What tax system do you prefer?

Supposn · Dec 18, 2010

Dina5Cowell said:
I think a flat income tax is regressive; that is, it impacts poor people more than the rich..... Plus, to earn the same level of income that we do now, low and middle class income taxes would sky rocket to make up for lowering taxes on the rich....

Dina5Cowell, g overnments often waive their sales taxes upon targeted items in consideration of lower income purchasers.

If revenue volumes are to be maintained, sales tax rates must be increased to compensate for tax waived items. The following are among the items I believe should be considered as candidates for waiver of any proposed sales tax:

Some states already waive their sales tax for purchases of food not accompanied by other services (such as restaurants or catering).

I advocate waiving sales taxes of capped amounts of monthly residential and monthly utility prices for specified items with regard to families? primary, (rather than motels or hotels) residences. [No waiver should be granted for the same classification of utility that?s provided to the same residence; (e.g. classifications such as telephone, electricity, water and sewage)].
These items are not all necessities but they are substantial portions of many lower income families? expenditures. The individual capped amounts for these waived items should be annually cost of living adjusted, (COLA?d). The items that I suggest should be so treated are residential rents and utilities.

I advocate waiving sales taxes upon a capped and COLA?d amount per person per trip using mass transportation. The waived tax would be an insignificant portion of commercial air transportation prices but significant to a wage earners? commuting expenses.

The sales taxes within many states have waivers for items that of many items that I believe are of lesser benefit to the poor or the lower earning wage earners but those waivers are proportionately more beneficial the middle rather than higher income earners. I?m opposed to them because I doubt that their aggregate economic benefit compensates for their reduction to government?s revenues.
Unfortunately they are politically popular. These waivers are likely unavoidable if a sales tax is to be enacted: School text books, school tuitions, medical services including insurance, over the counter and prescribed drugs are among such items.
I?m opposed to taxing transfers of wealth such as sales of stocks, bonds, securities or real-estate. I believe it?s less politically feasible to do so and it is economically unfeasible to tax them at the same rate as that of the general sales tax.

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn · Dec 18, 2010

obtuseobserver said:
you left out the best part.... we could get rid of the IRS

Obtuse Observer, the U.S. will retain the IRS or create some similar replacement for the IRS regardless of what tax method we utilize to provide federal revenue. Flat or progressive income tax or consumption tax, there will always be those who will attempt to evade paying their share of taxes.

Respectfully, Supposn

Supposn · Dec 18, 2010

Progressive income tax ain't progressive

Dina5Cowell said:
I think a flat income tax is regressive; that is, it impacts poor people more than the rich..... Plus, to earn the same level of income that we do now, low and middle class income taxes would sky rocket to make up for lowering taxes on the rich....

Dina5Cowell, I advocate replacing income taxes with a general consumption tax to whatever extent feasible.

The root cause of much income tax inequities is due to our progressive income tax rates. I suppose the purpose of progressive tax rates was two-fold. There?s the unfeasibility of attempting to greater tax the lowest income earners and their need for greater tax consideration. We have not fully acknowledged the extent of mischief due to our choosing progressive tax rates method to achieve our purpose.

I advocate replacing income taxes with a general consumption tax to whatever extent feasible. Taxing consumption rather than income provides significant economic advantages. Any such replacement must be done simultaneously and incrementally. If entire replacement is feasible, that?s what will eventually occur. In any case, lesser dependence upon significantly reduced income taxes would better enable us to reform whatever income taxes are remaining. Within any tax policy we can provide tax relief for lower income earners by methods that are more effective and less economically harmful.

Each perceived or actual tax inequity induces a modification of our tax regulations; each of these remedies actual or perceived inequities induces other factions to in turn lobby for additional remedies; we actually create additional inequities to compensate (rather than remedy) what?s claimed to be existing inequities. Our income tax regulations grow as a great onion; beneath the surface are layers upon layers of additional inequities being created.

