- Joined
- Jul 21, 2005
- Messages
- 51,713
- Reaction score
- 35,493
- Location
- Washington, DC
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Conservative
Okay, crazy thought in my head regarding a tax system.
Liberals generally like a progressive tax that has the higher incomes paying a significantly higher amount and that is light on the poorer ones.
Conservatives generally are wanting to have everyone have some skin in the game and avoid situations where only one bracket is getting played with due to mob rule.
So what if we did this. We set 6 brackets and they are unmovable. Bracket 1 is our baseline bracket with each other bracket being X times higher than the baseline bracket. That number (X) can not be changed, and individual brackets can not be changed. The only way to change the tax is to affect the baseline bracket. It would look like this
1) $0 - $24k . . . . . . . 1 (baseline)
2) $24k - $72k . . . . . . Baseline * 2
3) $72k - $144k . . . . . Baseline * 4
4) $144k - $240k . . . . Baseline * 6
5) $240k - $360k . . . . Baseline * 8
6) $360k + . . . . . . . . Baseline * 10
The only deduction would be from Chlidren. Your baseline is reduced by 6% per child (may of 4 children), with that 6% going down by 1 for each bracket you're in. So Bracket 1 would get the full 6% per, bracket 3 would be getting 4%, and bracket 6 would be 1% per.
From there, politicians can still argue over taxes but only in regards to changing the baseline. If you want the upper bracket to pay 70% you can, however the poor will be paying 7% and middle class will be paying between 14% and 28%. Want to make the upper income brackets pay under 30%? Then the poor is going to be paying less than 3% taxes and the highest middle class tax would be under 12%.
This would eliminate the ability for politicians to play to any particular base, pitting them against the other. Whether that be convincing everyone to go after the "rich" or doing a "pay off" to the wealthy by lowering their taxes. It would interject a bit of stability into our tax rate system as well and make it slightly less of a constant politicla issue. It'd also simplify the tax code immensely.
You could set Capital Gains at say Baseline * 5 and leave it at that, taking Capital Gains also off the table as a political tool. Ditto for setting something like the Corporate Tax (Base * 5 as well)?
So, what would your thoughts of this generalized tax scheme be? Like it? Dislike? Like the theory but not the numbers? Also, what would you push for the starting baseline to be?
2011 | ||||||||||||||
Married Filing Jointly | Married Filing Separately | Single | Head of Household | |||||||||||
Marginal | Tax Brackets | Marginal | Tax Brackets | Marginal | Tax Brackets | Marginal | Tax Brackets | |||||||
Tax Rate | Over | But Not Over | Tax Rate | Over | But Not Over | Tax Rate | Over | But Not Over | Tax Rate | Over | But Not Over | |||
10.0% | $0 | $17,000 | 10.0% | $0 | $8,500 | 10.0% | $0 | $8,500 | 10.0% | $0 | $12,150 | |||
15.0% | $17,000 | $69,000 | 15.0% | $8,500 | $34,500 | 15.0% | $8,500 | $34,500 | 15.0% | $12,150 | $46,250 | |||
25.0% | $69,000 | $139,350 | 25.0% | $34,500 | $69,675 | 25.0% | $34,500 | $83,600 | 25.0% | $46,250 | $119,400 | |||
28.0% | $139,350 | $212,300 | 28.0% | $69,675 | $106,150 | 28.0% | $83,600 | $174,400 | 28.0% | $119,400 | $193,350 | |||
33.0% | $212,300 | $379,150 | 33.0% | $106,150 | $189,575 | 33.0% | $174,400 | $379,150 | 33.0% | $193,350 | $379,150 | |||
35.0% | $379,150 | - | 35.0% | $189,575 | - | 35.0% | $379,150 | - | 35.0% | $379,150 | - | |||
Note: Last law to change rates was the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act of 2003. |
Okay, crazy thought in my head regarding a tax system.
Liberals generally like a progressive tax that has the higher incomes paying a significantly higher amount and that is light on the poorer ones.
Conservatives generally are wanting to have everyone have some skin in the game and avoid situations where only one bracket is getting played with due to mob rule.
