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.
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?)
Its not about being "convinced by the math" numbers are what they are, 2+2 is 4, I get that. Conceptually I find many reasons why taxes are out of control with too many loopholes and levers being pulled. It becomes a political lever thats abused and often leads to other important issues getting sidetracked.
Also, the use of "equitable" equates to "fair" which as far as I'm concerned, you cant legislate. Whats fair to me might not seem fair to you, its not a black and white fact, its an arbitrary and often emotional statement or plea for compassion.
What "class" are you talking about? Are you assuming you are playing teacher for me here?
Fair is irrelevant. at the end of the day there is a number that is right. Its the number that gets the maximum revenue while not doing damage to the economy. that is the RIGHT number.
I think some economists believe that number to be around 30% ish for all taxes (Federal, State and Local) combined. more than that you de-incentivize work and innovation.
I don't care what the number is, I just want to be at that number.
Fair is irrelevant. at the end of the day there is a number that is right. Its the number that gets the maximum revenue while not doing damage to the economy. that is the RIGHT number.
I think some economists believe that number to be around 30% ish for all taxes (Federal, State and Local) combined. more than that you de-incentivize work and innovation.
I don't care what the number is, I just want to be at that number.
As someone who works for a living and pays taxes, I really don't see how relying on nearly 1/3 of my income to still run a huge debt at both the state and federal levels is about right by any means.
<>
Also, the use of "equitable" equates to "fair" which as far as I'm concerned, you cant legislate.<>
What "class" are you talking about? Are you assuming you are playing teacher for me here?
You are interpreting "equitable" to mean "fair" . Fair is an emotional concept, as you say. I mean by equitable that the tax should have a similar impact across all levels of income.
I think of C-D forums as a place to learn things from the various opinions of posters, so I'll sometime call a thread a class. I was saying that because I did not want to drift off to the taxation of goods and services instead of income. That would be excessive thread drift, and I see it happened in another conversation anyway.
As someone who works for a living and pays taxes, I really don't see how relying on nearly 1/3 of my income to still run a huge debt at both the state and federal levels is about right by any means.
by "right" im not talking about what is moral or fair. and I am not 100% certain that is the actual number. but its in the ballpark
The point here is that if government takes 0 dollars, there is no government and everything falls apart.
if Government takes 100% of everything there is nothing but government and everything falls apart.
however, between those point, there is a percentage that government must take that does 2 things.
1. generates maximum revenue for government to operate on
2. does not discourage private sector innovation and economic expansion.
That is the number. period. its not about what is fair, its not about what people want government to do for them, its not about what politicians promise.
its about the amount of money taken from the economy that generates max revenue, while doing the least damage to the private sector economy.
What I don't understand is why THIS isn't the discussion point. nothing else really matters
by "right" im not talking about what is moral or fair. and I am not 100% certain that is the actual number. but its in the ballpark
The point here is that if government takes 0 dollars, there is no government and everything falls apart.
if Government takes 100% of everything there is nothing but government and everything falls apart.
however, between those point, there is a percentage that government must take that does 2 things.
1. generates maximum revenue for government to operate on
2. does not discourage private sector innovation and economic expansion.
That is the number. period. its not about what is fair, its not about what people want government to do for them, its not about what politicians promise.
its about the amount of money taken from the economy that generates max revenue, while doing the least damage to the private sector economy.
What I don't understand is why THIS isn't the discussion point. nothing else really matters
I think the % is the point of the discussion because 30% is a large chunk of money, and the results to date aren't exactly stellar, especially when you add in how little money people are currently saving for their own retirement and emergency savings in general.
Wait? Who is in charge of the government which is robbing us at gunpoint?
We can surely count on Trump and the GOP to first cut spending unilaterally and then cut taxes for the middle class, right?
Regardless of Russia, I honestly don't think either the Ds or Rs have any interest in working together to actually get things done, its sad. If Hillary had won we would be in a similar situation, nothing would be getting done because the Rs would be dragging their feet and just being obstructionists.
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.
