Posted on 03/12/2002 9:37:30 AM PST by Willie Green
Edited on 09/03/2002 4:50:05 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
I'm pretty sure you might have misrepresented Willie a bit
I can guarantee, that I have not represented his statements as regards the NRST, nor his opposition to any real change in the current tax system as he has expressed such as he has here on FR.
The most I have ever seen him state concerning what the tax system should be, is that it should include more Tariffs (20% or more across the board), and that the SS/Medicare system should not be privatised (meaning we continue to pay taxes for that attrocity). This inspite of the fact he recognises it for what it is, a wealth distribution mechanism. He looks upon any relief of business taxes as the worst of sins.
He offers no recommendations for change, yet is death on anything to do with business or the capitalist economic system that is a part of this nation's success.
When a man on one hand, tells me he abhores some foreign system of taxation that turns out to be virtually identical to the present system in this country and on the other hand, resists any change in our own system of taxation.
Just what should I believe about Mr. Green and his positions and will distort the positions and information of others to suit his own whims, other than he is a demogogue for whatever hidden agenda drives him?
My initial gut instinct is to favor only the personal exemption for individuals and dependents -- adjusted for inflation from what it was 30-40 years ago.
And what should be the tax on Businesses, since you have decided that more than half the citizenry should not pay a visible or apparent tax?
Walter Williams, World Net Daily, 10-25-2000
According to the most recent U.S. Treasury Department figures, in 1997 the top 1 percent of income-earners (those with income of $250,000 and higher) paid 33 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 5 percent of income-earners ($108,000 and over) paid 52 percent, and the top 50 percent ($36,000 and over) paid 96 percent of income taxes. Guess what the bottom 50 percent of income earners paid?
If you're among those who pay little or no federal income taxes, what do you care about tax cuts? Moreover, if you think tax cuts pose a threat to government handout programs, you might be openly hostile and support Al Gore's silly "risky scheme" talk. So many Americans paying little or no federal taxes makes for a natural spending constituency. It's like me in the restaurant: What do I care about extravagance if you're footing the bill?
Just how do you intend to keep government largess buying votes for more bennies under control?
In 1948 the median family income was $3,187 and the personal exemption was $600.
As of 1992, from a base of $600 in 1948, the personal exemption was never adjusted enough to compensate for inflation. While it was raised from $1,000 to $2,000 in the 1986 tax reform, the exemption would have to be about $8,000 to provide the same benefits it did in 1948.
Source: Scott A. Hodge, "Back to Budgeting as Usual: New Spending Caps Leave Room for Plenty of Pork," Backgrounder No. 849, Sept. 6, 1991, Heritage Foundation
Now the question becomes who, under your ideal tax, is around to actually pay a proportionate tax such that it deters growth in government, or in anyway provides feedback to the citizen that government largess is way too much.
Considering that under the current system:
Walter Williams, World Net Daily, 10-25-2000
According to the most recent U.S. Treasury Department figures, in 1997 the top 1 percent of income-earners (those with income of $250,000 and higher) paid 33 percent of all federal income taxes. The top 5 percent of income-earners ($108,000 and over) paid 52 percent, and the top 50 percent ($36,000 and over) paid 96 percent of income taxes. Guess what the bottom 50 percent of income earners paid?
And Congress Critters live by the maxim:
A government which robs Peter to pay Paul can always depend on the support of Paul.
-George Bernard Shaw
And you want to up the personal exemption and retain the Individual Income Tax with SS/Mediscare taxes and Business Income/payroll taxes besides?
You are indeed a fool, or a socialist bent on maintaining things just as they are.
http://www.library.unt.edu/govinfo/subject/vital.html
| Standard Allowances | Option 1 | Option 2 | Option 3 | Option 4 | Option 5 |
| Single | $13,100 | $13,100 | $ 6,550 | $ 6,550 | $0 |
| Joint | $26,200 | $26,200 | $13,100 | $13,100 | $0 |
| Head of Household | $17,200 | $17,200 | $ 8,600 | $ 8,600 | $0 |
| Dependent Exemption | $ 5,300 | $ 2,650 | $ 5,300 | $ 2,650 | $0 |
| Revenue Neutral Tax Rate | 19.9% | 19.4% | 16.8% | 16.3% | 13.1% |
Source: Congressional Budget Office, 1995.
Gee that means under a "flat" tax a single person would pay:
15.3% ---- 15.3%(SS/Medicare) on wages/salary below $10,000,
33.5% ---- 18.2% + 15.3% on wages/salary and other income from $10,000-$75,000
18.2% ---- on wages/salaries and other income from $75,001 up.
And being constucted similarly to the Armey Flat Tax, Businesses would also pay,
18.2% --- on (Gross Receipts less allowed business costs) on profits greater than $10,000.
WG, I agree with an exemption of the first say ten thousand dollars of each and every taxpaying entities earnings, but tell me again why everybody else should shoulder the responsibility of other folks kids. If a deduction is to be given, shouldn't it be given to those who don't have kids, and/or whose kids don't use public schools and the like? Course, I'll gladly give up one for the other . Peace and love, George.
who don't have kids, and/or whose kids don't use public schools and the like?
Kids eat and need clothing and medicine just like you do George, or do you intend to exempt yourself but not a child for the same kind of costs?
Public schools are not paid out of Federal Taxes, George. And in many places, especially out here in the west, they mainly come out of County and City property taxes.
Do you intend to have the Federal Tax pay for public schools as well? That'll increase the tax rates over all as well as increase your godgov.
By the way, a breakdown of a Flat "income" tax, is laid out above for you in reply #24. It collects all revenue except SS/Mediscare, which should be privatised and phased out over time.
Thus I figure it from that basis, as two separate taxes, as they did for the Armey flat tax back in '95.
