We need more taxpayers not more taxes. With forty-some percent paying no taxes we need to know why. In my area small businesses are afraid of government and its increasing regulatory power. Government agencies are legislating by regulation which is unconstitutional.
We need more taxpayers not more taxes. With forty-some percent paying no taxes we need to know why. In my area small businesses are afraid of government and its increasing regulatory power. Government agencies are legislating by regulation which is unconstitutional.
where do you get your 40 percent? does that include children? or those that do pay taxes but don't file taxes? (believe it or not a lot of people don't even though they would get a refund)
I agree we need reform on welfare and disability but on the same page we need to make companies responsible for work related injuries that lead to disability situations. I would even be ok with some type of living excessive police to check those receiving such benefits to make sure they aren't driving to the store in their escalade while talking on their new iphone while paying with foodstamps, it could be hard to implement though.
I myself favor a flat tax, so I don't have to spend hundreds every year making my CPA a rich man. It should go across the board at the same rate, equal to all and equal for all.
I myself favor a flat tax, so I don't have to spend hundreds every year making my CPA a rich man. It should go across the board at the same rate, equal to all and equal for all.
I myself favor a flat tax, so I don't have to spend hundreds every year making my CPA a rich man. It should go across the board at the same rate, equal to all and equal for all.
Oh it could never be that simple. They need to also legalize marijuana or however you spell it and tax that!
I myself favor a flat tax, so I don't have to spend hundreds every year making my CPA a rich man. It should go across the board at the same rate, equal to all and equal for all.
excellent, double the tax rate for the average worker, that will help the economy, I'm sure *THIS* time the rich will let some of their humongous tax break trickle down........ sure......
a "flat tax" is nothing but a tax break for the rich made up for by a tax increase on the working class
most countries that have flat taxes are former soviet countries and have a rate of about 24%, considering the average worker in the u.s. has an effective tax rate of 1/2 that I can't see how in any type of thinking you think that will improve the economy, yes it will make taxes easier by far, but just because it is easier doesn't make it better.
I myself favor a flat tax, so I don't have to spend hundreds every year making my CPA a rich man. It should go across the board at the same rate, equal to all and equal for all.
I also agree.
Why is it considered more "fair" to have some pay more so others can pay less? Do the rich use more government services? Do they somehow extort their money from the poor? For the most part, the rich get that way because; a) someone is willing to pay them a ton of cash to work, or b) they have a business where enough consumers willingly give them money in exchange for something or c) someone made enough money by a or b to leave their heirs enough money to live off the investments (AKA lucky sperm club). I exclude government jobs from this example because then you only need to get someone to pay you with taxpayer money.
The best argument for a broad tax base (flat or close to it) I heard was from Thomas Sowell. He argued that unless you have "skin in the game" you will always be willing to vote for someone trying to "give" you something because others will pay for it.
If you accept the premise that man has unlimited wants but limited means, any tax structure that exempts a significant portion of the voters is doomed to failure. By sharing the tax pain of government services with everyone, voters will more carefully choose what they want government to provide.
Why is it considered more "fair" to have some pay more so others can pay less? Do the rich use more government services?
they benefit from having security to protect their wealth, grow defense contractors, have educated employees, use our highways, etc, yes they do.
Quote:
Do they somehow extort their money from the poor?
yes, there are numerous examples of anticompetitive behavior going on right now, and mandatory binding arbitration just adds to those abuses
Quote:
For the most part, the rich get that way because; a) someone is willing to pay them a ton of cash to work, or b) they have a business where enough consumers willingly give them money in exchange for something or c) someone made enough money by a or b to leave their heirs enough money to live off the investments (AKA lucky sperm club).
true in some cases, doesn't mean they are necessarily productive people though, a lot of gains are made just from maintaining monopolies/duopolies
Quote:
I exclude government jobs from this example because then you only need to get someone to pay you with taxpayer money.
The best argument for a broad tax base (flat or close to it) I heard was from Thomas Sowell. He argued that unless you have "skin in the game" you will always be willing to vote for someone trying to "give" you something because others will pay for it.
you may want to rethink that, get the majority of people involved and you will get communism, seriously when people are asked about ecoinomic ideal WITHOUT labels people tend to want communism as long as that is not what it is labeled
Quote:
If you accept the premise that man has unlimited wants but limited means, any tax structure that exempts a significant portion of the voters is doomed to failure. By sharing the tax pain of government services with everyone, voters will more carefully choose what they want government to provide.
however if you tax the lower and middle class too much you will get a revolt as they can't afford to live while the rich are living it up
They need to also legalize marijuana or however you spell it and tax that!
Linear Mode
