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.
All the posters who quoted me have responded by informing me about what percent the rich are supposed to pay. Always ignored is the easily reseearched data on monies collected by the IRS. Some 47% of it is missing. The IRS, however, reports record collections from the poor and middle class whom it hounds to their graves and beyond while allowing rich deadbeats to pay pennies on the dollar and corporate deadbeats to pay nothing at all. I never said the rich don't pay taxes but that they don't pay proportionate to their income. This is hard to argue with. It is fact. Many middle class earners don't pay taxes proportionate to their income but which do you think is the bigger loss to the country: a 100,000/yr earner who hides 2K in taxes or a 20M/yr earner who hides 3M in taxes?
They very well could pay more because they wouldnt have all of the exemptions which they currently take advantage of.
If that were true, saggy would be all over it. Note saggy's position on the flat tax...
Quote:
Originally Posted by saganista
There hasn't been any sort of publicized flat-tax proposal that has not in effect simply been a means to shift tax burden off of the rich and onto the middle class. If you have grave concern over the current plight of the rich, advocating for a flat-tax might be in your future. Otherwise, not so much...
If that were true, saggy would be all over it. Note saggy's position on the flat tax...
Yeah, I've seen saggys position on it and simply dont have time to get into a pissing contest with her about how she's wrong..
She doesnt support it because it means that the POOR have to pay a "fair" share, not because the rich would "pay less", but the "poor" would have to pay something.
She also wouldnt support such a plan because it limits governments ability to just increase taxes or hide them from the public. It makes government accountable to live within a budget and it makes government adjust spending to the current economy. (which indeed is the problem with the plan).. When economy is good, cash would flood into the govt, and when its bad, it would dry up extremely fast, thereby resulting in the govt having to limit their spending when its needed the most.
Saggy would never support limiting governments budgets, spending, income or the ability to hide taxes in a 60,000 page IRS book. Wouldnt want to get rid of that book now would we?
The Fair Tax is a flat tax. I don't have time to explain it right now but if those who may know more about it don't do it soon I will try to get it done this evening. Very basic when I talk about it but maybe you would understand.
I might suggest that you get with Mike Huckaby to learn about the Fair Tax or just go to Neal Boortz at Boortz on boortz.com It is so fair that I can't believe that anyone who reads about it wouldn't want to see it changed, other than the Congress of the United States. They need the present income tax so they can play their games with it.
The FairTax is not a flat tax, at least not in the sense that everyone knows how a flat tax works. The best place to learn about the FairTax is at their web site.
The Fair Tax is a flat tax. I don't have time to explain it right now but if those who may know more about it don't do it soon I will try to get it done this evening. Very basic when I talk about it but maybe you would understand.
I might suggest that you get with Mike Huckaby to learn about the Fair Tax or just go to Neal Boortz at Boortz on boortz.com It is so fair that I can't believe that anyone who reads about it wouldn't want to see it changed, other than the Congress of the United States. They need the present income tax so they can play their games with it.
Mike Huckabee....goodness no. A lot of what he says is garbage.
I don't need you to explain to me what the two are. I can look that up on my own.
I just wanted to know why some people are bringing up fair tax in a thread that is talking about a flat tax.
If that were true, saggy would be all over it. Note saggy's position on the flat tax...
I'll use myself as an example.
I LIVE off of tax exempt income. I plan and manipulate my liablites to the point that I have $0 taxable profit because I mortgage my properties to the hill to the point that there is $0 profit. To "live" and pay bills, I refinance and remortgage investments in order to reinvest and pay bills, and borrowed money is tax free under the current tax structure.
My gross income is decent, my net income $0... And while I'm not even close to being rich, i live very comfortably due to tax exempt income. In a fair or flat tax status, I would be forced to pay taxes. Under the current system my "profits" go towards paying down debt, under these other taxable methods my "profits" would go to the government.
To use another example, Warren Buffet, you know the guy who jumped up and down to support Obama, pays about $20K a YEAR in taxes (his own admission) despite being worth tens of BILLIONS. He uses brk as a tax exempt shelter for his money and when it becomes clear that he'll "die" and be subject to estate taxes, he manipulates the system to"donate" his assets thereby avoiding further taxes. (I'm glad he's donating it, but the subject here is taxes)
Buffet ALONE would contribute $20B to the government under different taxable methods, and this doesnt even count the other investors and holders of his investment corporation.
I've been for a flat tax for some time now, however it'll never happen. The right can't handle what it'll do to the top 10%, and the left couldn't handle the backlash from the poor.
Flat taxes are the only fair way to tax. If I get taxed 10% of my income, then everyone should be taxed 10% of their income.
I LIVE off of tax exempt income. I plan and manipulate my liablites to the point that I have $0 taxable profit because I mortgage my properties to the hill to the point that there is $0 profit. To "live" and pay bills, I refinance and remortgage investments in order to reinvest and pay bills, and borrowed money is tax free under the current tax structure.
My gross income is decent, my net income $0... And while I'm not even close to being rich, i live very comfortably due to tax exempt income. In a fair or flat tax status, I would be forced to pay taxes. Under the current system my "profits" go towards paying down debt, under these other taxable methods my "profits" would go to the government.
Think about why that 'income' is tax exempt. Why would the government allow the exemption?
Quote:
To use another example, Warren Buffet, you know the guy who jumped up and down to support Obama, pays about $20K a YEAR in taxes (his own admission) despite being worth tens of BILLIONS. He uses brk as a tax exempt shelter for his money and when it becomes clear that he'll "die" and be subject to estate taxes, he manipulates the system to"donate" his assets thereby avoiding further taxes. (I'm glad he's donating it, but the subject here is taxes)
Buffet ALONE would contribute $20B to the government under different taxable methods, and this doesnt even count the other investors and holders of his investment corporation.
Buffett is worth $40B total. There's no way he earns enough income to pay $20B in taxes.
Warren Buffett's Net Worth Plummeted $10 Billion - Is Value... (http://www.[domain blocked due to spam].com/content/prweb/2009/10/warren-buffetts-net-worth-plummeted-10-billion-is-value-2 - broken link)
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.