Forbes: Bill Gates Points To The Best Tax System, The Progressive Consumption Tax

[DarkWizard12]

For example? Name me a tax which treats everyone fairly and yet limits capitalism.

Are those mutually exclusive? Like, the tax system is so sacred it has to exist in some -ism dichotomy? there are many capitalist, socialist, and mixed-economy countries that have so many varying degrees of taxation, it'd prefer to just 'use whatever works' here.

 

[jonny5]

Are those mutually exclusive? Like, the tax system is so sacred it has to exist in some -ism dichotomy? there are many capitalist, socialist, and mixed-economy countries that have so many varying degrees of taxation, it'd prefer to just 'use whatever works' here.

Yes, either you respect an individuals right to trade their labor and property for whatever they value it at. Or you dont. If you dont, then you can get the govt to take whatever you think is too much, via taxation. Govt is like any product. Everyone pays the same and gets the same return (prior to progessive taxation). McDonalds doesnt exist to reduce wealth inequality. It sells burgers, and everyone pays the same price, rich or poor.

Govt sells security and justice.

 

[Lafayette]

Everyone would be saving more and spending less.

Explain why.

 

[Lafayette]

I can tell your not interested in actual debate, so Ill just leave you to your yes men.

Cop out ...

 

[Winchester]

Hes wrong. Fair means equal. Progressivism is not equal. 2 people pay vastly different sums for the same return, which is again, unequal.

And its certainly accepted by pretty much everyone. He should probably stick to what he is good at, making software.

Yeah, no. Fair is in the eye of the beholder and not necessarily equal.

 

[Crovax]

I don't think that's necessarily a problem with the economy, as much as it's a problem with sellers either not providing anything worth buying, or everything that is worth buying is too expensive. It's not so much a problem as much as it is a sign of other things going on. Kinda like coughing doesn't make you sick, but it's a sign you might be sick.

You are missing the point, it doesn't matter what causes the savings it hurts the economy and a tax plan that provides great incentives for saving will hurt the economy.

 

[Crovax]

Explain why.

I really need to explain why a tax plan that leaves savings tax free and only tags spending would increase savings?

 

[Lafayette]

I really need to explain why a tax plan that leaves savings tax free and only tags spending would increase savings?

Unless you hide our savings under the mattress, they are in a bank earning interest.

They are therefore producing taxable income ...

 

[Crovax]

Unless you hide our savings under the mattress, they are in a bank earning interest.

They are therefore producing taxable income ...

It's not taxable under this plan, do you even bother reading your own sources

Any profits, capital gains, dividends, interest, any of these are treated exactly the same as any other income. If you’ve kept them in savings then they are not taxed

 

[James972]

You are missing the point, it doesn't matter what causes the savings it hurts the economy and a tax plan that provides great incentives for saving will hurt the economy.

actually in econ 101 we teach that S=I. Saving=investment. All growth comes from savings and investment. Make sense?

 

[Crovax]

actually in econ 101 we teach that S=I. Saving=investment. All growth comes from savings and investment. Make sense?

Considering that US companies are sitting on a record amount of savings and the economy growth is anemic, seems like that isn't the case.

Companies have $1.4 trillion in cash. Will they spend it? - Mar. 20, 2015

 

[Lafayette]

I really need to explain why a tax plan that leaves savings tax free and only tags spending would increase savings?

It's not taxable under this plan, do you even bother reading your own sources

Yes, you really need to explain why interest is not taxable!

From WikiPedia: Gross income:

Main article: Gross income

The Internal Revenue Code states that "gross income means all income from whatever source derived," and gives specific examples.

Gross income is not limited to cash received. "It includes income realized in any form, whether money, property, or services." Gross income includes wages and tips, fees for performing services, gain from sale of inventory or other property, interest, dividends, rents, royalties, pensions, alimony, and many other types of income. Items must be included in income when received or accrued. The amount included is the amount the taxpayer is entitled to receive. Gains on property are the gross proceeds less amounts returned, cost of goods sold, or tax basis of property sold.

Certain types of income are exempt from income tax. Among the more common types of exempt income are interest on municipal bonds, a portion of Social Security benefits, life insurance proceeds, gifts or inheritances, and the value of many employee benefits.

 

[Crovax]

Yes, you really need to explain why interest is not taxable!

From WikiPedia: Gross income:

You don't get it.

Under our current tax plan it is taxable as per your quote, if we switch to Bill Gates tax plan it won't be taxed.

 

[laska]

actually in econ 101 we teach that S=I. Saving=investment. All growth comes from savings and investment. Make sense?

Multiplier effect.

 

[Lafayette]

You don't get it. Under our current tax plan it is taxable as per your quote, if we switch to Bill Gates tax plan it won't be taxed.

And so what?

Of course it wont be taxed, because (under the Gates plan) it reduces the impact of the "gifted income" being made ...