Due to these additional tax inequities and loop holes the actual purpose of progressive rates, (to provide some tax relief for lower income earners) are severely undermined. Due to this and our FICA payroll tax are now the cause of our lower income wage earners being taxed much greater (than intended) proportions of their incomes. [Employers' portions of FICA payroll tax serves similar to a general sales tax except they additionally inhibit job creation. Employer?s portions of the FICA payroll tax drag upon our median wage and thus are additionally detrimental to the incomes of families more dependent upon wages and salaries].
Middle income earners pay greater than lesser earners? tax rates. Significant tax loop holes and considerations are more available only to speculators and are less available to entrepreneurs if they choose to reinvest their efforts and revenues to nurture and to sustain rather than divesting themselves from their enterprises. Similar tax considerations are completely unavailable to wage earners.
Progressive income tax rates lesser burden upon the middle rather than higher income earners is more an exaggerated fable rather than an actuality. Too often the reverse is the actuality.

Respectfully, Supposn

David · Dec 18, 2010

Supposn said:
Dina5Cowell, I advocate replacing income taxes with a general consumption tax to whatever extent feasible.

The root cause of much income tax inequities is due to our progressive income tax rates. I suppose the purpose of progressive tax rates was two-fold. There?s the unfeasibility of attempting to greater tax the lowest income earners and their need for greater tax consideration. We have not fully acknowledged the extent of mischief due to our choosing progressive tax rates method to achieve our purpose.

I advocate replacing income taxes with a general consumption tax to whatever extent feasible. Taxing consumption rather than income provides significant economic advantages. Any such replacement must be done simultaneously and incrementally. If entire replacement is feasible, that?s what will eventually occur. In any case, lesser dependence upon significantly reduced income taxes would better enable us to reform whatever income taxes are remaining. Within any tax policy we can provide tax relief for lower income earners by methods that are more effective and less economically harmful.

Each perceived or actual tax inequity induces a modification of our tax regulations; each of these remedies actual or perceived inequities induces other factions to in turn lobby for additional remedies; we actually create additional inequities to compensate (rather than remedy) what?s claimed to be existing inequities. Our income tax regulations grow as a great onion; beneath the surface are layers upon layers of additional inequities being created.

Due to these additional tax inequities and loop holes the actual purpose of progressive rates, (to provide some tax relief for lower income earners) are severely undermined. Due to this and our FICA payroll tax are now the cause of our lower income wage earners being taxed much greater (than intended) proportions of their incomes. [Employers' portions of FICA payroll tax serves similar to a general sales tax except they additionally inhibit job creation. Employer?s portions of the FICA payroll tax drag upon our median wage and thus are additionally detrimental to the incomes of families more dependent upon wages and salaries].
Middle income earners pay greater than lesser earners? tax rates. Significant tax loop holes and considerations are more available only to speculators and are less available to entrepreneurs if they choose to reinvest their efforts and revenues to nurture and to sustain rather than divesting themselves from their enterprises. Similar tax considerations are completely unavailable to wage earners.
Progressive income tax rates lesser burden upon the middle rather than higher income earners is more an exaggerated fable rather than an actuality. Too often the reverse is the actuality.

Respectfully, Supposn

Mind editing that into a larger, easer to read text size?

Or I could just quote it. :giggle:

obtuseobserver · Dec 18, 2010

Supposn said:
Obtuse Observer, the U.S. will retain the IRS or create some similar replacement for the IRS regardless of what tax method we utilize to provide federal revenue. Flat or progressive income tax or consumption tax, there will always be those who will attempt to evade paying their share of taxes.

Respectfully, Supposn

if we speculated the odds, were we to wager... I'd bet on me hoping to make money while realizing you're nearly certainly right

Supposn · Dec 19, 2010

David said:
Mind editing that into a larger, easer to read text size?

Or I could just quote it. :giggle:

Dina5Cowell, I advocate replacing income taxes with a general consumption tax to whatever extent feasible.

The root cause of much income tax inequities is due to our progressive income tax rates. I suppose the purpose of progressive tax rates was two-fold. There’s the unfeasibility of attempting to greater tax the lowest income earners and their need for greater tax consideration. We have not fully acknowledged the extent of mischief due to our choosing progressive tax rates method to achieve our purpose.

