[POLL] - Liberals, how much is a "fair share?" - Taxes

[PMZ]

We need business to perform in a way that competes with the rest of the world. They have forgotten how.

Perhaps business would be more keen on worldwide performance if they were not so busy trying to find tax cuts and loopholes in order to save more of their own profits? I have to say, I'm not sure why all of our manufacturing base is leaving the states when we have such a high tax rate and high wages, it's not like there are other countries out there with cheap labor and cheap taxes with no tariff response from the U.S....

Businesses used to be smart about product innovation, quality, customer service, employee development, productivity improvement. Now they are smart about executives and shareholders looting the workers. Government has nothing to do with that. It's all about instant gratification and greed.

 

[DGS49]

Back to basics:

A "fair share" system of taxation would take the same amount of money from every person living within the borders of the U.S., and subject to its laws. Take the total required to operate the government, divide by the population, and assess everyone their "fair share." It is the same in any sane club or association. Figure out how much you need to get by, set the dues accordingly, and collect the dues. If you don't pay the dues, you don't get ANY benefits from the organization. What could be more fair than that?

Parenthetically, one might note somewhere in this discussion that an income tax is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, and was only made possible by Amendment - which was sold on a number of lies. Ideally, in the minds of the Founding Fathers, the national government could generate all of the revenue it needed by tariffs and fees. But I digress...

Assuming that a tax on incomes (rather than on wealth) is the most viable option, a less "fair" system - but more workable - is one that taxes all incomes at a fixed percentage: the so-called "flat tax." It has the built-in advantage of minimizing the taxes on those with the least ability to pay, and maximizing taxes on those who can most "afford" it. But it is inherently unfair because it punishes financial success with higher payments to the government.

You will find very few organizations that fund themselves on such an unfair basis. Indeed, who would want to join such an organization? A masochist?

An extremely "unfair" system that is even more inequitable than the Flat Tax is a graduated income tax, where not only do the successful pay more because they earn more, but the rate of extraction is graduated so that their "contribution" goes up exponentially as their financial success increases. This goes beyond "unfair" to the level of diabolical. It truly punishes success and discourages innovation, creativity, and productivity.

The only "good" thing one can say about the American graduated tax system is that it has been worse than it is now, in the not so distant past. Also, thankfully, we do not have quite the crushing burden of the European welfare states, so the top rate here is less than it is there.

The proof of the unfairness of the graduated tax is the sheer size of the Internal Revenue Code and its associated Regulations. Much of the "fluff" in the IRC and IRR is comprised of elaborate (and not so elaborate) mechanisms by which various constituencies can avoid paying taxes - legally - by doing the things that Congress wants them to do. Build things, invest in things, grow things, don't grow other things, make your stuff more energy-efficient, and so on.

If the graduated income tax were actually "fair," then none of this would be necessary. You would simply pay the tax and be done with it. But it isn't fair, so Congress has to manipulate the rules to soften the impact.

And at the other end of the spectrum, we have Congress trying to buy the votes of the unsuccessful and the wretched by minimizing or eliminating their obligation to pay taxes, or - believe it or not - causing the government to PAY THEM NEGATIVE TAXES through the perversely-named Earned Income Tax Credit!

The one universal principle that is always ignored is this: EVERYBODY should pay something. Whether it is a payroll deduction, a percentage of a person's profits in business, or a deduction from a Social Security or welfare deposit, every emancipated adult in the country should feel a pinch of taxation, so that they can be vested in the business of Government. We have fully half of our (fucking) population that pays no Federal income tax each year, and THIS is a crime.

The fairest tax: A flat percentage tax with a fixed maximum amount - whether its a hundred thousand dollars or a million, I don't care. But there should be an amount over which the government has maxed out its share of a person's income.

 

[PMZ]

So easy to be a liberal when you are plundering and spending the money earned by other people.
But hey, socialism is great up until you run out of money.
And we ran out long ago.

First of all I dare say that I have, at least, contributed and earned as much as you have.

Second, the biggest evidence of our financial situation comes in the form of debt. The debt comes from our experiment with conservative policies.

Yes, the current squabble over finances at the Federal level was because conservatives wanted to take on more debt and liberals did not.
Only a dumb ass would claim that.

No. Conservatives only want to cut expenditures when democrats are in office. Pure politics. When Republicans are in office they want to spend, spend, spend, and not tax. Without the Bush's and Reagan we'd be well off fiscally. With them it will be generations, if we're lucky, before recovery.

The fact that so many are in denial of those simple and obvious facts is a measure of one thing. The effectiveness of Republican 24/4/365 media propaganda.

