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.
No, the only truly fair tax would be a flat percentage of wealth. The government can and should tax wealth.
That's not just my opinion...
Donald Trump, when flirting with the Reform Party nomination for President of the United States, proposed a one time 14.25% tax on net worth over $10,000,000 to raise $6.7 trillion and retire the national debt.
It's not about punishing "evil people", it's about recognizing that the tax burden should be shouldered by everyone, and those most able to bear a heavier load should do so.
Fair? Because stealing my money, against my will, on things I don't benefit, is fair?
When you rob Peter to pay Paul, you can always count on Pauls support.
No, the only truly fair tax would be a flat percentage of wealth. The government can and should tax wealth.
That's not just my opinion...
Donald Trump, when flirting with the Reform Party nomination for President of the United States, proposed a one time 14.25% tax on net worth over $10,000,000 to raise $6.7 trillion and retire the national debt.
It's not about punishing "evil people", it's about recognizing that the tax burden should be shouldered by everyone, and those most able to bear a heavier load should do so.
The wealthy already pay 80% or so of the tax burden in this country. A flat percentage rate on income would still have high earners shouldering the majority of the burden.
And no, wealth should not be taxed. The vast majority of wealthy people in this country became wealthy by saving and investing money which was already taxed when they earned it. https://www.ramseysolutions.com/reti...aires-research
Quote:
Ramsey Solutions conducted the largest survey of millionaires ever with 10,000 participants.
Eight out of ten millionaires invested in their company’s 401(k) plan.
The top five careers for millionaires include engineer, accountant, teacher, management and attorney.
79% of millionaires did not receive any inheritance at all from their parents or other family members.
Now, if you want to tax interest income we may or may not be able to come to an agreement. But taxing actual wealth? Nope, that’s nothing but stealing from the rich, and Robin Hood - despite his status as a fold hero - was an outlaw.
The end consumer benefits from businesses being able to use highways, etc., to ship goods. If you tax businesses for infrastructure use, the costs will be passed onto the consumer eventually anyway. There's probably a better case to be made that people poor use far more government services: police/EMS are far busier in low income areas, not to mention welfare, etc.
Regarding your family of 4 argument: Maybe government spending will be less abstract to people when they actually pay their fair share. Maybe when people realize that government services cost real money, we can reduce that $4.8T number down to something more reasonable. Maybe people who can't pay their share won't have children. Again, I said my proposal simply sets the baseline for fair, not that it was the end solution. If nothing else, it would quickly calibrate everyone to who actually contributes and who is a parasite. Most non-contributors are oblivious to the fact that they are being carried by everyone else. Who do you think is currently carrying the load for the family of 4 who can't pay $40K per year? Hint: People like me, who pay substantially more than that with no children. How is that fair?
The next time Biden proposes a multi-trillion dollar stimulus package, do the math to see how much it will cost every single person in this country. Doesn't sound so appealing anymore, does it?
The government can get by with more if they keep us in the dark.
The poor would pay significantly less than the rich as they have less money to spend. It's all relative. The VAT is a self-leveling tax as one's tax burden is limited by how much one can spend. European countries have no problem with it for exactly that reason.
Any VAT or sales tax is considered regressive, in that the poor pay a higher % of their income than do the rich. Here's a hint: rich folks don't spend all of their income, but poor folks do.
The only fair tax, is one where each person pays in proportion to the amount of benefit he gets from the government.
If you have taxes where one guy pays a lot more than what he gets from the govt, while another guy pays a lot less than what he gets from the govt, you will NEVER get any agreement on whether it's "fair".
The original Federal tax scheme established in this country when the Constitution was first adopted, did exactly that, in part. Personal taxes were paid by the states to the Fed govt, in proportion to the population of each state. If a state had twice as many people as its neighboring state, it paid twice as much in person tax money. This was called a "head tax" or "capitation tax".
Of course, most taxes back then were on goods (excise taxes), import/exports (duties), etc. But personal Federal taxes were forbidden, except in proportion to the state's population.
During the Civil War, the Fed govt tried to impose an Income Tax on the wealthy. It worked its way through the courts and was found to be unconstitutional. Though the money was never returned to the taxpayer.
Welfare spending needs to be abolished. It was started by the socialist Woodrow Wilson to compensate WW1 widows only. I would agree that only the widows of veterans receive any welfare from the Federal government. Let the states take care of its own people.
Last edited by Annandale_Man; 09-17-2021 at 01:19 PM..
The end consumer benefits from businesses being able to use highways, etc., to ship goods. If you tax businesses for infrastructure use, the costs will be passed onto the consumer eventually anyway. There's probably a better case to be made that people poor use far more government services: police/EMS are far busier in low income areas, not to mention welfare, etc.
Regarding your family of 4 argument: Maybe government spending will be less abstract to people when they actually pay their fair share. Maybe when people realize that government services cost real money, we can reduce that $4.8T number down to something more reasonable. Maybe people who can't pay their share won't have children. Again, I said my proposal simply sets the baseline for fair, not that it was the end solution. If nothing else, it would quickly calibrate everyone to who actually contributes and who is a parasite. Most non-contributors are oblivious to the fact that they are being carried by everyone else. Who do you think is currently carrying the load for the family of 4 who can't pay $40K per year? Hint: People like me, who pay substantially more than that with no children. How is that fair?
The next time Biden proposes a multi-trillion dollar stimulus package, do the math to see how much it will cost every single person in this country. Doesn't sound so appealing anymore, does it?
I have always said that people with children should being paying MORE in taxes, not receiving a deduction for dependents. Parents should be paying ALL the taxes associated with the burden on government services until they are old enough to work and pay their own way.
10% for everyone making above $25,000. No deductions. No refunds.
What about the freeloaders? That’s half of the population here. They don’t pay a penny. Actually, they receive almost all the benefits.
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.