So what if we did this. We set 6 brackets and they are unmovable. Bracket 1 is our baseline bracket with each other bracket being X times higher than the baseline bracket. That number (X) can not be changed, and individual brackets can not be changed. The only way to change the tax is to affect the baseline bracket. It would look like this
1) $0 - $24k . . . . . . . 1 (baseline)
2) $24k - $72k . . . . . . Baseline * 2
3) $72k - $144k . . . . . Baseline * 4
4) $144k - $240k . . . . Baseline * 6
5) $240k - $360k . . . . Baseline * 8
6) $360k + . . . . . . . . Baseline * 10
The only deduction would be from Chlidren. Your baseline is reduced by 6% per child (may of 4 children), with that 6% going down by 1 for each bracket you're in. So Bracket 1 would get the full 6% per, bracket 3 would be getting 4%, and bracket 6 would be 1% per.
From there, politicians can still argue over taxes but only in regards to changing the baseline. If you want the upper bracket to pay 70% you can, however the poor will be paying 7% and middle class will be paying between 14% and 28%. Want to make the upper income brackets pay under 30%? Then the poor is going to be paying less than 3% taxes and the highest middle class tax would be under 12%.
This would eliminate the ability for politicians to play to any particular base, pitting them against the other. Whether that be convincing everyone to go after the "rich" or doing a "pay off" to the wealthy by lowering their taxes. It would interject a bit of stability into our tax rate system as well and make it slightly less of a constant politicla issue. It'd also simplify the tax code immensely.
You could set Capital Gains at say Baseline * 5 and leave it at that, taking Capital Gains also off the table as a political tool. Ditto for setting something like the Corporate Tax (Base * 5 as well)?
So, what would your thoughts of this generalized tax scheme be? Like it? Dislike? Like the theory but not the numbers? Also, what would you push for the starting baseline to be?
So, what would your thoughts of this generalized tax scheme be? Like it? Dislike? Like the theory but not the numbers? Also, what would you push for the starting baseline to be?
I need new roofing on one of my homes. If I get a small time roofer, my neighbor is one, to buy the materials does he pay the tax on that? If he does my roof with those materials, who sells them to me? Do I pay the tax again with tax on tax? How much could he charge me? A big discount below his purchase price would be nice. Would it be better for me to buy the materials and pay the tax just once? If I buy the roofing materials in Mexico (I have a PU and a trailer that carries over a ton.) how much tax do I pay? Is this tax just for the final consumer? If I buy a car and claim I’m a part time taxi service how much tax do I pay?Dislike.
20-25% consumption on everything anyone buys, paid at the point-of-sale. No exceptions, write-offs, or other taxes at all.
So you have a long driveway and you want other people to pay for it's maintenance. :dohWe live on a private road. (Not because we want to, but because when the township was established it didn’t want it.) It needs paving and bridge work. We don’t get a property tax break because we have a private road. So, would we have to pay consumption tax on the paving materials? BTW, there are only disadvanteses to havinh our house on a private road rather than a township one.
I need new roofing on one of my homes. If I get a small time roofer, my neighbor is one, to buy the materials does he pay the tax on that?
If he does my roof with those materials, who sells them to me?
Do I pay the tax again with tax on tax?
How much could he charge me?
A big discount below his purchase price would be nice.
Would it be better for me to buy the materials and pay the tax just once?
If I buy the roofing materials in Mexico (I have a PU and a trailer that carries over a ton.) how much tax do I pay?
If I buy a car and claim I’m a part time taxi service how much tax do I pay?
Okay, crazy thought in my head regarding a tax system.
Liberals generally like a progressive tax that has the higher incomes paying a significantly higher amount and that is light on the poorer ones.
Conservatives generally are wanting to have everyone have some skin in the game and avoid situations where only one bracket is getting played with due to mob rule.
So what if we did this. We set 6 brackets and they are unmovable. Bracket 1 is our baseline bracket with each other bracket being X times higher than the baseline bracket. That number (X) can not be changed, and individual brackets can not be changed. The only way to change the tax is to affect the baseline bracket. It would look like this
1) $0 - $24k . . . . . . . 1 (baseline)
2) $24k - $72k . . . . . . Baseline * 2
3) $72k - $144k . . . . . Baseline * 4
4) $144k - $240k . . . . Baseline * 6
5) $240k - $360k . . . . Baseline * 8
6) $360k + . . . . . . . . Baseline * 10
The only deduction would be from Chlidren. Your baseline is reduced by 6% per child (may of 4 children), with that 6% going down by 1 for each bracket you're in. So Bracket 1 would get the full 6% per, bracket 3 would be getting 4%, and bracket 6 would be 1% per.
