A Flat Tax: Please help me understand how it is unfair to have a flat tax!

[Care4all]

our gvt can not tax all earnings as it stands now....

our gvt taxes, taxable income, not anyone's full income, just as our gvt taxes businesses on their profit, not their entire income.

this is why there is a standard deduction and personal exemption....the gvt can NOT tax you on necessities it can only tax you on your perceived profits.

someone making 10k being taxed $1000 bucks is taking food out of his mouth or a roof over their head.

I agree with a flat tax, but only if there is a personal deduction for everyone, where their immediate needs are not taxed.....

If businesses were taxed on their gross income and not allowed to deduct operating expenses, you would not be able to afford to buy anything.

The average corporate profit over the past 2 decades has been something like 8.5% which means that 91.5% of the average corp gross income is used up in operating expenses like payroll, supplies, raw materials etc.

If 100% of that was taxed, who do you think would be paying that tab?

why should individuals be flat taxed on all of their income, with no deductions, exemptions or expenses allowed while businesses are allowed these deductions?

if individuals will be taxed that way, then businesses should too.

probably better if no one and no business is taxed that way....but what cha gonna do? fair is fair.....right?

 

[DiamondDave]

I would exempt the first $30, 000.00 and have from there upward be taxed at a flat rate, including capital gains.
The $30, 000.00 exemption would, though, include a Millionnaire's first $30k as well.

And as you might be able to see... I have broken it down to show the inequity in that scenario as well... it is just another name for the same progressive bullshit

How do you propose to get people with no money to pay their equal share of the federal tax bill.

Let's say the budget is 2 trillion. Let's say we have 200 million people that have to pay that.

That comes to 10,000 per person. EQUAL TREATMENT. How are you going to make the 10,000 a year guy pay his EQUAL SHARE? Take ALL his money?

I did not promote equal 'share' or 'amount'... I promoted equal % on each and every dollar earned... no exceptions, no loopholes, no deductions...

So... since we tax on income and not amassed wealth of accumulation... your 'no money' scenario makes no sense... you earn no money in a given year and you pay no income taxes on it... they are paying the same % on every dollar earned from earning $1 and up though...

Now... if a person makes $1000 and the tax is 10%, they pay $100... someone else makes $1000000, they pay 10% on every dollar just like the guy who earned 1K, and that bill comes out to $100000... and the person making $10000000 pays $1000000... if there are 10X as many people making 1K as there are 100K, guess what, the need for 10K per person on average is still taken care of...

You are trying every progressive liberal trick in the book... I just do not fall for them

 

[Wiseacre]

Flat tax, fair tax, any kind of tax reform is basically a decision for who pays how much. Some people think the rich aren't paying enough, while others think that nearly half the income earners in this country aren't paying enough and are even getting a tax refund that's more than they paid in. It becomes a question of what's fair vs what's smart economically speaking. After all, you don't want to hinder economic growth and job creation, right? And we all know how much of a debate there is on just that part of the issue.

A flat tax really simplifies the whole thing, saves us all a lot of time and angst trying to fill out those damn 1040s and the associated forms. It essentially broadens the tax base, and we have more taxpayers carrying the burden. Which means somebody pays less, if the idea is to be revenue neutral. If it's not neutral, then we've just levied a tax on the lower half of the income ladder. Not going to win many elecions doing that.

Part of the debate revolves around capital gains, which is how the rich guys have made most of their money these last 30 years or so. Right now it's 15%, what happens if you raise that rate? The Left says virtually nothing, they'll invest anyway if demand goes up. Which is true if the economy is going well like it was back in the 90s under Clinton. But this ain't the 90s and things are nowhere near as positive now as they were then. Rich guys will put their money in various investments here or abroad to avoid paying higher taxes, that's just the way it is. So, while increased demand here would boost the economy, it won't be as robust if we didn't raise taxes on capital gains.

 

[DiamondDave]

our gvt can not tax all earnings as it stands now....

our gvt taxes, taxable income, not anyone's full income, just as our gvt taxes businesses on their profit, not their entire income.

this is why there is a standard deduction and personal exemption....the gvt can NOT tax you on necessities it can only tax you on your perceived profits.

someone making 10k being taxed $1000 bucks is taking food out of his mouth or a roof over their head.

I agree with a flat tax, but only if there is a personal deduction for everyone, where their immediate needs are not taxed.....

If businesses were taxed on their gross income and not allowed to deduct operating expenses, you would not be able to afford to buy anything.

