We either need to reduce spending or increase revenue. Neither candidate will reduce spending anywhere near enough to even think about balancing the budget, or even coming close. So we have to raise revenue. Do you want to raise taxes on the wealthy, or on the lower and middle class? It's gotta come from somewhere and it shoudlc ome from who can aford it most, especially in light of the major tax cut they received.
It's not about drilling anybody, it's about what's in the best interests of the country, now and going forward.
It's not about drilling anybody, it's about what's in the best interests of the country, now and going forward.
Since we have to tax people, we should tax them on what they spend rather than what they earn. Lower income earners can file for rebates, and will get a nice chunk of change back to spend, invest, or make a down payment on a home.
It would at least make people like the Kerrys pay more than 12.8%.
It would at least make people like the Kerrys pay more than 12.8%.
"Lower income earners can file for rebates, and will get a nice chunk of change back to spend, invest, or make a down payment on a home."
rebates? lets walk this thru shall we...
we have a "low inc earner" presently paying 10 %..he makes lets say 50,000. thats 5,000 a year..hes got 2 kids so he gets 2,000 in child credits and if married maybe another 500 due to the elimination of the marrige tax...he's paying 2,500 a year in fed taxes.. now how big is this FAT JUICY REBATE YOUR OFFERING MR.KERRY? ...OOOOO 50%???? (never in a million years will kerry ever allow some to get 50% of anything back but lets use that for now) so he gets back an extra 1250.00 in tax rebates!!!! yippie!! yahoooooooo!!!! walmart will rock tonight boys!
down payment on a frickin house with 1250???? you think that 1250 will look good in a savings account drawing 1.5% ?????
THIS WILL ACCOMPLISH NOT A FRICKIN THING FOR THIS COUNTRY....THE TAX CUTS FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PAY A FEW BUCKS IN TAXES WERE TO BOLSTER THE ECONOMY YOU *********!!!!! GIVING EVERY POORMAN AN EXTRA FEW HUNDRED WILL DO NOTHING!!!! NOTHING!!!!! NOTHING!!!!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND????? IT DOES NOTHING!!!!!!! ITS A STUPID IDEA TO DECIEVE STUPID PEOPLE!!!!!!!!
rebates? lets walk this thru shall we...
we have a "low inc earner" presently paying 10 %..he makes lets say 50,000. thats 5,000 a year..hes got 2 kids so he gets 2,000 in child credits and if married maybe another 500 due to the elimination of the marrige tax...he's paying 2,500 a year in fed taxes.. now how big is this FAT JUICY REBATE YOUR OFFERING MR.KERRY? ...OOOOO 50%???? (never in a million years will kerry ever allow some to get 50% of anything back but lets use that for now) so he gets back an extra 1250.00 in tax rebates!!!! yippie!! yahoooooooo!!!! walmart will rock tonight boys!
down payment on a frickin house with 1250???? you think that 1250 will look good in a savings account drawing 1.5% ?????
THIS WILL ACCOMPLISH NOT A FRICKIN THING FOR THIS COUNTRY....THE TAX CUTS FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY PAY A FEW BUCKS IN TAXES WERE TO BOLSTER THE ECONOMY YOU *********!!!!! GIVING EVERY POORMAN AN EXTRA FEW HUNDRED WILL DO NOTHING!!!! NOTHING!!!!! NOTHING!!!!! DO YOU UNDERSTAND????? IT DOES NOTHING!!!!!!! ITS A STUPID IDEA TO DECIEVE STUPID PEOPLE!!!!!!!!
Jinn,
It's a fact, I've been saying it for a long while here. If I was wrong the attack jackals would be all over me. Actually it's on the IRS website, it's fact. Now you see why the so-called rich get the tax cuts, because they are the only ones paying. I hardly consider if you actually work to mean you're rich, however, some do.
It's a fact, I've been saying it for a long while here. If I was wrong the attack jackals would be all over me. Actually it's on the IRS website, it's fact. Now you see why the so-called rich get the tax cuts, because they are the only ones paying. I hardly consider if you actually work to mean you're rich, however, some do.