From there, politicians can still argue over taxes but only in regards to changing the baseline. If you want the upper bracket to pay 70% you can, however the poor will be paying 7% and middle class will be paying between 14% and 28%. Want to make the upper income brackets pay under 30%? Then the poor is going to be paying less than 3% taxes and the highest middle class tax would be under 12%.
This would eliminate the ability for politicians to play to any particular base, pitting them against the other. Whether that be convincing everyone to go after the "rich" or doing a "pay off" to the wealthy by lowering their taxes. It would interject a bit of stability into our tax rate system as well and make it slightly less of a constant politicla issue. It'd also simplify the tax code immensely.
You could set Capital Gains at say Baseline * 5 and leave it at that, taking Capital Gains also off the table as a political tool. Ditto for setting something like the Corporate Tax (Base * 5 as well)?
So, what would your thoughts of this generalized tax scheme be? Like it? Dislike? Like the theory but not the numbers? Also, what would you push for the starting baseline to be?
This is to be a tax rate on what kind of income.
Are there any deductions?
How is this proposal much different in concept than the current tax table?
this could be workable, but would it be the same as we have now, say, if you made 75k, you would be taxed at baseline * 2 for 72k, and baseline * 4 for the additional 3k? otherwise, there actually would be a huge disincentive to jump into the next bracket and would not seem to be fair at all.
No, we have about 20 homes on this private drive. It’s about 3000 feet long because of a long curve and bridge that doesn't need to be there if it was public. The density matches another township road I can see from my house, i.e. it's typical for the area. I also have a long driveway that I pay to maintain.So you have a long driveway and you want other people to pay for it's maintenance. :doh
.
Whatever income our current income tax system considers income.
Outside of the small deduction for children, no.
As to your back and forth about consumption taxes, could you all perhaps take that to another thread rather than turn this one into a thread about consumption taxes?
So why did you buy or build a house there?No, we have about 20 homes on this private drive. It’s about 3000 feet long because of a long curve and bridge that doesn't need to be there if it was public. The density matches another township road I can see from my house, i.e. it's typical for the area. I also have a long driveway that I pay to maintain.
Okay, crazy thought in my head regarding a tax system.
Liberals generally like a progressive tax that has the higher incomes paying a significantly higher amount and that is light on the poorer ones.
Conservatives generally are wanting to have everyone have some skin in the game and avoid situations where only one bracket is getting played with due to mob rule.
So what if we did this. We set 6 brackets and they are unmovable. Bracket 1 is our baseline bracket with each other bracket being X times higher than the baseline bracket. That number (X) can not be changed, and individual brackets can not be changed. The only way to change the tax is to affect the baseline bracket. It would look like this
1) $0 - $24k . . . . . . . 1 (baseline)
2) $24k - $72k . . . . . . Baseline * 2
3) $72k - $144k . . . . . Baseline * 4
4) $144k - $240k . . . . Baseline * 6
5) $240k - $360k . . . . Baseline * 8
6) $360k + . . . . . . . . Baseline * 10
The only deduction would be from Chlidren. Your baseline is reduced by 6% per child (may of 4 children), with that 6% going down by 1 for each bracket you're in. So Bracket 1 would get the full 6% per, bracket 3 would be getting 4%, and bracket 6 would be 1% per.
From there, politicians can still argue over taxes but only in regards to changing the baseline. If you want the upper bracket to pay 70% you can, however the poor will be paying 7% and middle class will be paying between 14% and 28%. Want to make the upper income brackets pay under 30%? Then the poor is going to be paying less than 3% taxes and the highest middle class tax would be under 12%.
This would eliminate the ability for politicians to play to any particular base, pitting them against the other. Whether that be convincing everyone to go after the "rich" or doing a "pay off" to the wealthy by lowering their taxes. It would interject a bit of stability into our tax rate system as well and make it slightly less of a constant politicla issue. It'd also simplify the tax code immensely.
You could set Capital Gains at say Baseline * 5 and leave it at that, taking Capital Gains also off the table as a political tool. Ditto for setting something like the Corporate Tax (Base * 5 as well)?
So, what would your thoughts of this generalized tax scheme be? Like it? Dislike? Like the theory but not the numbers? Also, what would you push for the starting baseline to be?
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?