Home Non Cigar Related

Tax Revolt

KriegKrieg Posts: 5,093 ✭✭✭
For anyone who is interested, it is supposed to send congress a message about our tax code. It will culminate into a real tax rally on April 15th in DC. If you hate our tax system, and are getting tired of being punished for trying to achieve, go ahead and sign up.
The Online Tax Revolt is open to every American who believes taxes and spending are out of control, harmful to our country and a threat to our nation's future. Join other Americans as we march online from across the country to Washington, DC and rally together on April 15! www.onlinetaxrevolt.com

Comments

  • gripnripgripnrip Posts: 494 ✭✭✭
    Right on, Brutha! I'll spread the word....
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    not to sound like Dale Gribble, but i hate lists. should the government get too out of hand guess what lists are gunna be seized first?

    the NRA
    and this one...


    good cause but i choose to do my protesting at the ballot box.
  • kuzi16:
    not to sound like Dale Gribble, but i hate lists. should the government get too out of hand guess what lists are gunna be seized first?

    the NRA
    and this one...


    good cause but i choose to do my protesting at the ballot box.
    I can't tell you how many times I was called Bobby Hill from my teachers growing up. Funny show though. Dale Gribble "He also keeps a single cigarette and match in a plastic bag under his hat as his last "smoke" for when he thinks he will soon die."

    I wish I could do that with a cigar...
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    nightmaremike31:


    I wish I could do that with a cigar...
    No reason you couldn't . . . though you wouldn't keep it in your hat . . . and the ladies might keep asking you "Are you happy to see me?"
  • fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,024 ✭✭
    It is time for the "Fair tax"
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    fla-gypsy:
    It is time for the "Flat tax"
    Fixed ;)
  • kuzi16kuzi16 Posts: 14,633 ✭✭✭✭
    xmacro:
    fla-gypsy:
    It is time for the "Flat tax"
    Fixed ;)
    no. "fair tax"

    if i understand it correctly, the fair tax would work as follows:
    first eliminate all income taxes and all corporate taxes. next institute an across the board sales tax on all NEW goods in the range of 22% - 25% finally, every person in the US would get a check once or twice a year for the tax rate percentage of the poverty level. so if the poverty level is 10K and the tax rate is 20% everyone would get a check for $2000 if it was once a year (or $1000 if twice a year)

    this way those who make less than the poverty line dont pay taxes and those who buy more stuff (the rich) will pay the bulk of the taxes.


  • Matt MarvelMatt Marvel Posts: 930
    kuzi16:
    xmacro:
    fla-gypsy:
    It is time for the "Flat tax"
    Fixed ;)
    no. "fair tax"

    if i understand it correctly, the fair tax would work as follows:
    first eliminate all income taxes and all corporate taxes. next institute an across the board sales tax on all NEW goods in the range of 22% - 25% finally, every person in the US would get a check once or twice a year for the tax rate percentage of the poverty level. so if the poverty level is 10K and the tax rate is 20% everyone would get a check for $2000 if it was once a year (or $1000 if twice a year)

    this way those who make less than the poverty line dont pay taxes and those who buy more stuff (the rich) will pay the bulk of the taxes.


    The sales tax is also added into the price. So, instead of being listed as $9.00 and then you pay an extra .08 cents or so at the register, it's listed as $9.08. The store then pays sends the sales tax in, just like they do anyway. I'm not sure if that's the exact way it works, but that gives you a general idea.

    http://www.fairtax.org
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    kuzi16:
    no. "fair tax"

    I meant Flat tax; fair tax isn't much different than our current progressive system where the richer you are, the more you pay, and there are vast swaths of the country that pay nothing. Taxes suck, plain and simple - they should be a shared burden, one that everyone suffers through, instead of a few people paying, and the rest getting a wealth transfer. If everyone suffers under the same burden, you'll stop hearing people call for tax increases on "the wealthy", which is the same as saying "raise taxes on someone else except for me". The law applies equally to prince and pauper alike; taxes shouldn't be any different

  • Matt MarvelMatt Marvel Posts: 930
    xmacro:
    kuzi16:
    no. "fair tax"

