I bet he can't figure this out:
Posted on 12/09/2010 11:01:26 PM PST by streetpreacher
I bet he can't figure this out:
Doesn’t Forbes plan involve high standard deductions that mean large numbers of people (those earning less than the standard deduction amount) contribute nothing in Federal income taxes ? I’d rather nobody was excluded from taxation, even if they get a lower rate, so they don’t vote without feeling the pain of government spending. And it can’t be a token amount, but must actually be painful.
Regardless, all federal departments and agencies established after 1960 should be eliminated.
Politicians should review the staunch reality of this cartoon:
Consumption (”Fair Tax”) tax. No one is exempted and can’t be gamed.
Tax on dividends and tax on capital gains is taxing money that’s already been taxed.
Me no likey.
Huh?
The trick. Eliminate deductions with a lower rate...then raise the rate. Do not fall for it.
The FairTax exempts all spending on new goods/services up to poverty level — that is the effect of the prebate. It exempts all spending on used items like vehicles and homes. It exempts spending on education.
If you didn’t know these things about the FairTax, you do now. The FairTax is not “fair” and would never work the way it is written.
PS. It also attempts to shift the costs of SS/M onto the high earners rather than the people that will eventually receive the benefits, but that is more complicated to explain.
Got to www.mytaxburden.org and plug in $50K income and married with two kids. Look at the right-hand side where all the figures are broken out.
The standard deductions and exemptions bring the taxable income down to $23,600 so their income tax is $2690, then they get the $1000 tax credit for each child, making their net income tax $690.
Thanks for that link. I wish they had a column in there for what it was for 2009 with the Bush cuts still in affect.
The declining value of NYT stock, however, is a real cost to the schmucks that own it.
Never a word about spending less though, its always about increasing revenue and spending more.
We would then nipp in the bud any desire going forward to revert back to Obamacare or become Europe or Canada in that regard.
Their would be no excuses to getting health insurance other than an individuals own stupidity. It would require removing the exemption of the industry from anti-trust and allow purchasing across statelines.
Other than that remove the exemption of real-estate of the 250k-500k no cap-gain on 2 yrs living their. Same deal on homes as you noted, all money made on homes 15% flat.
That would be a great flat tax plan.
Never trust a politician when they say they are going to restructure the tax code to reduce taxes. You can bet they will end up with more taxes in the long run.
IMHO Politics is a game of tax, spend.
“Taxed on total income, not just wages - “...
“Exempt first $15000 or so of income.”...
Double talk. What else will we exempt? How long will is take for the tax rate to start creeping up to 15.1, 15.2, 15.3 ...->20.5 or higher etc? Then comes state and local taxes.
Yeah, they had it up til Monday when the “Deal” was announced. For the $50K family of four, the result was the same — $690 net income tax.
The only difference since Monday is on the Social Security tax. That wasn’t there until Monday because nobody had anticipated Obama’s offering the 2% temporary holiday in SS tax. The “Deal” is the same as today’s rates as far as the Income Tax goes.
The FairTax is not “fair” and would never work the way it is sold to the public..
I was referring to the fact that the FairTax allows legal avoidance of the tax by simply saving and spending outside the country. The resulting change in spending habits of the top 1% of producers would result in a $500B/yr hole in revenues compared to what HR25 expects. So it would not be “revenue neutral” without raising the rate from 23% to something much higher. That would encourage even more legal and illegal efforts to avoid it, in a death spiral. The math just doesn’t work unless you assume no change in people’s spending habits.
It doesn’t even matter that the top 1% would be no worse off than in the past. What matters is that they could do better by doing their spending outside the country, taking advantage of the income tax cut and then also avoiding the FairTax.
They will raise taxes. Sure it will be simple. Everyone who’s probably not a Dem will get their taxes raised. The Dems will still have the Exec, Senate & SCOTUS, the media and the foundations etc. I sincerely doubt in the middle of a housing depression they will do away with the mortgage deduction. It will harm the banks and the economy in general. They won’t do it.
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.