Don't you get it, a couple, a fireman and a nurse in NYC working over-time and making 100K with a family is not rich. Their income falls well within the top 20% that foot 80% of the bill. Should the top 5% like Kerry, Edwards and Heinz pay more than 12-15%? Sure they should but they have very high dollar tax attorneys and they will always loop hole out of paying grossly high rates.JinnRikki said:
I don't believe there should be an income tax, however it is not going away. So my second choice is a flat tax where everyone pays the same percentage and there are NO deductions.
My third choice is a graduated flat tax, maybe have three or four rate brackets. 10%, 15%, and 20%. The first $20,000 of anyone's income could be exempt. There should be NO deductions, not for mortgage interest, not for charity, not for making babies, not for getting married. Income should all be treated the same no matter how it is earned, through hourly labor, by capital gain, or by stock dividends. Any money that increases your personal wealth should be treated as income. The government shouldn't try to engineer one type of income over another. If this system were in place the richest people in the country would be able to file their taxes on one page, the same as everyone else.
State taxes could be filed on a postcard and based on a percentage of what your federal tax bill was. If it is a high income tax state, maybe they will have you pay 25% of what your federal tax bill was, a low tax state may only have you pay 5%. Whatever it is, all you would have to report to the state is what you paid in federal taxes, and then pay the corresponding amount to the state.
Of course none of this will ever happen for multiple reasons. It would put too many people out of work who process the taxes, put people out of work who perform tax preparation, and of course destroy the careers of the fancy tax lawyers and accountants who spend their time making the complex tax code work for their clients.
Do you realize how many people would be out of work if we instituted the system above?
Not to mention all of the legislators and staffers that spend their careers crafting the nonsense.
And let us not forget all of the cottage indutries that benefit from the special treatment in the tax code from the charities (real and phony) to the real estate industry.
My third choice is a graduated flat tax, maybe have three or four rate brackets. 10%, 15%, and 20%. The first $20,000 of anyone's income could be exempt. There should be NO deductions, not for mortgage interest, not for charity, not for making babies, not for getting married. Income should all be treated the same no matter how it is earned, through hourly labor, by capital gain, or by stock dividends. Any money that increases your personal wealth should be treated as income. The government shouldn't try to engineer one type of income over another. If this system were in place the richest people in the country would be able to file their taxes on one page, the same as everyone else.
State taxes could be filed on a postcard and based on a percentage of what your federal tax bill was. If it is a high income tax state, maybe they will have you pay 25% of what your federal tax bill was, a low tax state may only have you pay 5%. Whatever it is, all you would have to report to the state is what you paid in federal taxes, and then pay the corresponding amount to the state.
Of course none of this will ever happen for multiple reasons. It would put too many people out of work who process the taxes, put people out of work who perform tax preparation, and of course destroy the careers of the fancy tax lawyers and accountants who spend their time making the complex tax code work for their clients.
Do you realize how many people would be out of work if we instituted the system above?
Not to mention all of the legislators and staffers that spend their careers crafting the nonsense.
And let us not forget all of the cottage indutries that benefit from the special treatment in the tax code from the charities (real and phony) to the real estate industry.
What makes you think they wouldn't want more and more with a national sales tax?
I have no problem with a national sales tax but I fear it would start high and get higher. It also does cost the poor a disproportionate amount of their income compared to the rich. Maybe a solution would be to exempt food, clothing, and maybe shelter from the sales tax???
I have no problem with a national sales tax but I fear it would start high and get higher. It also does cost the poor a disproportionate amount of their income compared to the rich. Maybe a solution would be to exempt food, clothing, and maybe shelter from the sales tax???
There would have to be specific limits set and any increase would have to be passed by the congress and senate. I doubt they would raise it much unless they could sell it or they'd be voted out. The exemption should be food only no booze or smokes or springer DVDs. I see some fat so-called poor out buying 150 nikes and new release xbox games. I'm still buying the cheap 80.00 nikes.
