Flatten The Flat-taxers

Flanders

ARCHCONSERVATIVE
Sep 23, 2010
7,628
748
205
Here comes the flat tax —— AGAIN! As I’ve said a thousand times any talk about an economic solution to the nation’s problems is a waste of time if you’re not going to repeal the XVI Amendment —— THE TAX ON INCOME. All of the babbling about creating jobs, stimulating growth, reducing the deficit, and the biggest scam of all “economic equality” amounts to nothing more than useful idiots spreading government propaganda. Those who advocate a flat tax are the worst of the lot:

The need for a simple flat tax was underscored recently by the comprehensive tax reform plan released by the outgoing chairman of the House Ways & Means Committee, Dave Camp (R–Mich.).

Every time the government “reforms” the tax code Americans paying a tax on their incomes get buried deeper than they were before reform.

No one ever mentions it, but well-intentioned reforms can be done one at a time. I get the impression the flat-taxers are putting this one in the mix as a sop:


. . . the hideous alternative minimum tax would be abolished; . . .

So how come it wasn’t abolished before now? It seems to me that abolishing just one hideous deformity should be a lot easier than getting a flat tax. I wonder why Dave Camp never thought of that!

Notice that flat-taxers would scrap the code without repealing the XVI Amendment:


Junk the federal income tax code and start over!

Junking the tax code treats a symptom while spreading the disease.

Starting over means starting over at:


. . . a 17% tax rate for all, with generous deductions for individuals and families ( a family of four would owe no federal income tax on their first $46,000).

Seventeen percent is a floor not a ceiling. Does anyone really believe that Congress will NOT raise that 17% to 50% or more before the ink is dry on the legislation? Does anyone really believe that Congress will pass a law against raising the 17% ceiling? Even if Congress built protection into legislation there is a good chance a president will raise the ceiling by executive order. Hell, there’s a good chance the IRS will raise the tax rate on its own authority.

A flat tax does not deal with any of the evils inherent in a tax on income. I’m pretty sure that “generous deductions” under a flat tax includes charitable deductions. Quasi-voluntary contributions to get the “generous deduction” is better that forced contributions, but it does not get the government out of the coerced charity business which happens to be the greatest source of evil done by a tax on income.

Finally, I’ve yet to hear a flat-taxer like Steve Forbes say abolish the tax writeoff for advertising; a tax that is passed on to the rest of us in the form of higher prices on everything.


Steve Forbes Forbes Staff
“With all thy getting, get understanding."
The Tax Code: Make It Flat

The Tax Code: Make It Flat - Forbes
 
I agree. Why should we tax women who can't afford boob jobs?

All jokes aside, eliminating 75,000 pages of tax code would have a benefit. No?
 
Last edited:
I agree. Why should we tax women who can't afford boob jobs?

All jokes aside, eliminating 75,000 pages of tax code would have a benefit. No?

A flat tax wouldn't get rid of it. The IRS still would have rules about which business spending counts as an expense and which doesn't. That's what 90% of the IRS code involves.

The 16th Amendment needs to be repealed and the federal government needs to adopt a consumption tax. That's the only way to get rid of the IRS.
 
I agree. Why should we tax women who can't afford boob jobs?

All jokes aside, eliminating 75,000 pages of tax code would have a benefit. No?

A flat tax wouldn't get rid of it. The IRS still would have rules about which business spending counts as an expense and which doesn't. That's what 90% of the IRS code involves.

The 16th Amendment needs to be repealed and the federal government needs to adopt a consumption tax. That's the only way to get rid of the IRS.

I guess that depends on ones' definition of the word 'flat'. Maybe 'simplification' is a better term. I would argue that if 75,000 pages of bureaucratic mumbo jumbo were written on one page, there would be more certainty and less cost for everyone. So some tax lawyers would become shovel ready ditch diggers...big deal.
 
All jokes aside, eliminating 75,000 pages of tax code would have a benefit. No?

To percysunshine: Repealing the XVI Amendment would do the same thing.

All the ignorant wingnuts love the flat tax. They love paying more than their fair share while giving billionaires the break instead.

To Synthaholic: I’m not sure who decides “fair share.” I’m more interested in NOT using income tax dollars to create and maintain tax dollar millionaires/billionaires.

Sooo... you are an accountant who needs the government to invent a job for you?

To percysunshine: Good one. That’s the heart of it. Use income tax dollars to create a tax dollar job. The accountant then pays his income tax with tax dollars.

Lawyers and accountants do very well at the tax tub; mostly through legislative obfuscation, and deliberately complicated tax codes.

Lawyers have seniority at the tub which is not an endorsement for their necessity. Because of lawyers, State Supreme Court Justices don’t interpret laws as much as they untangle them.