I'm not certain that public schools should be a valid example to support your contention George. IMHO, fedgov has no business being involved in public schools. That's a state tax issue, not federal.
fedgov has no business being involved in public schools.
Why does fedgov have any business being involved in your family/personal finances Willy?
Flat income taxes demand that every person be subject to audits and worse to assure accurate reporting of family income. That's the main reason we have an IRS and its investigation division, beside it's function of going after family businesses and corportations for the same reason.
Looking for income, just means that government has one more lever of control over the individual. Making the individual report it, assure he will always be held in legal jeopardy to the government regardless of whether or not the individual would actually owe a tax once it's figured out.
Any time you leave an opening for government to get into family/private financial information, you have a wide opening for political abuse of the individual.
And what should be the tax on Businesses, since you have decided that more than half the citizenry should not pay a visible or apparent tax?Well geezer, since you know of my stance on tariffs, you should also know my position regarding taxes on business: A Proposal to Abolish the Corporate Income TaxThe most I have ever seen him state concerning what the tax system should be, is that it should include more Tariffs (20% or more across the board),
and that the SS/Medicare system should not be privatised (meaning we continue to pay taxes for that attrocity).
SS taxes ARE way too high. It is absolutely unnecessary to tax so much to build up a "Trust" fund to be raided by EITHER fedgov OR the private sector. The ONLY thing necessary is to operate SS exactly the way an income redistribution system SHOULD be run:
Eligible recipients would recieve variable, rather than fixed, monthly payments to assure that the system always remains solvent.
NO NEED for EXCESS TAXES to ACCUMULATE in a Trust Slush Fund for Congress & the private sector to fight over the opportunity to pilfer!!!
Face it, geezer, you just aren't a true conservative!!!
SS/Mediscare should be ended in the most appropriate manner paying fair due to those who have had no options in the matter.
Bottom line, if they were to terminate the system entirely tomorrow. I would forego any owed me now and for the future for my childrens & grandchildren's benefit, relying only on my own earned retirement pentions.
I also thought you might get a kick out of the convoluted hogwash the antique_wheezer is babbling.
Getting whipped, eh Willie? Got to call in your cheering section tah help you out?
Then you won't mind calling in Taxman, pigdog, bigun, Principled, EternalVigilance, kevkrom, poohbah, VRWC_minion et. al. into the discussion as well.
We can make this a grand ole thread, like ole times.
Well geezer, since you know of my stance on tariffs, you should also know my position regarding taxes on business: A Proposal to Abolish the Corporate Income Tax
I notice you have failed to inform George of your radical opinion. It'll be interesting what he has to say about that. He has been known to threaten people who don't want to pay that kind of tax with hanging.
By the way, are you aware that the NRST abolishes the Corporate Income Tax, as well as all Corporate payroll taxes. That includes SS/Mediscare taxes by the way Willie.
Infact, phasing out SS/Mediscare over time would drop the NRST to 14.91% of non-saving/investment expenditures of the family.
But I notice you don't apparently care about such things yourself.
Face it, geezer, you just aren't a true conservative!!!
For one who maintains that it is ok to intrude into private family finances with an IRS audit via an individual income tax, I kind of wonder what your definition of "true" conservative is.
You are aware of course I have no qualms about appropriate tariffs, nor am I adverse to reduction of the NRST rate should such actually be effective in providing necessary revenues. Be aware the NRST taxes imports across the board besides, where the income tax does not.
And that the income tax, when levied on wages or any other business related payments to others as income, fails to tax foreign imports at all. Leaving only Tariffs and the potential for trade wars that they can bring on as well as the inflationary pressures that such tariffs bring into our domestic economy.
This month's total SS tax revenue = Next month's total SS tax disbursements.
Ahhh Willy how does that change tax rates?
That is essentially what is going on now with the exeception that there is an maximum amount each month the government will pay individuals.
Eligible recipients would recieve variable, rather than fixed, monthly payments
Are you suggesting we should increase SS payments as long as there is a "SS" tax surplus?
What kind of bureaucracy should we have to determine who gets what each month, and how much does that bureaucracy cost?
You accuse me of not being a "true" conservative. I who want to see and end to such socialist "distribution of the wealth" payments some day myself.
You are really out of it.
By the way 7.65% of the SS/Medicare tax is an employment excise levied on business, the other 7.65% of the SS/Medicare tax is levied as an "tax on income".
1) Is your tariff intended to take the place of that excise on employments levied on Corportations?
2) Do you intend to increase the Individual Income tax to make up the difference in the "Flat" income tax you and George are having a love fest over?
Inquiring minds want to know??
NO NEED for EXCESS TAXES to ACCUMULATE in a
TrustSlush Fund
There is no such slush fund, never has been and as far as I can see there never will be. The so called SS/Medicare taxes are paid into general revenues and not earmarked at all. You have just bought into political rhetoric rather than anything real.
Give yah a clue, Congress Critters do not deal in substance, when it can get away with feelings and perception instead. The latter is so much more manipulatable than reality.
SS and Medicare are allocated funding out of general revenues by the same kind of appropriation bills as any other government scam.
Unfortunately, silver coinage stopped in the U.S. 35+ years ago. And even pennys aren't made of copper anymore. Just the same, "base" metals like zinc and the cupro-nickel alloys sandwiched with copper are worth more (not much) than steel. Who the heck knows where they'll start making the blanks. Maybe they'll just make (or already are) the metal coil & blanks in Mexico and do the final coining (imprint) here. Anyway you look at it, it sucks.
I suppose I owe you a debt of gratitude.
Thank-you, geezer!!!
Glad to discuss my favorite topic anyday. Let some more folks know about your thread so's they can help bump it for you too :o)
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.