I advocate replacing income taxes with a general consumption tax to whatever extent feasible. Taxing consumption rather than income provides significant economic advantages. Any such replacement must be done simultaneously and incrementally. If entire replacement is feasible, that’s what will eventually occur.
In any case, lesser dependence upon significantly reduced income taxes would better enable us to reform whatever income taxes are remaining.

Within any tax policy we can provide tax relief for lower income earners by methods that are more effective and less economically harmful.

Each perceived or actual tax inequity induces a modification of our tax regulations; each of these remedies actual or perceived inequities induces other factions to in turn lobby for additional remedies; we actually create additional inequities to compensate (rather than remedy) what’s claimed to be existing inequities.

Our income tax regulations grow as a great onion; beneath the surface are layers upon layers of additional inequities being created.

Due to these additional tax inequities and loop holes the actual purpose of progressive rates, (to provide some tax relief for lower income earners) are severely undermined. Due to this and our FICA payroll tax are now the cause of our lower income wage earners being taxed much greater (than intended) proportions of their incomes.

[Employers' portions of FICA payroll tax serves similar to a general sales tax except they additionally inhibit job creation. Employer’s portions of the FICA payroll tax drag upon our median wage and thus are additionally detrimental to the incomes of families more dependent upon wages and salaries].

Middle income earners pay greater than lesser earners’ tax rates.

Significant tax loop holes and considerations are more available only to speculators and are less available to entrepreneurs if they choose to reinvest their efforts and revenues to nurture and to sustain rather than divesting themselves from their enterprises. Similar tax considerations are completely unavailable to wage earners.

Progressive income tax rates lesser burden upon the middle rather than higher income earners is more an exaggerated fable rather than an actuality. Too often the reverse is the actuality.

Respectfully, Supposn

fubbers · Jan 9, 2011

One of the most left states, Washington State has a single sales tax that all must pay, from Bill Gates to the poorest of poor.

Sales Tax
Business and Occupation Tax
No tax on food or Medications
Sales tax relief for the poor

A tax agreement with Oregon who has no sales tax but income tax. Where if a Washington resident buys a item in Oregon not tax and the same for Oregonians shopping in Washington.

Supposn · Jan 9, 2011

fubbers said:
One of the most left states, Washington State has a single sales tax that all must pay, from Bill Gates to the poorest of poor.

Sales Tax
Business and Occupation Tax
No tax on food or Medications
Sales tax relief for the poor

A tax agreement with Oregon who has no sales tax but income tax. Where if a Washington resident buys a item in Oregon not tax and the same for Oregonians shopping in Washington.

Fubbers, within your message there?s a short list of tax methods with no explanation of which states are employing which method.

Both the sentence preceding and the sentence following the list are simple declaratives; their meanings are clear. Your last, ? Where if a Washington resident buys a item in Oregon not tax and the same for Oregonians shopping in Washington?, is inexplicit.

What?s the point your trying to make?

Respectfully, Supposn

fubbers · Jan 10, 2011

Supposn said:
Fubbers, within your message there?s a short list of tax methods with no explanation of which states are employing which method.

Both the sentence preceding and the sentence following the list are simple declaratives; their meanings are clear. Your last, ? Where if a Washington resident buys a item in Oregon not tax and the same for Oregonians shopping in Washington?, is inexplicit.

What?s the point your trying to make?

Respectfully, Supposn

If I live in Vancouver or Seattle WA and decide to visit and shop in OR I pay no sales tax. Now if a Portlandian or a person say from Prineville OR decides to shop in WA they pay no sales tax...

Point is I love the sales tax idea not a income tax ...

myp · Nov 26, 2011

I'd like to bump this up and see what responses we get now because it really is an interesting question.

I have actually changed my views since lasting posting in this thread and do support a progressive tax (although only because I believe in taxing equally in value as opposed to money) although I still do not support a capital gains tax and most likely not an income tax. I think a progressive consumption tax might work well.

I also do not support an inheritance tax (just thought I'd throw that out there).

Supposn · Nov 27, 2011

Progressive consumption tax?

myp said:
I'd like to bump this up and see what responses we get now because it really is an interesting question.