    I meant Flat tax; fair tax isn't much different than our current progressive system where the richer you are, the more you pay, and there are vast swaths of the country that pay nothing. Taxes suck, plain and simple - they should be a shared burden, one that everyone suffers through, instead of a few people paying, and the rest getting a wealth transfer. If everyone suffers under the same burden, you'll stop hearing people call for tax increases on "the wealthy", which is the same as saying "raise taxes on someone else except for me". The law applies equally to prince and pauper alike; taxes shouldn't be any different

    I'll admit, I'm not the most educated on this. Isn't a progressive tax what you want? I've always thought a flat tax sounded unfair. An affordable flat tax for the wealthy isn't going to be as affordable for someone who isn't. I guess it depends on the rate. I don't know, like I said, I'm not that educated on this. Everything I've read on the Fair Tax sounds pretty damn good though.
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    It really comes down to your basic political philosophy. I'd like to see something that doesn't favor or discriminate, regardless of the person being taxed. A true flat tax is one rate across the board. Let's say it's 20% - the person making $20k/yr and the person making $1mill/yr are taxed at this rate - the person making $20k pays $4k in taxes and keeps the rest; the person making $1mill pays $200k and keeps the rest. Both are treated equally under the law, and both keep 80% of what they make, with no rebates to either one, and everyone having a stake in the tax system, so no one's crying out for other people to be taxed higher while asking for their own taxes to go down or stay the same.

    The current progressive code has many parts of the country paying zero taxes (I forget the income cutoff), and has the Gov't paying them rebates - so there are people who are paying nothing in taxes and getting rebates, which is just a wealth transfer. Under the current tax code, that person making $1mill pays closer to 40% of their income in taxes, and the person making $20k pays no taxes, and very likely gets a few thousand dollars in "rebates" from the Gov't each year. It's true that the flat tax would raises the taxes on those making less while cutting the taxes for those making more; but we'd have equality in taxes, with everyone paying their share equally and no one being favored or discriminated against in the tax code. It'd also simplify your taxes, to the point most people could figure what they owe on a postcard.

    But anyway, tax policy is really all about incentives - the reason people argue so much over taxes is because human behavior is impossible to predict accurately. High taxes cause people to flee high-tax states, and at some point, when taxes get too high, tax-payers start figuring they're better off trying to evade taxes rather than paying them; but if taxes are low, people figure the penalties aren't worth the risk of tax evasion and they pay their full taxes. The problem is, if taxes get too low, the Gov't doesn't have enough money - this can be a good or bad thing, depending on your politics.

    Bottom line is, taxes create or dampen incentives for people to spend and invest; the reason we keep arguing over it is because we're all trying to find the right kind of structure where the Gov't rakes in enough money to operate, without dampening peoples desire to work hard and get ahead in life. We all have the same goal in mind, but we disagree on the path to that goal

  • KriegKrieg Posts: 5,093 ✭✭✭
    xmacro:
    kuzi16:
    no. "fair tax"

    I meant Flat tax; fair tax isn't much different than our current progressive system where the richer you are, the more you pay, and there are vast swaths of the country that pay nothing. Taxes suck, plain and simple - they should be a shared burden, one that everyone suffers through, instead of a few people paying, and the rest getting a wealth transfer. If everyone suffers under the same burden, you'll stop hearing people call for tax increases on "the wealthy", which is the same as saying "raise taxes on someone else except for me". The law applies equally to prince and pauper alike; taxes shouldn't be any different


    I know some people think what this country needs is ANOTER flat tax idea. So ... here's some flat tax vs. FairTax issues some of you may want to consider.
    1. In 1986 the Congress reformed our tax code to essentially give us a flat tax ... a flat tax with two rates. Fifteen and twenty-eight percent. Most deductions were eliminated. Today's tax code is the result of that effort.

    2. A flat tax leaves the IRS in place. You'll still have to report your income to the IRS every year, and you'll still be subject to audits.

    3. Social Security and Medicare payroll taxes? Still there.

    4. Do you get 100% of your paycheck? No. Withholding will still be there.

    5. Business taxes? Still there .. and they'll remain embedded in the price of every good and service you buy, so you'll be paying them.

    6. Corporate board meetings? They'll still spend an inordinate amount of time working on the tax implications of business decisions, rather than just basing their business moves on what's best for their customers and shareholders.

    7. K Street lobbyists? They're still there too. They'll still be drawing their six-figure incomes while they game the new flat-tax for the benefit of their clients.

    8. Bring American businesses back home? Nope. Business taxes are still there, so American businesses will still locate their operations overseas in order to escape our punishing business income taxes.

