Clinton's Hostile Preschool Takeover

[homesick_american 1]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

Flat taxes are regressive anyway; I don't think they're fair at all.

[Ban Hammer 12,879]

which is refunded at the end of the year, so in essence they don't pay income tax, which has been everyone's point.

Their point is that they dislike anyone taking more from the system than they put in. Which is fine, but they cannot falsely claim that the poor and working poor don't taxes; he claimed that "the POOR do not pay TAXES," which is wholly false.

in essence, he's right. when this aforementioned gal paid in about 2500 over the year and gets back close to 5k, what would you call it? is she really paying taxes?

[Longview 0]

Flat taxes are regressive anyway; I don't think they're fair at all.

Bingo.

Gary, your ideas're nowhere near the mainstream or majority, not for the Republicans or the Democrats. And while you're certainly entitled to your beliefs, acting as if they're widely-held is disingenuous. Far's "kook fringe" goes, again, check your mirror. All I've advocated is allowing two of President Bush's three tax packages to expire, whereas you're accusing the wicked government of wanting to "take over every aspect of your life."

when this aforementioned gal paid in about 2500 over the year and gets back close to 5k, what would you call it? is she really paying taxes?

I call it someone who paid their income taxes, but also benefits from government assistance. Her income tax dollars still financed the previous fiscal year's budget. You can't accuse people who take government assistance of not paying their income taxes, though.

Edited July 24, 2007 by Longview

[Ban Hammer 12,879]

Flat taxes are regressive anyway; I don't think they're fair at all.

Bingo.

Gary, your ideas're nowhere near the mainstream or majority, not for the Republicans or the Democrats. And while you're certainly entitled to your beliefs, acting as if they're widely-held is disingenuous. Far's "kook fringe" goes, again, check your mirror. All I've advocated is allowing two of President Bush's three tax packages to expire, whereas you're accusing the wicked government of wanting to "take over every aspect of your life."

when this aforementioned gal paid in about 2500 over the year and gets back close to 5k, what would you call it? is she really paying taxes?

I call it someone who paid their income taxes, but also benefits from government assistance. Her income tax dollars still financed the previous fiscal year's budget. You can't accuse people who take government assistance of not paying their income taxes, though.

if she financed the previous fiscal year, that's a heck of an interest rate

and still she didn't pay any taxes when it's all said and done, she just made a temporary loan

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

How is it not fair?

If you're making the statutory minumum (as hard as it is to believe that there are people out there who make $10K or less per year) - you have less disposible income than someone who makes 10 times that amount. That's just simple mathematics surely...?

[wioombeen 0]

What you all don't seem to realize is this will all be moot when the zombie holocaust strikes.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

What you all don't seem to realize is this will all be moot when the zombie holocaust strikes.

Not only do zombies not pay taxes, they eat the taxman!

[almaty 19]

What you all don't seem to realize is this will all be moot when the zombie holocaust strikes.

Not only do zombies not pay taxes, they eat the taxman!

bless them

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Actually zombies aren't that far removed from taxmen anyway.

"GRRRR... Brains!"

"GRRRR... Money!"

I suspect a connection

[Dan J 277]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

How is it not fair?

If you're making the statutory minumum (as hard as it is to believe that there are people out there who make $10K or less per year) - you have less disposible income than someone who makes 10 times that amount. That's just simple mathematics surely...?

There are some disadvantages to a flat tax.

In order to to keep the government income the same, people in the lower tax brackets will be paying much more than they do now in taxes. Which may make them more dependent on government services to survive. Unless you make the make the bracket where taxes start much higher than $10,000

Progressive taxes help keep wealth balanced throughout the economy. It prevents, at least to an extent, most of the wealth ending up in the top 5-10%.

A flat tax would make things a lot simpler, and take reduce the costs of the IRS and tax collection system. It would also put a lot of tax accountants out of work. I guess the question is, are the savings worth the costs?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

Every person gets to keep 10K free from taxation. That is fair. The fact that one person may be paying more or being taxed on a higher percentage of the income is about as fair or unfair as one person making a higher income. What sense woud it make to tax the existential minimum?

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

How is it not fair?

If you're making the statutory minumum (as hard as it is to believe that there are people out there who make $10K or less per year) - you have less disposible income than someone who makes 10 times that amount. That's just simple mathematics surely...?

There are some disadvantages to a flat tax.

In order to to keep the government income the same, people in the lower tax brackets will be paying much more than they do now in taxes.