The average corporate profit over the past 2 decades has been something like 8.5% which means that 91.5% of the average corp gross income is used up in operating expenses like payroll, supplies, raw materials etc.

If 100% of that was taxed, who do you think would be paying that tab?

why should individuals be flat taxed on all of their income, with no deductions, exemptions or expenses allowed while businesses are allowed these deductions?

if individuals will be taxed that way, then businesses should too.

probably better if no one and no business is taxed that way....but what cha gonna do? fair is fair.....right?

Business tax rates are a whole other argument... and we can debate that til the cows come home as well.. but this indeed is a discussion on a flat income tax for citizens

 

[DiamondDave]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

And as shown so many times.. that is smoke and mirrors... because in the end, we are taxed on total yearly income... all this myth of a system does is change perception on a progressive tax rate

 

[TheDecepticon]

If you make a million and you get divorced and your wife gets HALF...you ain't gonna STARVE.

If you make $30,000 and you get divorced and your wife gets half....you're fucked.

There. See why a flat tax isn't fair now?

 

[Wiseacre]

our gvt can not tax all earnings as it stands now....

our gvt taxes, taxable income, not anyone's full income, just as our gvt taxes businesses on their profit, not their entire income.

this is why there is a standard deduction and personal exemption....the gvt can NOT tax you on necessities it can only tax you on your perceived profits.

someone making 10k being taxed $1000 bucks is taking food out of his mouth or a roof over their head.

I agree with a flat tax, but only if there is a personal deduction for everyone, where their immediate needs are not taxed.....

If businesses were taxed on their gross income and not allowed to deduct operating expenses, you would not be able to afford to buy anything.

The average corporate profit over the past 2 decades has been something like 8.5% which means that 91.5% of the average corp gross income is used up in operating expenses like payroll, supplies, raw materials etc.

If 100% of that was taxed, who do you think would be paying that tab?

why should individuals be flat taxed on all of their income, with no deductions, exemptions or expenses allowed while businesses are allowed these deductions?

if individuals will be taxed that way, then businesses should too.

probably better if no one and no business is taxed that way....but what cha gonna do? fair is fair.....right?

Fair is fair, big biz should not be gettng tax breaks because they're big enough to lobby for it. I support a flat tax on business with the same deal as personal taxes, no matter how big you are you pay 15% or whatever it is. No loopholes, no subsidies, no special deals.

 

[DiamondDave]

Dave is hilariously stupid and obtuse on this issue.

Yeah... because I break it down in terms of facts.. show the inequality in all the bullshit systems based on subjective fairness...

That's the epitome of 'stupid'.. LOL

No, because you have a massive self created blind spot.

It's okay though, I just view you as a kind of retarded person now and find your retardedness amusing.

Blind to subjective 'fairness' on a playing field that can be continually changed in each and every differing circumstance?? You betcha..

But somehow I bet you would scream bloody murder if by law rich would get preferred treatment by government in a differing situation... like 1 vote per election per 10K earned... that is just as subjective of a benefit afforded by government simply based on income... Now I, on the other hand, object to unequal treatment in both scenarios... you only object to equal treatment when it does not directly benefit you or your cause, and you fully promote unequal treatment when it benefits you

 

[G.T.]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

And as shown so many times.. that is smoke and mirrors... because in the end, we are taxed on total yearly income... all this myth of a system does is change perception on a progressive tax rate

or - it's that you don't understand what "exempt" means.

Say the exemption is the first $30k you make.

If you make $30k or under for the entire year........then, at the end of the year - you're taxed $0

If you make $100k for the year, you're taxed on $70, 000......not $100, 000......because the first $30k was exempt.

How that doesn't make sense to you baffles me, and it's why article15 called you dumb.

 

[Wiseacre]

If you make a million and you get divorced and your wife gets HALF...you ain't gonna STARVE.

If you make $30,000 and you get divorced and your wife gets half....you're fucked.

There. See why a flat tax isn't fair now?

Not if you don't tax the 1st $20,000. I would assume the ex-wife has to pay taxes on her half of the alimony, if her total income exceeds $20,000. Most of the flat tax plans do not tax the 1st dollar, they give you a baseline at the poverty level or certain numberof exemptions if you got kids to support.

 

[Article 15]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

Interesting thought. Not sure how I feel about that though.

A low exemption rate would mean a massive hike on the poor and a high exemption rate is a massive cut for the wealthy.

I like a flat tax with a floor much better.