I have actually changed my views since lasting posting in this thread and do support a progressive tax (although only because I believe in taxing equally in value as opposed to money) although I still do not support a capital gains tax and most likely not an income tax. I think a progressive consumption tax might work well.

I also do not support an inheritance tax (just thought I'd throw that out there).

MYP, our regular income tax rates increase in step with increasing income brackets. We describe that as ?progressive income taxation? that?s usually referred to as a ?progressive tax?.
A flat tax has only one single tax rate.

Sales taxes are the usual type of a consumption tax and value added tax describes a superior n administrative method for administering a sales tax.

Consumption taxes can be drafted to have a single tax rate or differing rates for various categories of taxed goods.

Any tax can be drafted to additionally grant some more consideration for lower income earners; to that extent the tax is made to be less flat.

How would a ?progressive consumption tax? be drafted?
How does ?taxing equally in value as opposed to money? fit into that?

A capital gains tax doesn?t exist. We do have discounts of regular rates that are applied to capital gains incomes.

Respectfully, Supposn

CatholicCrusader · Nov 27, 2011

myp said:
If you were to somehow be able to change the tax system of a country on your own, what system would you want and why? I recently saw this question posed on Reddit (a social bookmarking site for those not familiar with it) and was wondering how everyone here would respond.

Flat tax, plain and simple. 20% on individual income and 15% corporate. Plus the added luxery of abolishing the IRS. No deductions, no loopholes, no nothing.

Why? So everyone pays fairly and simple. Right now, some people pay all the taxes, and half of Americans pay none.

David · Nov 27, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
Flat tax, plain and simple. 20% on individual income and 15% corporate. Plus the added luxery of abolishing the IRS. No deductions, no loopholes, no nothing.

Why? So everyone pays fairly and simple. Right now, some people pay all the taxes, and half of Americans pay none.

That's true only of income taxes and that was a Repub idea.

CatholicCrusader · Nov 27, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
Flat tax, plain and simple. 20% on individual income and 15% corporate. Plus the added luxery of abolishing the IRS. No deductions, no loopholes, no nothing.

Why? So everyone pays fairly and simple. Right now, some people pay all the taxes, and half of Americans pay none.

David said:
That's true only of income taxes and that was a Repub idea.

I thought thats what we were talking about, Income Taxes.

David · Nov 27, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
I thought thats what we were talking about, Income Taxes.

You said no taxes. I was just clearing up that point.

dabdab · Nov 27, 2011

1- retch people are never retch because they work hard . that is a myth . they are retch for many different reasons ,good and bad ,honesty and good well and crockery , but non of them no matter how good he is can claim he can do it alone or he did it alone by himself . rather he depended on the socity to make the money so for those who are complaining from taxing the retch ether accept it or leave the planet there are thaousends ready to jump to the vacant opertionity .you are no thing you are a parasite , and we all love to be that parasite .
2- education and health are necessary for the benefit of the individual and society , so an exultant level has to be availabe free of charge of course , so is an acceptable level of shelter and nourishment . education and health are investment . shelter and nourishment are investment expenses .
3- no paper money and the state own the only bank . big brother will know and his virtual police will be 24 plowing in these transaction , if they find any thing suspicious , they raise a flag and a second level of virtual police consoledate other dat from his car gps and from his celphone no need to listen to his conversation just where and with home .
4- you want to work for big brother ? he will pay you well and you can still keep the old free shelter and food rations and save your salary in the bank (no interest but you can by some public shares and get the profits from it ) .you have free entrepreneurial spirit in your blood ? no problem big brother is your venture capitalist put up your project you get 20% I get 80% you want more / pay for it you can increase your share to 50% and we will split the Profits fifty fifty .you will be working your but out and geting retch if that what you want .
4- big brother own all the land and the natural resources for the benefit of all .
5-there are no Stock market, or wall street who needs it they never do any thing constructive . all they do is shuffle the money and take a cut without adding any real value and when the money is consumed by there cutting they cook the books or go bust .
5-there are no taxes what so ever . but big brother is a partner with every conceivable investment with his money and infrastructure no thanks to any retch man tax . big brother is the retch for all .
who want to be a partner ?