Not necessarily. I am saying one flat tax on income and nothing else. No wheel tax, no gas tax, no sales tax, no property tax. Nothing but an income tax. Take all these other taxes together and calculate that as a percentage for a low income family and you'll find that low income folks are taxed quite heavily today relative to their income.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

How is it not fair?

If you're making the statutory minumum (as hard as it is to believe that there are people out there who make $10K or less per year) - you have less disposible income than someone who makes 10 times that amount. That's just simple mathematics surely...?

There are some disadvantages to a flat tax.

In order to to keep the government income the same, people in the lower tax brackets will be paying much more than they do now in taxes.

Not necessarily. I am saying one flat tax on income and nothing else. No wheel tax, no gas tax, no sales tax, no property tax. Nothing but an income tax. Take all these other taxes together and calculate that as a percentage for a low income family and you'll find that low income folks are taxed quite heavily today relative to their income.

Very true - I make a tad more than $10K a year - but I figured out not so long ago that with taxes and health deductions I actually make less than I did in the UK. The sales tax is a deceptive one too as its added almost everything you buy - surely the ultimate stealth tax. Hard to say what it actually costs the average person per year - odds are you don't think much about it.

Edited July 24, 2007 by Number 6

[smoke20 0]

ET-yes they are both exempt from the 1st 10k. YOU said it was equal & fair for everyone. so i put simple round #s in there to try to get you to explain, how 1 person paying taxes on any percentage their income & 1 person not paying taxes on any of their income is fair. and you can't.

How is it not fair?

If you're making the statutory minumum (as hard as it is to believe that there are people out there who make $10K or less per year) - you have less disposible income than someone who makes 10 times that amount. That's just simple mathematics surely...?

There are some disadvantages to a flat tax.

In order to to keep the government income the same, people in the lower tax brackets will be paying much more than they do now in taxes.

Not necessarily. I am saying one flat tax on income and nothing else. No wheel tax, no gas tax, no sales tax, no property tax. Nothing but an income tax. Take all these other taxes together and calculate that as a percentage for a low income family and you'll find that low income folks are taxed quite heavily today relative to their income.

hell, i knew what you meant last night. i've just been waiting for you to spit it out. (this is america we all have to do our part, to keep it going in the right direction. even if it means paying a few more dollars than our neighbor)

[GaryC 7]

Flat taxes are regressive anyway; I don't think they're fair at all.

Bingo.

Gary, your ideas're nowhere near the mainstream or majority, not for the Republicans or the Democrats. And while you're certainly entitled to your beliefs, acting as if they're widely-held is disingenuous. Far's "kook fringe" goes, again, check your mirror. All I've advocated is allowing two of President Bush's three tax packages to expire, whereas you're accusing the wicked government of wanting to "take over every aspect of your life."

I am square in the middle of the mainstream. It's you that are on the fringe.

You advocate letting the Bush tax cuts expire. Why? Those tax cuts are what has made our economy as strong as it is. And you call yourself an economist.

Here is a very good article about the tax cuts. Follow the link and you will get a detailed explanation of each point from real economists that know what they are talking about. I am sure all you will do is bash the source. That is what your kind does when faced with the truth. But please read and learn something.

Ten Myths About the Bush Tax Cuts—and the Facts

Myth #1: Tax revenues remain low.

Fact: Tax revenues are above the historical average, even after the tax cuts.

Myth #2: The Bush tax cuts substantially reduced 2006 revenues and expanded the budget deficit.

Fact: Nearly all of the 2006 budget deficit resulted from additional spending above the baseline.

Myth #3: Supply-side economics assumes that all tax cuts immediately pay for themselves.

Fact: It assumes replenishment of some but not necessarily all lost revenues.

Myth #4: Capital gains tax cuts do not pay for themselves.

Fact: Capital gains tax revenues doubled following the 2003 tax cut.

Myth #5: The Bush tax cuts are to blame for the projected long-term budget deficits.

Fact: Projections show that entitlement costs will dwarf the projected large revenue increases.

Myth #6: Raising tax rates is the best way to raise revenue.

Fact: Tax revenues correlate with economic growth, not tax rates.

Myth #7: Reversing the upper-income tax cuts would raise substantial revenues.

Fact: The low-income tax cuts reduced revenues the most.

Myth #8: Tax cuts help the economy by "putting money in people's pockets."

Fact: Pro-growth tax cuts support incentives for productive behavior.

Myth #9: The Bush tax cuts have not helped the economy.

Fact: The economy responded strongly to the 2003 tax cuts.

Myth #10: The Bush tax cuts were tilted toward the rich.

Fact: The rich are now shouldering even more of the income tax burden.

http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/bg2001.cfm