And here is what you "don't get": You are not the only one on this forum. So, in any exchange, it is wise to repeat the point to which you are responding. Otherwise, the comment-exchange gets very confusing.

 

[jonny5]

Cop out ...

Says this guy

"Leave your BS about "stealing" in the toilet, where it belongs way down in the bog ..."

 

[jonny5]

Yeah, no. Fair is in the eye of the beholder and not necessarily equal.

Look it up. Fair means equal treatment. Only politicians redefine words to suit them.

 

[Lafayette]

You imply that it is subjective.

In the present circumstance, that of Income Disparity, it is objective. Meaning this, economists have employed the Gini Index to determine the degree of "fairness" in an economic-context.

Here it is:

As you can see, the US is just about as "fair" as China. And much less unfair than "high-taxation, high social-services expenditures" Europe. But more fair than Mexico. (Wow, what an achievement!!!)

So, now, of course, you don't like the mathematics employed. Right ... ?

PS: And that trend upwards begins when in US history? Take a close look. The 1980s! And who was PotUS in the 1980s? Yes! Reckless Ronnie who brought upper-income taxation down from 70% to less than 30%! (No wonder the Replicants put up so many statues of him!)
__________________

 

[DA60]

Jeez...all these ideas to 'save' America look more and more like re-arranging the deck chairs on the Titanic.

You people are looking at the wrong things.

Different taxation, MMT, supplemental incomes, more stimulus, negative interest rates...it's all nonsense.

The problem is the central banks of the world are running the economies and the central banks are run by big business/banks. And they are slowly destroying the middle classes of the world.

The problem is not bigger government...the problem is there is way, WAY too much government.

Kill/neuter the Fed's of the world and balance federal budgets. Do that and the economies of the world will grow far more quickly then they are now...guaranteed.

But most of you don't understand that.

And therein lies the problem.

Mooching has become cool. Discipline has become a sin.

 

[James972]

Kill/neuter the Fed's of the world

yes then who will control inflation and deflation???

 

[Lafayette]

You are missing the point, it doesn't matter what causes the savings it hurts the economy and a tax plan that provides great incentives for saving will hurt the economy.

And, at present, with a huge national debt to be sustained, the tax-revenue goes to maintaining the debt, when it could be used stimulating the economy thus adding jobs.

And I'm missing the point ... ?

 

[Lafayette]

A NATION GOING NOWHERE

You people are looking at the wrong things.

They're the right "things", but everybody thinks "their thing" is the right one.

When the economy is, in fact, a giant puzzle that can never be completely "made". We start in one place (heady investment in real-estate) and it undoes itself (Toxic Waste starts a Great Recession).

Reckless Ronnie's tax-hatchet created a Net Worth Class of the Rich (only 11% of the nation who own 88% of total Net Worth) and, at the same time, a constant Poverty Threshold of 50 million people (that commit crimes because they can't get decent jobs at their low-level of skills competency). The Replicants swagger into a Middle-east War that eats up billions of precious dollars, that could have been better spent elsewhere, and we still can't quit the mess we started - not having left well-enough alone.

It's a wheel of fortune that turns, and turns and turns ... on itself. High crime rates that make incarceration a profitable BigBusiness for some. Whilst the cost is paid out of the Public Purse at the state level - that really needs the money for doing other things. Like giving the kids a decent tertiary-level education such that they can find decent jobs at a decent pay-scale.

We, as a nation, are running on a treadmill that goes effectively nowhere. Just lots of sweat for not all that much advancement.

Economically, we're just running in place and going nowhere. Because our Political System is a shambles that it is, which is what happens when so few bother to even participate by voting ...

PS: And many think the Dunderhead, with his brains so far up his backside, is the Real 'n True Answer to all our problems? Wow, what idiocy.
PPS: But why not more idiocy? We, as a nation, have become proficient at it.
_____________________

 

[James972]

And, at present, with a huge national debt to be sustained, the tax-revenue goes to maintaining the debt, when it could be used stimulating the economy thus adding jobs.

And I'm missing the point ... ?

If tax revenue spent by govt stimulates the economy then tax revenue not spent by the taxpayer destimulates the economy. therefore no net increase in spending is made possible by govt spending. Layfayette is 100% baffled by basic economics.

 

[James972]

Economically, we're just running in place and going nowhere. Because our Political System is a shambles that it is, which is what happens when so few bother to even participate by voting ...

so if the near total illiterates who don't vote did vote they could teach us how to solve our economic problems???? Could anything be dumber???

 

[DA60]

Progressive taxation is, by definition, unfair.

Everyone should pay EXACTLY the same tax rate (outside of the very poor as the effort would be wasted and self-defeating).

I don't care what Gates says on this, the ONLY fair taxation is where everyone pays EXACTLY the same tax rate...on income and ALL capital gains (including principle residences) with no deductions except for charitable contributions.

That is a fair way of taxation. Progressive taxation is not.