 

[DiamondDave]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

And as shown so many times.. that is smoke and mirrors... because in the end, we are taxed on total yearly income... all this myth of a system does is change perception on a progressive tax rate

or - it's that you don't understand what "exempt" means.

Say the exemption is the first $30k you make.

If you make $30k or under for the entire year........then, at the end of the year - you're taxed $0

If you make $100k for the year, you're taxed on $70, 000......not $100, 000......because the first $30k was exempt.

How that doesn't make sense to you baffles me, and it's why article15 called you dumb.

But you still earned 30K... in your progressive or floor system, it is supposedly *poof* non-existent??? Bullshit...

Like I said.. smoke and mirrors.... an attempt at deception like 30K is suddenly the same as zero.... and that is why you and ones like article15 are the ones who are either completely blinded, or just plain dumb... kinda like DieHard2, changing sea level and telling them it is all the same, it is all ok...

 

[Article 15]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

Interesting thought. Not sure how I feel about that though.

A low exemption rate would mean a massive hike on the poor and a high exemption rate is a massive cut for the wealthy.

I like a flat tax with a floor much better.

I'm not even sure where a decent rate lays for such an idea for that matter.

Just been running some numbers off hand it's kind of a wonky system.

 

[Article 15]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

And as shown so many times.. that is smoke and mirrors... because in the end, we are taxed on total yearly income... all this myth of a system does is change perception on a progressive tax rate

or - it's that you don't understand what "exempt" means.

Say the exemption is the first $30k you make.

If you make $30k or under for the entire year........then, at the end of the year - you're taxed $0

If you make $100k for the year, you're taxed on $70, 000......not $100, 000......because the first $30k was exempt.

How that doesn't make sense to you baffles me, and it's why article15 called you dumb.

It really is an amazing display of retardation.

 

[G.T.]

And as shown so many times.. that is smoke and mirrors... because in the end, we are taxed on total yearly income... all this myth of a system does is change perception on a progressive tax rate

or - it's that you don't understand what "exempt" means.

Say the exemption is the first $30k you make.

If you make $30k or under for the entire year........then, at the end of the year - you're taxed $0

If you make $100k for the year, you're taxed on $70, 000......not $100, 000......because the first $30k was exempt.

How that doesn't make sense to you baffles me, and it's why article15 called you dumb.

But you still earned 30K... in your progressive or floor system, it is supposedly *poof* non-existent??? Bullshit...

Like I said.. smoke and mirrors.... an attempt at deception like 30K is suddenly the same as zero.... and that is why you and ones like article15 are the ones who are either completely blinded, or just plain dumb

How is it smoke and mirrors? It's not, you just don't understand it.

I can't believe you're really this dumb.

you don't know what exemption means, and I suggest you look it up. "Bullshit" is not exactly an intelligent rebuttal.

If an exemption is for the first x-amount of dollars you make, then it's for the first x-amount of dollars you make - for everyone.

Meaning, as a rich guy, you subtract it from your taxable income - before they tally your tax bill.

So if you make $100, 000 and the first $30, 000 is exempt..............your tax bill is on $70, 000.

It's a pretty basic and concrete idea, it's not smoke and mirrors at all it's just that you don't understand it.

 

[TheDecepticon]

If you make a million and you get divorced and your wife gets HALF...you ain't gonna STARVE.

If you make $30,000 and you get divorced and your wife gets half....you're fucked.

There. See why a flat tax isn't fair now?

Not if you don't tax the 1st $20,000. I would assume the ex-wife has to pay taxes on her half of the alimony, if her total income exceeds $20,000. Most of the flat tax plans do not tax the 1st dollar, they give you a baseline at the poverty level or certain numberof exemptions if you got kids to support.

Well, it's not a FLAT tax if it has EXEMPTIONS, is it?
Jebus.

 

[DiamondDave]

or - it's that you don't understand what "exempt" means.

Say the exemption is the first $30k you make.

If you make $30k or under for the entire year........then, at the end of the year - you're taxed $0

If you make $100k for the year, you're taxed on $70, 000......not $100, 000......because the first $30k was exempt.

How that doesn't make sense to you baffles me, and it's why article15 called you dumb.

But you still earned 30K... in your progressive or floor system, it is supposedly *poof* non-existent??? Bullshit...

Like I said.. smoke and mirrors.... an attempt at deception like 30K is suddenly the same as zero.... and that is why you and ones like article15 are the ones who are either completely blinded, or just plain dumb

How is it smoke and mirrors? It's not, you just don't understand it.

I can't believe you're really this dumb.

you don't know what exemption means, and I suggest you look it up. "Bullshit" is not exactly an intelligent rebuttal.