 

[PMZ]

So easy to be a liberal when you are plundering and spending the money earned by other people.
But hey, socialism is great up until you run out of money.
And we ran out long ago.

First of all I dare say that I have, at least, contributed and earned as much as you have.

Second, the biggest evidence of our financial situation comes in the form of debt. The debt comes from our experiment with conservative policies.

Yes, the current squabble over finances at the Federal level was because conservatives wanted to take on more debt and liberals did not.
Only a dumb ass would claim that.

Only a brained dead zombie would deny it.

 

[PMZ]

Back to basics:

A "fair share" system of taxation would take the same amount of money from every person living within the borders of the U.S., and subject to its laws. Take the total required to operate the government, divide by the population, and assess everyone their "fair share." It is the same in any sane club or association. Figure out how much you need to get by, set the dues accordingly, and collect the dues. If you don't pay the dues, you don't get ANY benefits from the organization. What could be more fair than that?

Parenthetically, one might note somewhere in this discussion that an income tax is prohibited by the U.S. Constitution, and was only made possible by Amendment - which was sold on a number of lies. Ideally, in the minds of the Founding Fathers, the national government could generate all of the revenue it needed by tariffs and fees. But I digress...

Assuming that a tax on incomes (rather than on wealth) is the most viable option, a less "fair" system - but more workable - is one that taxes all incomes at a fixed percentage: the so-called "flat tax." It has the built-in advantage of minimizing the taxes on those with the least ability to pay, and maximizing taxes on those who can most "afford" it. But it is inherently unfair because it punishes financial success with higher payments to the government.

You will find very few organizations that fund themselves on such an unfair basis. Indeed, who would want to join such an organization? A masochist?

An extremely "unfair" system that is even more inequitable than the Flat Tax is a graduated income tax, where not only do the successful pay more because they earn more, but the rate of extraction is graduated so that their "contribution" goes up exponentially as their financial success increases. This goes beyond "unfair" to the level of diabolical. It truly punishes success and discourages innovation, creativity, and productivity.

The only "good" thing one can say about the American graduated tax system is that it has been worse than it is now, in the not so distant past. Also, thankfully, we do not have quite the crushing burden of the European welfare states, so the top rate here is less than it is there.

The proof of the unfairness of the graduated tax is the sheer size of the Internal Revenue Code and its associated Regulations. Much of the "fluff" in the IRC and IRR is comprised of elaborate (and not so elaborate) mechanisms by which various constituencies can avoid paying taxes - legally - by doing the things that Congress wants them to do. Build things, invest in things, grow things, don't grow other things, make your stuff more energy-efficient, and so on.

If the graduated income tax were actually "fair," then none of this would be necessary. You would simply pay the tax and be done with it. But it isn't fair, so Congress has to manipulate the rules to soften the impact.

And at the other end of the spectrum, we have Congress trying to buy the votes of the unsuccessful and the wretched by minimizing or eliminating their obligation to pay taxes, or - believe it or not - causing the government to PAY THEM NEGATIVE TAXES through the perversely-named Earned Income Tax Credit!

The one universal principle that is always ignored is this: EVERYBODY should pay something. Whether it is a payroll deduction, a percentage of a person's profits in business, or a deduction from a Social Security or welfare deposit, every emancipated adult in the country should feel a pinch of taxation, so that they can be vested in the business of Government. We have fully half of our (fucking) population that pays no Federal income tax each year, and THIS is a crime.

The fairest tax: A flat percentage tax with a fixed maximum amount - whether its a hundred thousand dollars or a million, I don't care. But there should be an amount over which the government has maxed out its share of a person's income.

Another ad for poorer poor and richer rich in the Republican push for feudal aristocracy.

 

[RKMBrown]

We need business to perform in a way that competes with the rest of the world. They have forgotten how.

Perhaps business would be more keen on worldwide performance if they were not so busy trying to find tax cuts and loopholes in order to save more of their own profits? I have to say, I'm not sure why all of our manufacturing base is leaving the states when we have such a high tax rate and high wages, it's not like there are other countries out there with cheap labor and cheap taxes with no tariff response from the U.S....

Businesses used to be smart about product innovation, quality, customer service, employee development, productivity improvement. Now they are smart about executives and shareholders looting the workers. Government has nothing to do with that. It's all about instant gratification and greed.

Any you are a LYING POS.

 

[PMZ]

Perhaps business would be more keen on worldwide performance if they were not so busy trying to find tax cuts and loopholes in order to save more of their own profits? I have to say, I'm not sure why all of our manufacturing base is leaving the states when we have such a high tax rate and high wages, it's not like there are other countries out there with cheap labor and cheap taxes with no tariff response from the U.S....

