In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 2489
Online now 1783 Record: 18710 (2/25/2012)
We aren't just committed to college football; we're early enrolling in it.
Where the madness isn't just in March.
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
having a federal flat tax and essentially eliminating the IRS vs keeping the current system. I have always felt that the IRS stood for "individuals representing satan" and am somewhat for the federal flat sales tax. Seems to me like it would shrink the heck out of
government in at least one capacity and puts the burden of collection on business owners at point of purchase. I know there is a lot more to it but it just seems like a better system to me.
I dream of a day when chickens can cross the road without having their motives questioned.
It's fair, proportional, constitutional, fiscally brilliant and a number of other reasons it will never pass.
I don't know, I think some people should simply be exempt from paying taxes. If you are a hard worker, but lack the skills or cognitive ability to get a good job, you could conceivably have two jobs, work 80 hours a week at minimum wage and make only $30,000. 10% (or whatever arbitrary number you come up with) of that yearly wage hurts a lot worse than 10% of a $100,000 yearly wage.
"Show class, have pride, and display character. If you do, winning takes care of itself." -Coach Bryant
Yes, basically to be an American you pay 12% or something.
There would be an undoubted percentage that need to be exempt. Maybe the bottom 25-30% of people.
A "federal flat sales tax" is NOT proportional.
Wealthy individuals spend a lower percentage of their incomes than individuals who earn lower incomes. Because of this, the wealthy individuals would be subjected to the "federal flat sales tax" less often and would therefore pay a smaller proportional amount of taxes.
It's a regressive system.
prettty sure we are talking income tax, skippy. Your point is still not valid, though.. Try again.
Well if you think he's talking about an "income tax" then I'm pretty sure you're wrong, skippy.
He said "federal flat sales tax" and even went on to describe how the burden of collection would be on "business owners at point of purchase." That clearly refers to a flat sales tax, which is regressive. If you don't understand that, there are thousands of experts who disagree with you.
But keep thinking that there's an easy fix for all of this, even though every country in the world struggles with the structure of their tax code.
This post was edited by AbsenteeTrojan 16 months ago
I'm not sure it's worth mentioning "regressive" and "progressive" income tax systems to these people. They don't understand the basic economic arguments behind each system.
Seriously, I came into this thread and was instantly amazed at how few people understand the concept of a regressive v. progressive tax structure.
Even if the gov't moved to this kind of system it would just be a matter of time before a politcal party ran on the basis that they needed to up the tax % on certain items because they are a luxury. You would end up in the same situation you have now.
No, I miss stated it at 2 am but I like where this is going, you pay a specific amount of tax on your purchases. If you buy a 1000.00 car you pay 120.00 tax, if you buy a 100,000.00 car you pay 12000.00 tax. Its the same with houses but it is one time deal or any other purchases. It gives you the freedom to invest in America without being constantly being taxed for doing so and so on for a sales tax option.
I created this because the sales tax and the flat federal seemed interesting to me 4 and 8 years ago when ole what's his name was running on it.
This post was edited by GF5 16 months ago
I don't get out much and I don't watch the news so I pick up bits and pieces. Sorry.
What are you even talking about?
If you're talking about state sales tax, state sales taxes are already flat (and regressive).
If you're talking about federal income tax, that's an entirely different matter.
What are you trying to propose here?
How about a Federal sales tax. The infrastructure is already in place.
On top of a state sales tax?
Actually, before I go into any more depth on this, do you know what a regressive tax is, and why current state sales taxes are viciously regressive?
Federal income tax. It works in Florida very well
Just curious, how much of the requested amount would be eliminated by getting rid of the IRS?
I thought we were talking about income tax
Basically are talking about government income in general and how to be the most fair to both sides. So.....Yes
Again, a "flat federal sales tax" that will replace the current income tax would be regressive. A regressive tax system means that, as the income levels rises, the effective tax rates decrease.
Higher income individuals actually spend less of their income (because of investing, savings, etc) than lower income individuals do. Therefore, lower income individuals would be subjected to the "flat federal sales tax" more often and that would be detrimental to being "fair to both sides."
What you're proposing isn't actually all that ridiculous though. There are countries that have tried a modified form of it... called the Value Added Tax. The only difference is that the end consumer isn't the only one who pays taxes. The seller also has to pay tax on the "value added" to the product before the next step in the sales cycle.
I'm pretty sure that the EU and some Scandinavian countries utilize the value added tax. There are some good reads on it out there if you're interested.
Thank you, Is the value added somewhat a similar plan to the way we handle our SS taxes as employers?
So SS (pre borrowing against it) worked to support retiree's, why would this value added system not work in the US? Especially if we terminated the IRS and moved toward a smaller government?
I'm republican as they come, but a flat tax is a bad idea. We need higher taxes because the democrats spend money on useless crap. If we ran a more efficient country with a smaller government, while focusing primarily on social programs to help the needy, a flat tax may be beneficial. However, we don't... and we never will.
We spend ridiculous money to protect wealthy individuals that stand to benefit from a democrat filled gov't. We also spend a ridiculous amount of money to protect wealthy individuals that stand to benefit from a republican filled gov't. At the end of the day, the only solution is to make as much money as you can and keep it from the hands of the idiots running this country.
Make your money, save it, and keep it from the government. It's what the wealthy do.
I used to be a republican but I find myself leaning toward constitutionalism. In many ways I would like to see the country regress in government. Kinda why I am interested in taxes that are both fair to maintain a sustainable government yet fair to the people.
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports