Here's a flat tax for you.....

[YoungConserv]

Everyone is taxed the same for the income at specific income levels, only for the income over and above the brackets is the tax rate higher.

Right and having differ t brackets legally separate us which is not equality under the law.separate is not equal

 

[Deuce]

Yes and yes.

If you don't view risk as a factor, then explaining it to you would do no good.

Does it scale with risk? Should riskier ventures be rewarded with greater and greater tax breaks?

 

[Deuce]

Right and having differ t brackets legally separate us which is not equality under the law.separate is not equal

That is your interpretation. Why don't you advocate a flat dollar tax? Say, $5000 per person. Isn't that "equal treatment?" You don't support equal treatment!? Flat percentage is just as arbitrarily "equal" as a flat dollar amount.

 

[YoungConserv]

That is your interpretation. Why don't you advocate a flat dollar tax? Say, $5000 per person. Isn't that "equal treatment?" You don't support equal treatment!? Flat percentage is just as arbitrarily "equal" as a flat dollar amount.

It is but it allows for some what of a middle ground between the flat tax and what we have now.

 

[Paschendale]

Right and having differ t brackets legally separate us which is not equality under the law.separate is not equal

Okay, it's not equal treatment. Fortunately, it is very easy to prove that this unequal treatment is rationally related to furthering a legitimate government interest. That being raising revenue. It is much more effective to obtain revenue from those who have a lot more revenue to spare than from those who do not. Look, even without the sixteenth amendment, progressive income tax passes constitutional muster!

Obviously, higher income is not grounds for a more strict level of scrutiny.

To the OP, I don't think anyone actually thinks the flat tax is a good idea unless their only desire is to lower their own taxes.

 

[Republic Now!]

I can't find any basis for the the claim that Wisconsin is 44th in job growth. The claim that their dead last in short-term growth is definitely false. According to the BLS (This is a third party source which compiles BLS data), Wisconsin has the second highest percentage increase in employment and the third highest base growth in employment in June.

Also, I'm sick of hearing how a tax cut which everyone benefits from is attacking a certain group because they get less of a cut. It gets old fast and it's extremely stupid. It amazes me that people actually buy into it though.

 

[YoungConserv]

Okay, it's not equal treatment. Fortunately, it is very easy to prove that this unequal treatment is rationally related to furthering a legitimate government interest. That being raising revenue. It is much more effective to obtain revenue from those who have a lot more revenue to spare than from those who do not. Look, even without the sixteenth amendment, progressive income tax passes constitutional muster!

Obviously, higher income is not grounds for a more strict level of scrutiny.

To the OP, I don't think anyone actually thinks the flat tax is a good idea unless their only desire is to lower their own taxes.

What do you think about a flat tax that has exceptions for basics like food, rent and utilities with in reason and that's it?

 

[YoungConserv]

Also, I'm sick of hearing how a tax cut which everyone benefits from is attacking a certain group because they get less of a cut. It gets old fast and it's extremely stupid. It amazes me that people actually buy into it though.

Not to mention there is no such thing as a tax cut only a change in tax rate. The whole idea of a tax cut insists that there is a ideal tax rate that we no for a fact.

 

[Paschendale]

What do you think about a flat tax that has exceptions for basics like food, rent and utilities with in reason and that's it?

Insufficient. That would amount to little more than massive tax cuts for the wealthy. Which accomplishes absolutely no good for anyone.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

I can't find any basis for the the claim that Wisconsin is 44th in job growth. The claim that their dead last in short-term growth is definitely false. According to the BLS (This is a third party source which compiles BLS data), Wisconsin has the second highest percentage increase in employment and the third highest base growth in employment in June.

Also, I'm sick of hearing how a tax cut which everyone benefits from is attacking a certain group because they get less of a cut. It gets old fast and it's extremely stupid. It amazes me that people actually buy into it though.

The finding came from The US Chamber of Commerce report.

Anyway, how is it good for the middle class to sacrifice things like schools and all those other necessary things needed for towns and cities to function for an extra $34.00 in pocket change? It's absurd.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Insufficient. That would amount to little more than massive tax cuts for the wealthy. Which accomplishes absolutely no good for anyone.

Well sure it does if you believe in fairies, magic dust and things that trickle down:drink

 

[Republic Now!]

The finding came from The US Chamber of Commerce report.

Could you cite it for me please?

Anyway, how is it good for the middle class to sacrifice things like schools and all those other necessary things needed for towns and cities to function for an extra $34.00 in pocket change? It's absurd.

Imagep explained earlier that only the rich used schools.

 

[Gipper]

Does it scale with risk? Should riskier ventures be rewarded with greater and greater tax breaks?

Yes they should.