Accountants learn from lawyers. Federal, state, and local tax codes prove it. A flat tax is an accountant’s worst nightmare.

Accountants are the most interesting because they grabbed a prominent spot at the trough without benefit of a long public relations campaign. That is quite an accomplishment when you stop and think about it. The positive image of lawyers in today’s America is largely based on literature, stage plays, radio, talking pictures, and TV. On the other hand the only image accountants have is the one that Charles Dickens gave them in David Copperfield.

If accountants are ever called upon to upgrade their professional image, I can just see the TV shows that will suddenly appear. One such show might be titled Uriah Heep: Inner-City Tax Consultant. Another might be titled Uriah Heep: For the Defense. And can’t you just picture a scene in a hospital emergency room where a gurney, piled high with bloodstained IRS forms, is being rushed into surgery as our accountant hero barks money-saving commands at admiring female assistants?


The 16th Amendment needs to be repealed and the federal government needs to adopt a consumption tax. That's the only way to get rid of the IRS.

To bripat9643: A consumption tax is not a bad method of tax-gathering. An increase in a consumption tax harms the economy; that acts as a check on government growth, and all but kills welfare state thinking.
 
Accountants are the most interesting because they grabbed a prominent spot at the trough without benefit of a long public relations campaign. That is quite an accomplishment when you stop and think about it. The positive image of lawyers in today’s America is largely based on literature, stage plays, radio, talking pictures, and TV. On the other hand the only image accountants have is the one that Charles Dickens gave them in David Copperfield.

If accountants are ever called upon to upgrade their professional image, I can just see the TV shows that will suddenly appear. One such show might be titled Uriah Heep: Inner-City Tax Consultant. Another might be titled Uriah Heep: For the Defense. And can’t you just picture a scene in a hospital emergency room where a gurney, piled high with bloodstained IRS forms, is being rushed into surgery as our accountant hero barks money-saving commands at admiring female assistants?[/B]

Only someone who spent too much time studying actuarial science could have an imagination like that! Personally I have nightmares of punk accountants roving the cities in packs.
 
All the ignorant wingnuts love the flat tax. They love paying more than their fair share while giving billionaires the break instead.

At the State level I think the flat tax is Plan B. The best plan at the state level is no income tax.
 
I agree. Why should we tax women who can't afford boob jobs?

All jokes aside, eliminating 75,000 pages of tax code would have a benefit. No?

Just remember that the portion of the Tax Code which has any relevance to ordinary citizens is about 6000 pages. The rest applies only to large corporations, financial institutions, insurance companies, foreign entities and operations, and so forth. I doubt that 1,000 pages would be needed to cover what is needed for 99% of taxpayers to file a Form 1040.
 
All the ignorant wingnuts love the flat tax. They love paying more than their fair share while giving billionaires the break instead.

Define fair share.

And why should your fair share be a lower share than someone else's fair share?
 
The best plan at the state level is no income tax.

To GHook93. No tax on income is best on every level!

Just remember that the portion of the Tax Code which has any relevance to ordinary citizens is about 6000 pages. The rest applies only to large corporations, financial institutions, insurance companies, foreign entities and operations, and so forth. I doubt that 1,000 pages would be needed to cover what is needed for 99% of taxpayers to file a Form 1040.

To oldfart: Your response reads like a justification for the tax on income. The filing requirement for individuals is not all that complicated; so the tax is okay.

The objective is individuals keeping what they earn to spend as they please, not making it easier to pay a tax on income.


Define fair share.

And why should your fair share be a lower share than someone else's fair share?

To Spiderman: Exactly so.

Incidentally, “fair share” is a favorite phrase of good old Bill O’Reilly. He never defines it either.
 
I’ve always maintained that repealing the XVI Amendment is the best way for Americans to regain the individual liberties stolen by the income tax. Flat-taxers knowingly, or unknowingly, support a tax on income.

Over the years, I’ve debated a few folks who claimed that it was more important to abolish the Federal Reserve than it was to repeal the XVI Amendment. Those debates usually came down to which one to get rid of first. My case is based on one certainty. The Federal Reserve is nothing without the income tax.

Anyway, these two videos will inform some who might not be aware of the unbreakable link between the XVI Amendment and the Fed. Listen to a younger Harry Reid double-talk voluntary and involuntary in the first video:


[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7lefFz81BCo&feature=player_detailpage]No Law Requires You to Pay Income Tax, Period. - YouTube[/ame]​

This second video is lengthy but worth listening to. I suggest watching it in 15 minutes segments at your leisure so as to better absorb the information:

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=lu_VqX6J93k]The Creature From Jekyll Island (by G. Edward Griffin) - YouTube[/ame]​
 

Forum List

Back
Top