• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every persons position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Flat Tax or Income Tax.

V.I. Lenin

Active member
Joined
Apr 19, 2005
Messages
381
Reaction score
0
Location
NY
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
Should people be taxed based on their income (rich more, poor less) or should their be a flat, equal tax that all should pay? Why?
 

Squawker

Professor
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 12, 2005
Messages
1,314
Reaction score
4
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
I definitely think we should have a flat tax. I used to think it should start at around 50,000, but I see so many people taking advantage of the system because they don't have to "pay". Maybe everyone should have to pay 10 percent of everything they earn. I waiver back and forth on that, but the system we have is so unfair. The rich can hire good CPA's and get out of so many taxes, because of the built in loop holes of the tax code. Get rid if the IRS, get rid of the write offs, and pay the flat rate. Think of all the money we would save just in Accounting expenses. IRS employee wages, paperwork, on and on.
 

Mixed View

Active member
Joined
Mar 7, 2005
Messages
343
Reaction score
1
Location
MO
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Liberal
I'm deffinently for a flat tax "fair tax". If don't change it to a flat tax then we might as well call us Canada. The rich have to pay 63 percent in Canada, is stealing legal there? It has to be.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I like the idea of a bracketed flat tax with three to four tiers. Basically everyone in that bracket would pay x number of dollars, period, no I.R.S and a simple tax code. My new favorite idea though is to have a national sales tax, basically, minimal to no taxes nationally on needed items such as food, rent/mortgage payments, etc. but then luxury items (this includes TV.s cars, etc.) would be taxed at a higher yet reasonable rate.
I think economically a NST would work because people would "choose" how much they contribute in taxes each year by how much they purchase, naturally, wealthy people would still pay more in taxes because they have the most buying power but it would be more fair because they are not taxed for the fruits of their labor, just the choices made with those gains.
I also believe the NTS would be the most beneficial economical taxation because it would eliminate the need to save up the income that most americans hold over for fear of taxation at the end of the year and thus more americans would probably buy more products, therefore more money goes directly back into the market.
 

Redcommie

New member
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Location
The Belly of the BEast
Tax should be progressive, because the rich can pay more and still be comfortable. To a poor person, the flat tax might slip them under, and that isn't fair to them, while the rich people can still have comfortable lives and pay more.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Redcommie said:
Tax should be progressive, because the rich can pay more and still be comfortable. To a poor person, the flat tax might slip them under, and that isn't fair to them, while the rich people can still have comfortable lives and pay more.
Why would that be fair, becuase it would make you feel better to see wealthy people sniped by high taxation. That is jealousy and there is no excuse to take almost or over half of someone's income under any circumstances. How would you like it if after a hard days work your government decided to "allow you" enough for rent, bills, and a beer when you know your check could have gone to much more, like savings, investment, maybe even some kind of entertainment or transportation. This isn't "Robin Hood" there is nothing noble about over-taxation,socialization, or communisation.
 

stump

Member
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
LaMidRighter said:
Why would that be fair, ...
Waah! Waah! :boohoo: You sound like those commies. Wages should be equal that is fair. Taxes should be equal that is fair.

Sheesh! Life isn't fair. Deal with it. :mrgreen:

I favor progressive taxes. But not because the rich can afford more or any of that liberal groupthink. Fact is, capitalism works best when the playing field is level. Tax rates should be higher for those at a certain rate above mean. This way people can still earn more for more work but it keeps them from controlling more and more of the capital.

It may not be fair but it's the best way to run a capitalistic economy.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Normally Stump I agree with you, but we'll have to disagree on this one. I think all americans should be treated equally, this means taxation and everything else, we have a duty as americans to defend even that which we disagree with, even if we vocalize that agreement. If we say, for instance that the government should have free reign over something as trivial as money and let them make the conditions for anyone's wallets, then we give them a political blank check over everything, because, when you get down to it, you are showing the government that you have no problems with them taking something from someone because they have used class warfare, or emotional rhetoric, or even scare tactics. Sorry, it's late and I am on a tangent, but I think that fair is most certainly fair, and punishing someone's bank account because they produced more is not fair.
p.s.- I know life's not fair, but taxation should be just.
 

stump

Member
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
LaMidRighter said:
Normally Stump I agree with you, but we'll have to disagree on this one.
No worries, I had no delusions that you would see the wisdom in my thinking. :lol:
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
stump said:
No worries, I had no delusions that you would see the wisdom in my thinking. :lol:
Right! well then, moving along :cheers:
 

Arthur Fonzarelli

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
446
Reaction score
0
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
A lot of interesting points of view. Someone wrote that there should be a flat tax & then went on to describe, I believe, a 4 tier system of taxation...sorry but 4 separate tiers does not make for a flat tax. interesting though.

