- Joined
- Jul 5, 2011
- Messages
- 3,813
- Reaction score
- 2,874
- Location
- New Mexico
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Progressive
Can someone explain how this is any different than what Republicans have been implementing since Reagan? A system that has only produced more deficits due a reduction of government revenue and the development of systemic problems due to a lack of reasonable regulations? If it didn't work then, why request we continue to try the same crap?House Speaker John Boehner called on the congressional debt-reduction supercommittee to lay the foundation for a tax-code overhaul that would reject rate increases and curb some tax breaks.
In a speech to the Economic Club of Washington today, the Ohio Republican said the 12-member panel should recommend $1.5 trillion in budget savings by focusing solely on cuts to federal spending and overhauling Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. The panel should fashion “principles” for a later, broad rewrite of the tax code that include lowering tax rates for individuals and companies, he said.
“Tax reform should deal with the whole tax code, both the personal side and the corporate side, and it should result in a code that is simpler and fairer to everyone,” Boehner said. “Tax increases, I think, are off the table, and I don’t think they’re a viable option for the joint committee.”
Boehner said the House will consider President Barack Obama’s $447 billion jobs plan, which includes cuts in payroll taxes, provides tax breaks for hiring by small businesses, and more spending for infrastructure. The speaker made clear he opposes much of it, calling instead for Republican ideas to boost job growth, such as reduced government regulation.
“The president’s proposals are a poor substitute for the pro-growth policies that are needed to remove barriers to job creation in America, the policies that are needed to put America back to work,” Boehner said. He called on Obama to direct his cabinet secretaries to temporarily halt all work “that gets in the way of private-sector job creation.”
Boehner Asks Debt Panel to Take on Tax Breaks, Reject Hike - Bloomberg
Can someone explain how this is any different than what Republicans have been implementing since Reagan? A system that has only produced more deficits due a reduction of government revenue and the development of systemic problems due to a lack of reasonable regulations? If it didn't work then, why request we continue to try the same crap?
wash, rinse, repeat...same ol' same ol'....Boehner Asks Debt Panel to Take on Tax Breaks, Reject Hike - Bloomberg
Can someone explain how this is any different than what Republicans have been implementing since Reagan? A system that has only produced more deficits due a reduction of government revenue and the development of systemic problems due to a lack of reasonable regulations? If it didn't work then, why request we continue to try the same crap?
agreed...we need spending cuts and tax increases if we are ever going to dig our way out of this mess.If tax increases are off the table, republicans are not serious about fixing the deficit.
If tax increases are off the table, republicans are not serious about fixing the deficit.
Would love to get Boehner and Obama to answer me why they are not trying get a flat income tax and another one for business, with neither one getting any breaks or deductions.
I would also like to see a rollback in some of the ridiculous regulations causing problems and costing jobs and small business growth.
Why would we want a flat tax? The income tax is the only progressive tax in our system. It already is too flat to even offset the other taxes, which are all regressive at the top.
Why? Because things would then be so much simplier. We could cut the IRS way back. Politicians would no longer be able to promise all these cuts for votes.
0-25,000 FLAT 2%
25-50,000 FLAT 12%
50-100,000 FLAT 15%
100-250,000 Flat 18%
Etc, Etc, Etc. (numbers only used for the example, I don't know what they would be exactly)
What is wrong with that?
lololol...ahh perry a much easier....HUGE TAX cut for the rich and a HUGE tax increase for the bottom half of america...
Boehner Asks Debt Panel to Take on Tax Breaks, Reject Hike - Bloomberg
Can someone explain how this is any different than what Republicans have been implementing since Reagan? A system that has only produced more deficits due a reduction of government revenue
If tax increases are off the table, republicans are not serious about fixing the deficit.
Why? Because things would then be so much simplier. We could cut the IRS way back. Politicians would no longer be able to promise all these cuts for votes.
0-25,000 FLAT 2%
25-50,000 FLAT 12%
50-100,000 FLAT 15%
100-250,000 Flat 18%
Etc, Etc, Etc. (numbers only used for the example, I don't know what they would be exactly)
What is wrong with that?
The only thing wrong with it is with politicians. If you took away the idea of loopholes, you take away half of what politicians promise.
Why? Because things would then be so much simplier. We could cut the IRS way back. Politicians would no longer be able to promise all these cuts for votes.
0-25,000 FLAT 2%
25-50,000 FLAT 12%
50-100,000 FLAT 15%
100-250,000 Flat 18%
Etc, Etc, Etc. (numbers only used for the example, I don't know what they would be exactly)
What is wrong with that?
see chart above. tax rates do not directly determine revenue.
Why? Because things would then be so much simplier. We could cut the IRS way back. Politicians would no longer be able to promise all these cuts for votes.
0-25,000 FLAT 2%
25-50,000 FLAT 12%
50-100,000 FLAT 15%
100-250,000 Flat 18%
Etc, Etc, Etc. (numbers only used for the example, I don't know what they would be exactly)
What is wrong with that?
I would recommend a couple of changes:
- Put in this type of tax and then totally get rid of payroll taxes so we do not have the issue of who pays Federal taxes. Rates would have to be adjusted somewhat.
- Not sure if you would have any personal exclusions at all, if the answer is no then I would exclude the first 5K for an individual and 10K for a family.
- I would add a bracket for the Super rich. Something above the current 35%, let's say 50-60% with the bracket starting at $5 million. That should take away the argument that a flatter tax is a backdoor way to allow the wealthy to pay less.
What a flat tax means is that all income brackets pay the same percentage. What you're describing is a much lower, but still progressive, tax system.
No, teamosil is right. A flat tax is where all income brackets pay the same percentage. You wrote down a gradual tax system. Here's three sources where it is, in fact, written.What you are saying is you are unable to look beyond your preconcieved notions. Nowhere is anything written that says all brackets must pay the same FLAT rate.
What you are saying is you are unable to look beyond your preconcieved notions. Nowhere is anything written that says all brackets must pay the same FLAT rate.
Question is irrelevant. The true mystery is: does Boehner truly believe what he is saying, or is it merely political posturing? If the former, we should be very, very worried... for in that case the obvious goal of various Republican/Tea Party proposals are to subjugate the middle class to an economic slavery not seen since the early part of the 20th century... or earlier. Let's not forget that unfettered capitalism built this country on the backs of abused workers (slaves, coolies, children, women).Boehner Asks Debt Panel to Take on Tax Breaks, Reject Hike - Bloomberg
Can someone explain how this is any different than what Republicans have been implementing since Reagan? A system that has only produced more deficits due a reduction of government revenue and the development of systemic problems due to a lack of reasonable regulations? If it didn't work then, why request we continue to try the same crap?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?