    9. Death Tax? Gift Tax? Still there in all the flat tax proposals I've seen.

    10. Will the flat tax bring American wealth back home? The latest estimates put $10 trillion of American wealth in offshore financial corporations. There is only one reason that money isn't back here working ... and that's our income tax structure. Will the flat tax bring that money back home? Nope. The FairTax? Yup.

    11. What about the poor? They're not paying income taxes now ... will they pay the flat tax? No way! But politicians will still be looking for a way to raise taxes on the rich so that they can relieve the poor, poor pitiful poor of the responsibility for paying for their own Social Security and Medicare.

    12. Will all Americans be able to buy the basic necessities of life without any federal tax consequences under the flat tax? No. The FairTax? Yes.

    13. Will foreign visitors to our shores contribute to our Social Security and Medicare programs under the flat tax? No. The FairTax? Yes.

    From my point of view, the flat tax pales in any comparison to The FairTax.


  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    There's more than one kind of flat tax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Recent_and_current_proposals

    My biggest gripe with the fair tax is that it keeps in place redistribution of wealth - it doesn't treat everyone equally and it plays favorites depending on which political party is in power and who they're courting; the Dems may give tax breaks to their political base when they're in power, and the Repubs do the same for their base - a tax code that stops this practice would be preferable. A true flat tax is one rate for all Americans, regardless of income; maybe with a second rate for corporations (yeah, I know it's double taxation). Fair tax is too much like our current code, which can be changed on a whim to punish or favor whichever political group the politicians want. I guess we agree on what needs fixing, but I just have doubts that the fair tax won't morph into the monstrosity that our progressive tax system is in now

  • KriegKrieg Posts: 5,093 ✭✭✭
    xmacro:
    There's more than one kind of flat tax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flat_tax#Recent_and_current_proposals

    My biggest gripe with the fair tax is that it keeps in place redistribution of wealth - it doesn't treat everyone equally and it plays favorites depending on which political party is in power and who they're courting; the Dems may give tax breaks to their political base when they're in power, and the Repubs do the same for their base - a tax code that stops this practice would be preferable. A true flat tax is one rate for all Americans, regardless of income; maybe with a second rate for corporations (yeah, I know it's double taxation). Fair tax is too much like our current code, which can be changed on a whim to punish or favor whichever political group the politicians want. I guess we agree on what needs fixing, but I just have doubts that the fair tax won't morph into the monstrosity that our progressive tax system is in now

    Flat tax has been tried. And it was/is a miserable failure. You should really pick up the FairTax book (both of them) it will really open your eyes.
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    No, it hasn't been tried, at least not in the US - what's been tried is a progressive system that increases taxes the more you make.

    I'd rather trust a tax system that's already in place and has results we can look at , and that is advocated by a highly successful businessman with experience in the private sector , than a theoretical system that's advocated talk show host with little to no background in economics

  • TheedgeTheedge Posts: 316
    How about property taxes? Should a person in a $500,000 house pay more than a person in a $100,000 house? Why? Do the higher taxes discourage people from building?
  • fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,024 ✭✭
    I said Fair Tax system and that is what I meant. Those that consume (buy) more would pay more. The current system only taxes those of us who work (have income). There are plenty of folks who live on "old money" or who hide their income sufficiently so they pay nothing, but still enjoy the services (so called) that the Govt provides. Everyone should pay, not just us working stiffs who aren't smart/rich enough to hide/protect our income from the income tax.
  • VulchorVulchor FloridaPosts: 4,844 ✭✭✭
    I like it Gypsy, maybe the only way to be fair. Unfortuanately, issue then becomes, is it a set national tax rate----which of course creates other issues and concerns as far as the federal govt.
  • TheedgeTheedge Posts: 316
    That’s part of the problem fla-gyspy. The rich corporate types are smarter than our elected leaders. That’s why they are the rich corporate types, and not in office. Push their buttons enough, and they have enough money to just leave. I find it a bit amusing that the former head of our local democratic caucus, is now an expatriate living in Mexico to avoid taxes.

    I see someone has organized a tea party event in town tomorrow night. I'm thinking about checking it out, but these things tend to bring out the really wacka doos.
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    fla-gypsy:
    I said Fair Tax system and that is what I meant. Those that consume (buy) more would pay more. The current system only taxes those of us who work (have income). There are plenty of folks who live on "old money" or who hide their income sufficiently so they pay nothing, but still enjoy the services (so called) that the Govt provides. Everyone should pay, not just us working stiffs who aren't smart/rich enough to hide/protect our income from the income tax.
    A few things:
    1) You're describing a consumption tax; fair tax is more complicated
    2) The old money and super-wealthy are reliable democrat donors (think George Soros) - there's no way the dems are gonna support this
    3) Business is gonna rail against this because it'll increase the price of domestic goods, while leaving foreign goods untaxed (an attempt to do so would probably be seen as a tariff and invite WTO sanctions); so Repubs aren't gonna support this idea
    4) If the fair tax is passed, it's still subject to manipulation when Congress gets to decide what products are taxed at which rate - favored industries will get a lower consumption tax slapped on them than unfavored industries

    That's why I don't like the fair tax; it leaves too much room for manipulation by Congress

  • PuroFreakPuroFreak Posts: 4,131 ✭✭
    xmacro:
    fla-gypsy:
    I said Fair Tax system and that is what I meant. Those that consume (buy) more would pay more. The current system only taxes those of us who work (have income). There are plenty of folks who live on "old money" or who hide their income sufficiently so they pay nothing, but still enjoy the services (so called) that the Govt provides. Everyone should pay, not just us working stiffs who aren't smart/rich enough to hide/protect our income from the income tax.
    A few things:
    1) You're describing a consumption tax; fair tax is more complicated
    2) The old money and super-wealthy are reliable democrat donors (think George Soros) - there's no way the dems are gonna support this
    3) Business is gonna rail against this because it'll increase the price of domestic goods, while leaving foreign goods untaxed (an attempt to do so would probably be seen as a tariff and invite WTO sanctions); so Repubs aren't gonna support this idea
    4) If the fair tax is passed, it's still subject to manipulation when Congress gets to decide what products are taxed at which rate - favored industries will get a lower consumption tax slapped on them than unfavored industries

    That's why I don't like the fair tax; it leaves too much room for manipulation by Congress

    The Democrats and Republicans wouldn't support a flat tax either. As a matter of fact, I don't see enough of either party, as they stand today, to support any real major change in the tax code. That's why we need a massive overhaul of our members of congress before we can even think about overhauling anything else. I am speaking of both Democrats AND Republicans. I'm going to have trouble voting for any incumbents this election year simply due to the fact that none of them are worth a damn. All partisan politics aside, our government at the federal, and state level in many cases, is in need of some real change.
  • xmacroxmacro Posts: 3,402
    ^ Agree completely ^
  • cabinetmakercabinetmaker Posts: 2,560 ✭✭
    I agree, our incumbants are horrible (most, not all) and in need of replacement. That is the only way any meaningful change in policy can happen.
  • fla-gypsyfla-gypsy Posts: 3,024 ✭✭
    xmacro:
    fla-gypsy:
    I said Fair Tax system and that is what I meant. Those that consume (buy) more would pay more. The current system only taxes those of us who work (have income). There are plenty of folks who live on "old money" or who hide their income sufficiently so they pay nothing, but still enjoy the services (so called) that the Govt provides. Everyone should pay, not just us working stiffs who aren't smart/rich enough to hide/protect our income from the income tax.
    A few things:
    1) You're describing a consumption tax; fair tax is more complicated
    2) The old money and super-wealthy are reliable democrat donors (think George Soros) - there's no way the dems are gonna support this
    3) Business is gonna rail against this because it'll increase the price of domestic goods, while leaving foreign goods untaxed (an attempt to do so would probably be seen as a tariff and invite WTO sanctions); so Repubs aren't gonna support this idea
    4) If the fair tax is passed, it's still subject to manipulation when Congress gets to decide what products are taxed at which rate - favored industries will get a lower consumption tax slapped on them than unfavored industries

    That's why I don't like the fair tax; it leaves too much room for manipulation by Congress

    1. I wasn't attempting to give an in depth analysis of the entire plan, I know it is more complex than that. Considering you would no longer pay Income tax it would be a no brainer to pay as I consume. 2. You got that right, that is why we need to throw that bunch out 3.You are right, all incumbents must go and we need to install a populist govt. 4. You have to establish it through a series of Const amendments to prevent easy tampering. I have studied the plan some and I like it.
Sign In or Register to comment.