The best idea I saw was the 10% for everyone...a single flat rate...No write-offs. If we actually had a good businessman run the country for about 5 years I believe we could reduce that rate to 5%. Not including Social Security, which by the way needs to be revamped & set up more like STERS, PERS or one of the other public retirement systems.

This would also mean cutting spending on unessential things (i Know this is a topic for another discussion so I won't go into what I believe are unessential right now) & stop blackmailing states into submission with the promise of money if they govern according to the whim of a particular congress or administration. EXAMPLE: I have been saying for a long time that our interstate highway system has become a way for the feds to blackmail states into submission to receive funds for the upkeep of the interstate highways that run through each state. Today & yesterday I finally heard someone on the news admit that to be the case. Someone has proposed changing the drinking age to 18 for active duty military personnel...BUT, someone else was fearful that would prevent funding for their interstate highways. This is just one of many things our federal government needs to get away from doing so our taxes could be lowered.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
I think that was my mention of the 4 tier "flat tax" Fonz. Admittedly, that would not be a flat tax, more of a combination of the flat and progressive, sure, it would treat higher brackets according to ability to pay, but, the flat part would be a solid monetary amount that all in that bracket should be able to afford. That was just a thought, I am heavily favoring the national sales tax though.
 

Spirit of Nirvana

New member
Joined
May 31, 2005
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Taxes should be flatter because the rich have an ability to pay more, plus the rich usually gain wealth off surplus value - which is stealing from the workers.

It is justified in the sense that the money was taken from the workers, taxed, and given back to the workers.
 

Arthur Fonzarelli

Active member
Joined
May 25, 2005
Messages
446
Reaction score
0
Location
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
LaMidRighter said:
I think that was my mention of the 4 tier "flat tax" Fonz. Admittedly, that would not be a flat tax, more of a combination of the flat and progressive, sure, it would treat higher brackets according to ability to pay, but, the flat part would be a solid monetary amount that all in that bracket should be able to afford. That was just a thought, I am heavily favoring the national sales tax though.
I have wavered on the national sales tax idea. On one hand it seems great because my work wouldn't be taxed, or at least not to the extent it is now. But, then our government depends on a buyers market & would this mean you would start taxing food...? Plus this whole national sales tax just seems so Canadian...LOL.

The flat rate percentage type income tax would work because the rich would pay more in actual dollars as they make more & the poor would pay less obviously because they make less. The percent of their income to taxes would be exactly the same...BUT, this only works if we remove write-offs, including children, houses (your mortgage interest), etc. Although there is a gray area when dealing with corporate taxes & that of the small business owner as well as the self-employed. I believe an incentive for entrepreneurship is always a great idea.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
Arthur Fonzarelli said:
.
Although there is a gray area when dealing with corporate taxes & that of the small business owner as well as the self-employed. I believe an incentive for entrepreneurship is always a great idea.
Amen! :applaud
 

stump

Member
Joined
May 23, 2005
Messages
119
Reaction score
0
LaMidRighter said:
That was just a thought, I am heavily favoring the national sales tax though.
Problem with sales taxes is that they are regressive. The poor pay a higher percentage than the rich (because they spend 100% of their income). Doesn't make sense.
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
stump said:
Problem with sales taxes is that they are regressive. The poor pay a higher percentage than the rich (because they spend 100% of their income). Doesn't make sense.
There could be exemptions made on necessities like food or breaks on clothing built into the tax, I am thinking more towards taxing luxury items(electronics, cars, and the like).
 

TJS0110

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
327
Reaction score
0
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
I realy think there should be a flat tax becuase its not realy fair to take away more money from someone becuase they are more succesful. Its not good to overtax someone who cant realy afford a high tax but if you look at it logicaly its not fair to give someone a lower tax becuase they do nothing to help the economy. Now im not saying all people with a high income do something to realy help but isnt it more fair to tax everyone equaly so the guy who works and makes a higher income(which i will in this situation equate to hard work,which isnt always true) gets to keep the money and is able to distridute it through the economy how he pleases. If a citizen nows that he can get lower taxs by haveing a lower income i'm afraid that will fallow the same trend as relastate tax in my state which sais that the less you have on the property the less tax you pay on the property. Now what would be realy nice is would be to simply get rid of income tax and raise tha sales tax but then that would be unfair to people with no jobs such as retired people.
 

TJS0110

Active member
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
327
Reaction score
0
Location
Missouri
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
stump said:
Problem with sales taxes is that they are regressive. The poor pay a higher percentage than the rich (because they spend 100% of their income). Doesn't make sense.