Businesses used to be smart about product innovation, quality, customer service, employee development, productivity improvement. Now they are smart about executives and shareholders looting the workers. Government has nothing to do with that. It's all about instant gratification and greed.

Any you are a LYING POS.

Lying POSs don't get that reaction. Prophets do. Your aristocracy has failed. Failed at their coup, failed to produce what they're paid for. Growth.

 

[dcraelin]

Yes, the current squabble over finances at the Federal level was because conservatives wanted to take on more debt and liberals did not.
Only a dumb ass would claim that.

Only a brained dead zombie would deny it.

Read Kevin Phillip's Arrogant Capital to see how politicians, especially those close to bankers, do not really want to pay down debt. That really explains the opposition to tax increases by establishment Republicans. And Kevin Phillips once wrote the Emerging Republican Majority

 

[PMZ]

Yes, the current squabble over finances at the Federal level was because conservatives wanted to take on more debt and liberals did not.
Only a dumb ass would claim that.

Only a brained dead zombie would deny it.

Read Kevin Phillip's Arrogant Capital to see how politicians, especially those close to bankers, do not really want to pay down debt. That really explains the opposition to tax increases by establishment Republicans. And Kevin Phillips once wrote the Emerging Republican Majority

King Bush was told by the CBO that he could lead the US, in his term, to debt free. He ran the other direction as fast as Alan Greenspan could carry him.

 

[Uncensored2008]

We need a flat tax and a fiscally conservative and limited government which has its budget under control, coupled with worker's unions that are actually involved with those they are representing in order to negotiate what a fair wage is between the employer and employee without having mindless legislators suggesting they know better what a fair wage is, having no knowledge of the job or the profits earned and then forcing their decision through the coercion of force.

We need business to perform in a way that competes with the rest of the world. They have forgotten how.

Are you Wesley Mouch?

 

[PMZ]

We need a flat tax and a fiscally conservative and limited government which has its budget under control, coupled with worker's unions that are actually involved with those they are representing in order to negotiate what a fair wage is between the employer and employee without having mindless legislators suggesting they know better what a fair wage is, having no knowledge of the job or the profits earned and then forcing their decision through the coercion of force.

We need business to perform in a way that competes with the rest of the world. They have forgotten how.

Are you Wesley Mouch?

No. I don't think that he would have been in favor of holding business accountable. On the other hand, if John Galt was real, I imagine he would have been.

 

[Uncensored2008]

No. I don't think that he would have been in favor of holding business accountable. On the other hand, if John Galt was real, I imagine he would have been.

Yeah, Galt was a Marxist through and through. Yer right fucking brilliant, PMZ™

 

[PMZ]

No. I don't think that he would have been in favor of holding business accountable. On the other hand, if John Galt was real, I imagine he would have been.

Yeah, Galt was a Marxist through and through. Yer right fucking brilliant, PMZ™

Are you saying that only Marxists hold private businesses accountable?

Bizarre.

Consumers do.

 

[RKMBrown]

Businesses used to be smart about product innovation, quality, customer service, employee development, productivity improvement. Now they are smart about executives and shareholders looting the workers. Government has nothing to do with that. It's all about instant gratification and greed.

Any you are a LYING POS.

Lying POSs don't get that reaction. Prophets do. Your aristocracy has failed. Failed at their coup, failed to produce what they're paid for. Growth.

ROFL now you are a "prophet." Prophet for who? Satan?

 

[Uncensored2008]

Are you saying that only Marxists hold private businesses accountable?

Bizarre.

Consumers do.

Does it hurt to be that stupid?

 

[PMZ]

Any you are a LYING POS.

Lying POSs don't get that reaction. Prophets do. Your aristocracy has failed. Failed at their coup, failed to produce what they're paid for. Growth.

ROFL now you are a "prophet." Prophet for who? Satan?

Truth is only referred to "satan" on Fox Opinions.

 

[PMZ]

Are you saying that only Marxists hold private businesses accountable?

Bizarre.

Consumers do.

Does it hurt to be that stupid?

Are you another one who believes that only Marxists hold private businesses accountable?

 

[RKMBrown]

Lying POSs don't get that reaction. Prophets do. Your aristocracy has failed. Failed at their coup, failed to produce what they're paid for. Growth.

ROFL now you are a "prophet." Prophet for who? Satan?

Truth is only referred to "satan"...

I'll take that as a yes.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Truth is only referred to "satan" on Fox Opinions.

You huff a LOT of spray paint, doncha PMZ™?

 

[PMZ]

ROFL now you are a "prophet." Prophet for who? Satan?

Truth is only referred to "satan"...

I'll take that as a yes.

Prophet for truth. Your satan.