CatholicCrusader · Nov 27, 2011

dabdab said:
1- retch people are never retch because they work hard . that is a myth...........

I think you mean "rich" people. You just love your propoganda lies, don't you.

Ever heard of Bill Gates? Started from his dad's garage with just an idea and became the richest man in America. His dad was not rich.

I can repeat that story for all kinds of folks who came from poor families and became successes through hard work.

Quit drinking your Liberal KoolAid, its destroying your brain cells.

myp · Nov 27, 2011

Supposn said:
MYP, our regular income tax rates increase in step with increasing income brackets. We describe that as ?progressive income taxation? that?s usually referred to as a ?progressive tax?.
A flat tax has only one single tax rate.

Sales taxes are the usual type of a consumption tax and value added tax describes a superior n administrative method for administering a sales tax.

Consumption taxes can be drafted to have a single tax rate or differing rates for various categories of taxed goods.

Any tax can be drafted to additionally grant some more consideration for lower income earners; to that extent the tax is made to be less flat.

How would a ?progressive consumption tax? be drafted?
How does ?taxing equally in value as opposed to money? fit into that?

A capital gains tax doesn?t exist. We do have discounts of regular rates that are applied to capital gains incomes.

Respectfully, Supposn

Check this out for more on a progressive consumption tax: http://www.themoneyillusion.com/?p=7091

Also, a capital gains tax does exist right now.

myp · Nov 27, 2011

CatholicCrusader said:
Flat tax, plain and simple. 20% on individual income and 15% corporate. Plus the added luxery of abolishing the IRS. No deductions, no loopholes, no nothing.

Why? So everyone pays fairly and simple. Right now, some people pay all the taxes, and half of Americans pay none.

Why have a corporate tax at all?

Also, fairness of a flat tax is arguable- everyone might pay the same money percentage, but they won't pay the same percentage of value given the marginal value of money. And also, why on income? It discourages saving.

myp · Nov 27, 2011

dabdab said:
1- retch people are never retch because they work hard . that is a myth . they are retch for many different reasons ,good and bad ,honesty and good well and crockery , but non of them no matter how good he is can claim he can do it alone or he did it alone by himself . rather he depended on the socity to make the money so for those who are complaining from taxing the retch ether accept it or leave the planet there are thaousends ready to jump to the vacant opertionity .you are no thing you are a parasite , and we all love to be that parasite .
2- education and health are necessary for the benefit of the individual and society , so an exultant level has to be availabe free of charge of course , so is an acceptable level of shelter and nourishment . education and health are investment . shelter and nourishment are investment expenses .
3- no paper money and the state own the only bank . big brother will know and his virtual police will be 24 plowing in these transaction , if they find any thing suspicious , they raise a flag and a second level of virtual police consoledate other dat from his car gps and from his celphone no need to listen to his conversation just where and with home .
4- you want to work for big brother ? he will pay you well and you can still keep the old free shelter and food rations and save your salary in the bank (no interest but you can by some public shares and get the profits from it ) .you have free entrepreneurial spirit in your blood ? no problem big brother is your venture capitalist put up your project you get 20% I get 80% you want more / pay for it you can increase your share to 50% and we will split the Profits fifty fifty .you will be working your but out and geting retch if that what you want .
4- big brother own all the land and the natural resources for the benefit of all .
5-there are no Stock market, or wall street who needs it they never do any thing constructive . all they do is shuffle the money and take a cut without adding any real value and when the money is consumed by there cutting they cook the books or go bust .
5-there are no taxes what so ever . but big brother is a partner with every conceivable investment with his money and infrastructure no thanks to any retch man tax . big brother is the retch for all .
who want to be a partner ?

You know "big brother" is a deregatory term right? Also you looking to the government for capital investment and then saying Wall St. has no role is contradictory.

The kind of power you look to give government is scary. It has been tried in the past and generally led to a ROBBERY of the people's wealth. The rich people will still exist- they'll just exist in government

What tax system do you prefer?

Similar threads