I dont know if im actualy get the point of your quote right but if you look at it if we had higher sales taxes then you would still be taxing the rich more so the poor would probably suffer less sertain items probably wouldn't be taxed such as food and other neccesities. Therfore it wouldn't realy jeoprodise the poor. The rich would also be giveing more back for the amount they make becuase they would purchase more.
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,334
Reaction score
16,228
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Should people be taxed based on their income (rich more, poor less) or should their be a flat, equal tax that all should pay? Why?
My idea of a flat tax is where every one is taxed the same percentage on income.That way every one pays their fair share and no one is being penalized every time they move up in a income bracket.
 

IndiConservative

New member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
47
Reaction score
0
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Independent
There is currently a bill before the house and senate for the "Fair Tax" HR 25 & SB 25 . Its like the Flat tax only it answers questions about how it affects poor people and other problems take a look at the link. If you like it tell your congressmen/women and senators you want it.

Neal Bortz is also starting to go around the country to hype it up

http://www.myfairtax.org/index.html
 

LaMidRighter

Klattu Verata Nicto
DP Veteran
Joined
May 19, 2005
Messages
30,534
Reaction score
10,682
Location
Louisiana
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Libertarian - Right
IndiConservative said:
There is currently a bill before the house and senate for the "Fair Tax" HR 25 & SB 25 . Its like the Flat tax only it answers questions about how it affects poor people and other problems take a look at the link. If you like it tell your congressmen/women and senators you want it.

Neal Bortz is also starting to go around the country to hype it up

http://www.myfairtax.org/index.html
Read the link and love the idea. Thanks for the info.
 

cnredd

Major General Big Lug
DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 5, 2005
Messages
8,682
Reaction score
262
Location
Philadelphia,PA
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Here is the problem with those who feel the wealthy get all of the breaks...

This is a VERY simple way to understand the tax laws. It DOES make you think. Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner.
The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing, the fifth would pay $1, the sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $13, and the tenth man (the richest) would pay $59. That's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement ..... until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax language, a 'tax cut'). "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten only cost $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes. The first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But what about the other six - the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?" The six men realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay. And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to eat for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. "But he (pointing to the tenth man) got $7!". "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got seven times more than me!". "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $7 back when I got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!". "Wait a minute," yelled the first four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!". The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered a little late what was very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill! Imagine that!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is how the tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, abuse them in some way, and they just may not show up at the table anymore. Where would that leave the rest? Unfortunately, most taxing authorities cannot seem to grasp this rather straight-forward logic!
 

jamesrage

DP Veteran
Joined
Jul 31, 2005
Messages
34,334
Reaction score
16,228
Location
A place where common sense exists
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Slightly Conservative
Here is the problem with those who feel the wealthy get all of the breaks...

This is a VERY simple way to understand the tax laws. It DOES make you think.
Let's put tax cuts in terms everyone can understand:

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for dinner.
The bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our
taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing, the fifth would pay $1, the
sixth would pay $3, the seventh $7, the eighth $12, the ninth $13, and the tenth
man (the richest) would pay $59. That's what they decided to do.

The ten men ate dinner in the restaurant every day and seemed quite happy with
the arrangement ..... until one day, the owner threw them a curve (in tax
language, a 'tax cut'). "Since you are all such good customers," he said, "I'm
going to reduce the cost of your daily meal by $20." So now dinner for the ten
only cost $80. The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our
taxes. The first four men were unaffected. They would still eat for free. But
what about the other six - the paying customers? How could they divvy up the $20
windfall so that everyone would get his "fair share?" The six men realized that
$20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share,
the fifth man and the sixth man would end up being PAID to eat their meal. So
the restaurant owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill
by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should
pay. And so the fifth man paid nothing, the sixth pitched in $2, the seventh
paid $5, the eighth paid $9, the ninth paid $12, leaving the tenth man with a
bill of $52 instead of his earlier $59.

Each of the six was better off than before, and the first four continued to eat
for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their
savings. "I only got a dollar out of the $20," declared the sixth man. "But he
(pointing to the tenth man) got $7!". "Yeah, that's right," exclaimed the fifth
man. "I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got seven times more than
me!". "That's true!" shouted the seventh man. "Why should he get $7 back when I
got only $2? The wealthy get all the breaks!". "Wait a minute," yelled the first
four men in unison. "We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the
poor!". The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up. The next night the
tenth man didn't show up for dinner, so the nine sat down and ate without him.
But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered a little late what was
very important. They were FIFTY-TWO DOLLARS short of paying the bill! Imagine
that!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college instructors, is how the tax
system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a
tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, abuse them in
some way, and they just may not show up at the table anymore. Where would that
leave the rest? Unfortunately, most taxing authorities cannot seem to grasp this
rather straight-forward logic!
Thats a good way of looking at it.That why I like my idea of everyone pays the same percentage.Lets say hypothetically the income tax is %10 Every body pays ten pecent,nothing more nothing less.Of course any flat tax idea would put the tax assistance out of business.
 
Top Bottom