If you have a TV or a cell phone one is paying a federal tax on their electric bill to power the things.
If that actually deterred the non FIT payers from wanting more spending it might make sense
it doesn't
people who have no skin in the game shouldn't be demanding people like me pay more
if they want me to pay more they should face tax hikes too
And therein lies the biggest moral hazard our Republic has ever faced, predicted for almost two centuries that we would face it. The ability of the electorate to vote itself the largesse of the Treasury.
Everyone needs to pay a portion of every tax where they have any income. No exemptions. As you note, all need skin in every game. It is part of the appeal of Cain's 9-9-9. It greatly reduces that number of games being played, and all get to participate in some very transparent and simple revenue schemes, such that the government cannot play hide-and-steal with the tax codes.
the welfare socialists hate the thought of everyone having to pay income tax since it would really cut down on the ability of the pimps in their party winning elections by promising a couple hundred thousand slackers that their needs will be funded by raising taxes on a couple thousand highly productive tax payers
If that actually deterred the non FIT payers from wanting more spending it might make sense
if they want me to pay more they should face tax hikes too
I bet Dean Foods would not like your proposition. Odds are you just like millions bought milk from one of their dairys.
What spending are you talking about?
They have over the past thirty or so years.
nah we always bought Coors when I was a kid, and later Trauth though both are now out of business
and its people who pay taxes corporations are just conduits
and its people who pay taxes corporations are just conduits
Coors is out of business?
WOW those right wing nuts there at Coors have really gone nutso!
psssst corporations are people too. just ask a judge.
Sure, I say get money out of politics in general.
Rant aside I am sure it doesn't hurt to be the President's close friend.
j-mac
.....that.....
OR
maybe given that human beings will seek to maximize their own self interest, and businesses are owned and run by human beings, we should just cease giving out preferential treatment alltogether?
Yet another in a long streak of great ideas, CP! We can stop giving preferential treatment to everybody!
So what about keeping the government running? We’re gonna have to tax somebody to keep essential services going (whatever you think those may be). How are we going to decide who gets taxed and who doesn’t without preferential treatment? Tax everybody the same %?
Shouldn’t we take marginal propensity to spend into account?
What about industries that are vital to American infrastructure?
Shouldn’t we favor those to avoid being stuck in the 20th century while the rest of the world advances around us?
No matter how much bull**** you try to spatter on the issue, it is impossible to avoid giving preferential treatment to somebody.
I’m saying that we should rationally assess who and what conditions will spread the most prosperity to the middle class.
I know that sounds difficult, CP, but don’t worry; none of us are going to heft undue expectations of rationality onto your shoulders
. Carry on, good sir.
GE is thriving and not sharing any of their gains with the people of the US, therefore we need to stop giving them the preferential treatment that’s allowed them to thrive; we need to find companies that are willing to share their windfall with the people and give them those resources instead.
Also: 1+1=2
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?