Posted on 09/04/2012 8:00:03 AM PDT by econjack
Excellent post!
And if the world is winning and you’re losing, the perfect place to restore your soul is “Storybook Boats”.
Ahhhh...
(Well, OK. First you have to get eaten by Monstro, the Whale...)
Pirates of the Potomac
Say “Hello” to my daughter while you are there. She went from one of the unemployed to the ranks of the employed because of the “Happiest Place on Earth”. She truly thinks it has earned its name!
crickets, nothing.
How I wish something rational could happen to the tax structure. Even if the total tax paid were the same the burden taken off the backs of so many would be an encouragement. We live in fear of the tax code, I do. That fear is intentional by the Feds and the States.
From: The Rich Don’t Pay Enough?
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2924199/posts
August 29, 2012 3:10:06 PM CDT · 16 of 21
Sequoyah101 to rudabaga
So, what is right about a progressive tax? Why penalize success? What about all that democracy and equality stuff?
As a nation, we are slaves to the tax code and it is the spoils tool of the politicians used to curry favor, show favoritism and punish rivals or threats.
Why a progressive tax? Who has the right to say that you or anyone else has earned more than his “fair” share and needs to have it confiscated out of proportion to his earnings? Do the successful get more benefits, use more of the roads or get better defense in disproportion to their earnings? If they pay for these things in disproportion why isn’t it “fair” for them to get more or a better deal?
True, we are part of the world economy but we are also not competing on level ground. Again, tariffs are the tools of politicians but in this case on a world stage.
If we are to truly be a part of the world economy we need to have a standard of living like the rest of the world that we compete in. Their labor can’t afford what ours does. Their dependents of the state not only don’t have what ours do, they have nothing and they die. World competition demands that you either lower the standards here, compete and produce more value per worker. The only other choice is wealth transference which will ultimately lower the standards here as well.
I have said that the wages in this country are too low and that corporations and the rich are keeping too much and it is because there are easy alternatives to cheap labor many of which are facilitated or even encouraged by the government. Those should be removed.
Let’s suppose we get rid of the progressive tax, and instead institute a simple flat tax, say 15%.
A millionaire could pay 15% of his income and not even miss it. But a 15% hit would really impact the quality of life of someone making $20,000 a year.
Something about that bothers me.
One solution is to exempt the first, say, $10,000 of income. But then you no longer have a flat tax. Someone making $30,000 a year would be paying a significantly higher percentage than someone making $12,000 a year.
It’s a mess. The solution I like best would be something like Cain’s 999 plan.
Actually it is pretty simple. 3 Trillion spending and 3.5 million occupants. Everyone pony up their 8,575.00 per year (children included). If you can’t pay then you can’t vote. I have a feeling that the 3 trillion number will fall pretty fast.
Me, too. To me, the best thing would be a flat rate tax with no deductions. (The Fair Tax with its "prebate" scares me because politicians get to set it and determine who qualifies...not good.) With a flat rate, everyone has something in the game if they earn an income. I would also love to see a voting requirement that says: If you didn't pay any federal income tax last year, you can't vote in federal elections this year. You could even go with Bortz's idea of 1 vote per $10,000 in federal income taxes paid, up to a limit of 5 votes. Man...would that send the libs into a tailspin!
Doesn’t bother me. I think everyone should pay their share of the burden whether they make $1 or $1 mil.
Too bad. Maybe it would drive people harder to bootstrap themselves to a higher income. If you're making $20K a year, that's the market trying to tell you something (e.g., upgrade your skill set). If you feel badly about such people, take some of your money and give it to them. However, don't take my money and give it to them. That's an endless money pit. There are many people who just won't work harder to raise their incomes via education and retraining. If that's their choice, so be it, but I'm tired of subsidizing lazy people. 99 weeks to find a job? One company has people who interviewed for jobs only to say they could start for 6 weeks. When asked why, it was because that's when their unemployment benefits ran out.
Enough!
Huh? I never said that.
I'm tired of subsidizing lazy people.
I certainly agree there. I'm all for bringing back some version of the WPA. If someone wants a welfare check, or food stamps, then they had better report to the nearest WPA unit to help clear brush, pick up litter, or whatever.
I thought Cain’s 999 was a cop-out; he used to support the Fair Tax. We need to stop taxing productivity and tax consumption.
End the Income Tax, repeal the 16th Amendment and enact the Fair Tax. You get to keep all you earn and pay taxes only when you make retail purchases of new goods.
EVERYBODY gets the “prebate.” There is no manipulating the the Fair Tax. Everybody gets the prebate. Everybody pays the same rate on their purchases.
Personally, I’d rather discard the prebate, but I understand why it is there.
The federal government was about the right size when it was mostly funded by the excise tax on alcohol. And Prohibition would not have been possible if the income tax hadn’t been introduced to replace the missing taxes from booze.
If you exempt the first $20K or whatever, you still have voters who are not sharing the burden that they vote onto others. And it is tricky to administer the exemption without continuing to have the IRS monitor and regulate our behavior.
An option is to have a sales tax that exempts the bare necessities, like food. A sales tax hits all voters, and they all would have an incentive to vote for low-tax politicians.
Another option is No direct federal taxation. Instead, the Feds could take a percentage of whatever each state collects. The CATO Institute calls this Reverse Revenue Sharing. Then the states can compete for taxpayers by implementing better tax systems.
You are 100% correct. One of the many problems that the US has is that too many folks have absolutely no skin in the game. What do they care if tax rates go up, down, or sideways?
I like the sales tax idea, but the exemptions would be tricky. Food is certainly an "essential" but I'll bet you'd soon have things like GM cars and anything made in Chicago declared "essentials" as well.
No, I know you weren’t saying that...the comment was directed to the libs...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.