 

[Jerry]

Independent analysis confirms GOP flat tax plan is massive tax giveaway to the wealthy at the expense of middle-class taxpayers | Urban Milwaukee

The only tax that should exist is a clean 10% off the top of everything you earn in anyway. No exceptions, no exemptions, not credits, no progressive tax system of any kind, and yes the poor have to pay their 10% also. No one favored or hated more than anyone else. Everyone pays 10%, and government officials held personally and criminally responsible for fraud.

 

[rabbitcaebannog]

Could you cite it for me please?

Sure: http://foundation.uschamber.com/PDF/ES2013.pdf scroll down to page 83

 

[imagep]

The only tax that should exist is a clean 10% off the top of everything you earn in anyway. No exceptions, no exemptions, not credits, no progressive tax system of any kind, and yes the poor have to pay their 10% also. No one favored or hated more than anyone else. Everyone pays 10%, and government officials held personally and criminally responsible for fraud.

Conservatives keep telling me that any time you tax something, you get less of it. So you think that it would be better to have less production.

If I had to pick just one type of tax, and no other taxes were allowed, I would pick inheritance, because it is the transfer of wealth to someone who did nothing to create it. I would actually suggest taxing sloth or stupidity, or gluttony (so that we have less of it), but I don't know that would be quite as practical.

Regardless, there are a lot of advantages of having multiple taxes. Anytime that you tax just one thing, then people concentrate on avoiding just that one thing. Although I have to admit that the 10% you suggested wouldn't be so high that it would cause a lot of problems in this aspect.

 

[Republic Now!]

Sure: http://foundation.uschamber.com/PDF/ES2013.pdf scroll down to page 83

Considering the scope of that survey is mostly outside of the time-frame in which the Republicans had control it is deceptive to use it as a criticism of them.

Unfortunately, without compiling each individual state's statistics, the BLS has no simple way to compare the state's employment growth. The easiest way, it seems would be to use the unemployment map as a metric for how the state's job market is looking. From this map, comparing June 2011- June 2013, we can see that Wisconsin is most certainly not last, outpacing several states in unemployment reduction.

If anyone knows how to compile BLS data more effectively or wants to bother compiling the state employment data later please do so. I may do so when I have some more free time just to have it available, and if I do, I'll post it here.

 

[Jerry]

Conservatives keep telling me that any time you tax something, you get less of it. So you think that it would be better to have less production.

10% is 24% less than I pay now, so it's a large net increase.

 

[TurtleDude]

Yes they should.

tax rates should lessen the more you pay. the rich will still pay far more for what they get. But its idiotic that those who pay the most also pay the highest rates when they don't use nearly as much as what they pay for

 

[Gipper]

tax rates should lessen the more you pay. the rich will still pay far more for what they get. But its idiotic that those who pay the most also pay the highest rates when they don't use nearly as much as what they pay for

Well I certainly won't advocate for regressive income taxation. That's just...cruel. However, a flat tax is still terrific because it will still allow for basic exemptions and deductions. This assists the [working] poor. If the first 15,000 dollars is exempt, that may be a fraction of a percent to a billionaire, but it could make all the difference in the world for someone that's just trying to get by at the most basic level.

Having said that, risk still plays a key part in taxation in my mind. If you make your money as a professional poker player, you should have a lower tax rate. The only way I would say that shouldn't be the case is if you're more cushioned if/when you lose. Same with capital gains. Apparently a ton of people think that there is no such thing as "capital losses". Capital losses are essentially nothing. You can get the most basic of benefits from them (a write-off) which is small in nature and is a perk given to almost anything. If al-Qaeda set your house on fire, you could claim a deduction and it was out of your hands.

Now...if capital losses were a credit as opposed to a deduction, then yeah...go ahead and tax them as normal income. However, it's just foolish to punish investors because some people don't think their way of making money is "fair".

Usually the people who advocate against this are people who are all emotion and no business acumen.

 

[head of joaquin]

Yes they should.

A sure way to produce a bubble and a recession.

So tell us why should risk born by billionaires be incentivized. Go into detail. I want to hear this!

 

[head of joaquin]

very few of the parasite class actually work. They want others to work to feed them. Do you get a bonus for every time you use the silly MEME term. IT really has no use in this discussion

Make stuff up much?

 

[Gipper]

A sure way to produce a bubble and a recession.

So tell us why should risk born by billionaires be incentivized. Go into detail. I want to hear this!

So they continue to take risks.

 

[Deuce]

What do you think about a flat tax that has exceptions for basics like food, rent and utilities with in reason and that's it?

How about clothes? Toilet paper? Who decides what counts as "food?" And what does "within reason" mean? Are we leaving in a lower capital gains rate? Various tax writeoffs like having children, buying a house, or charitable donations?

Sales taxes always end up regressive. A poor person has to spend a greater percentage of their income on basic subsistence.

 

[Deuce]

Yes they should.

...

why? That just encourages reckless behavior.