.
That's even more regressive for the lower income people that a flat tax! Arrrgh.
If I make $40,000 a year and you take away $4,000 that limits my spending for food, clothing, shelter, and transportation. I have $36,000 which covers those basics for my family but I'm tapped out.
Another guy makes $400,000 a year and you take away $40,000. He has $360,000 to spend. He spends the same $36,000 as I spend for basics, but he still has $324,000 to spend anyway he wants on better food, nicer clothes, bigger shelter, vacations, faster transportation and so on.
You can double his tax rate so now he has only $284,000 to spend after basics and taxes and you have lots more revenue coming in without a big impact on his happiness.
I'm sure I have not changed your mind on wanting to simplify taxation, but perhaps you can see why a flat tax has more impact on the poor.
I have no problem with your scenario above. Each is paying the same proportion of his income. The impact is not a consideration. Why should I pay a higher percentage than you? Or a lower percentage? If you don't have skin in the game, why should you get a vote? If by your numbers I'm paying 10x the amount you're paying, should you only get 1/10th of a vote at election time?
Flat tax, 10% for everyone. No fathomable reason why the government needs almost 1/3 of my income to run a multi-trillion debt. Its unacceptable and irresponsible.
If I add up all the taxes I pay, it is over 50% of my income. That is indentured servitude.
Fed Income Tax
Fed SS Tax
State Income Tax
Local Income Tax
State Sales Tax
Real Estate Tax
Property Tax
Occupational Privilege Tax
Energy Taxes, and Fees
Utility Taxes
Gasoline Taxes
And many more!
It is utterly ridiculous. Trump will reform the Fed Tax Code. Go Trump! Obama, Hillary, and the Democrats love more taxes on middle income earners, as there are not enough rich to tax (their friends and cronies) to matter. It is the middle income earner that funds America. And the poor get screwed with things like higher gas taxes to fund failed "green" initiatives. What a crock!
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.