If an exemption is for the first x-amount of dollars you make, then it's for the first x-amount of dollars you make - for everyone.

Meaning, as a rich guy, you subtract it from your taxable income - before they tally your tax bill.

So if you make $100, 000 and the first $30, 000 is exempt..............your tax bill is on $70, 000.

It's a pretty basic and concrete idea, it's not smoke and mirrors at all it's just that you don't understand it.

I know exactly what an exemption is... and what it does in a flat tax system is take it from equal % on every earned dollar (because the first X amount of dollars still exist and still have value) to a disguised progressive rate...

I have broken this down time and time and time again.... and showed it conclusively time and time and time again....

You choose to promote a system where a person, still earning income, can pay 0% or 3.3% or ~10% (assuming the 10% rate), all dependent on an income level just levied in a different way on paper...

Exemptions, like the levels in the current system, bring about unequal treatment on % taxation on total yearly income in a yearly income tax system... it is as simple as that.... and because you would benefit more than the 'evil rich' you choose to vilify, you are ok with it....

Like I said... if you support an unequal treatment system, just go ahead and state it... and show exactly how hypocritical you are when you scream about unequal treatment by government under law in other areas... because it is as simple as you promoting equal treatment when it benefits you, and unequal treatment when it benefits you

 

[Wiseacre]

If you make a million and you get divorced and your wife gets HALF...you ain't gonna STARVE.

If you make $30,000 and you get divorced and your wife gets half....you're fucked.

There. See why a flat tax isn't fair now?

Not if you don't tax the 1st $20,000. I would assume the ex-wife has to pay taxes on her half of the alimony, if her total income exceeds $20,000. Most of the flat tax plans do not tax the 1st dollar, they give you a baseline at the poverty level or certain numberof exemptions if you got kids to support.

Well, it's not a FLAT tax if it has EXEMPTIONS, is it?
Jebus.

It is if I say it is. LOL, Seems to me you should give a single person a different income floor for tax purposes over a married couple with kids. Frankly, I'd limit the number though, if you have 12 kids you only get an exemption for the 1st two.

Point is, there's gotta be some amount of income that's not taxed, the bottom wrung of the income ladder are not able to pay whatever the flat tax rate is. Whether you set it at the current poverty line or tax people at a different starting point depending on whether they have dependents, everything above that gets taxed.

 

[PLYMCO_PILGRIM]

If you want a purely percentage based tax system, and I do, the why not exempt the first X% on all income from taxes completely and then only levy a tax on the remaining 100-X percent?

That way everyone gets have some of their income 100% tax free.

I was discussing this same thing with Care4All earlier and I think that while it goes against the general "equitable responsibility for everyone" it upholds the american value of not stomping all over the little guy.

I get the opposition to this as I hold some reservations...i truly want everyone from $1.00 to a guadzilliion to pay the same % of income. However, I also understand the impact such a setup would have on poor and would be willing (if say i was involved in actually trying to debate and set up this type of system) to compromise and say that all americans pay zero taxes on their first $xx,xxx.xx in income.

I think by doing so many of those who oppose the idea of a flat tax, with no exemptions, would have a lot easier time supporting it since it doesn't crush the poor.

 

[Skull Pilot]

our gvt can not tax all earnings as it stands now....

our gvt taxes, taxable income, not anyone's full income, just as our gvt taxes businesses on their profit, not their entire income.

this is why there is a standard deduction and personal exemption....the gvt can NOT tax you on necessities it can only tax you on your perceived profits.

someone making 10k being taxed $1000 bucks is taking food out of his mouth or a roof over their head.

I agree with a flat tax, but only if there is a personal deduction for everyone, where their immediate needs are not taxed.....

If businesses were taxed on their gross income and not allowed to deduct operating expenses, you would not be able to afford to buy anything.

The average corporate profit over the past 2 decades has been something like 8.5% which means that 91.5% of the average corp gross income is used up in operating expenses like payroll, supplies, raw materials etc.

If 100% of that was taxed, who do you think would be paying that tab?

why should individuals be flat taxed on all of their income, with no deductions, exemptions or expenses allowed while businesses are allowed these deductions?

if individuals will be taxed that way, then businesses should too.

probably better if no one and no business is taxed that way....but what cha gonna do? fair is fair.....right?

People are selling their labor. That is what income is. There is no overhead for my time and skill that I sell to an employer.

If your job requires you to buy your own tools or use your own vehicle then you do get to write those things off just like a business.