|
|
 Up |
|
  |
Author: Michael BaldwinMichael Baldwin Date: Sep 12, 2008 00:02
SJM gets on the same page and writes:
>It's not just the poor who spend the majority of
>their income. It's 95%% of Americans. The top 2%% spends
>a tiny fraction of what they earn and will be
>taxed only on that.
>Meanwhile average Americans are paying 23%% of their income out
>in taxes. How is this a fair tax?
Respectfully SJM your statement, "Meanwhile average Americans are paying
23%% of their income out in taxes", is simply inaccurate and wrong.
Everyone in America would only pay tax on what they _consume_...
|
| Show full article (1.96Kb) |
|
| | 44 Comments |
|
|
Author: Tom ShermanTom Sherman Date: Sep 12, 2008 02:03
Michael Baldwin wrote:
> SJM gets on the same page and writes:
>
>> It's not just the poor who spend the majority of
>> their income. It's 95%% of Americans. The top 2%% spends
>> a tiny fraction of what they earn and will be
>> taxed only on that.
>> Meanwhile average Americans are paying 23%% of their income out
>> in taxes. How is this a fair tax?
>
> Respectfully SJM your statement, "Meanwhile average Americans are paying
> 23%% of their income out in taxes", is simply inaccurate and wrong.
> Everyone in America would only pay tax on what they _consume_. Never
> again on _income_. Only _legal_ residents of the U.S. would receive the
> pre-bate to offset the tax on necessities.
> Granted, we all know the average successful millionaire _spends_ only
> a fraction of the accumulated wealth. But how much of that wealth is
> re-invested? I'll make this quick. I bet there are a whole bunch of
> folk, awfully glad Oprah has re-invested her accumulated and _earned_
> wealth back into other businesses. Oprah has provided jobs and income ...
|
| Show full article (3.41Kb) |
|
| | 43 Comments |
|
|
Author: Michael BaldwinMichael Baldwin Date: Sep 12, 2008 03:14
Tom, who knows he could be fired at any moment for no reason, hones his
stand up routine just in case and writes:
>The government under the current administration is not interested in
>big time tax cheats (since they are part of "their
>base"), but would rather go after the working poor who
>make errors on their returns.
Tom, you crack me up man! Anyway, The Fair Tax eliminates both issues
you cite.
Best Regards - Mike Baldwin
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Tom ShermanTom Sherman Date: Sep 12, 2008 03:41
Michael Baldwin wrote:
> Tom, who knows he could be fired at any moment for no reason, hones his
> stand up routine just in case and writes:
>
>> The government under the current administration is not interested in
>> big time tax cheats (since they are part of "their
>> base"), but would rather go after the working poor who
>> make errors on their returns.
>
> Tom, you crack me up man! Anyway, The Fair Tax eliminates both issues
> you cite.
>
I guess it makes many people feel better to deny the ugly truths in life.
--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
“Mary had a little lamb / And when she saw it sicken /
She shipped it off to Packingtown / And now it’s labeled chicken.”
|
| |
| 41 Comments |
|
|
Author: Michael BaldwinMichael Baldwin Date: Sep 12, 2008 04:35
Tom Sherman writes:
>I guess it makes many people feel better to deny
>the ugly truths in life.
Well Tom, you tell me who is in denial. You cited two things,
corporate and political corruption via the tax code and poor people
being audited by the IRS for honest mistakes.
Like it or not Tom, _when_ implemented The Fair Tax _eliminates_ those
issues. There will be _no_ tax code to manipulate for corporate and
political gain and _no_ IRS conducting audits on tax returns that no
longer exists.
Usually I can find some humor in what you right. However such is not
the case in this circumstance.
Still, Best Regards - Mike Baldwin
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Tom ShermanTom Sherman Date: Sep 12, 2008 10:05
Michael Baldwin wrote:
> Tom Sherman writes:
>
>> I guess it makes many people feel better to deny
>> the ugly truths in life.
>
> Well Tom, you tell me who is in denial. You cited two things,
> corporate and political corruption via the tax code and poor people
> being audited by the IRS for honest mistakes.
> Like it or not Tom, _when_ implemented The Fair Tax _eliminates_ those
> issues. There will be _no_ tax code to manipulate for corporate and
> political gain and _no_ IRS conducting audits on tax returns that no
> longer exists.
> Usually I can find some humor in what you right. However such is not
> the case in this circumstance.
>
What this "Fair Tax" proposal will do is a couple of things. Firstly, it
will reduce the tax share of the very rich, since they spend a much
smaller fraction of their income on personal consumption than the
working classes. Secondly, it will gut the government in terms of ...
|
| Show full article (1.48Kb) |
| 4 Comments |
|
|
Author: Tim McNamaraTim McNamara Date: Sep 12, 2008 18:45
The "Fair Tax" basically boils down to "make somebody else pay for this
stuff." Like the unceasing waffle over the "death tax," it's verbiage
designed to bias the conversation by controlling the terminology and the
underlying assumptions.
It's funny that wealth redistribution through the abuse of capitalism
and unfair exploitation of labor is considered a Good Thing, but
progressively taxing the robber barons who gain by this is a Bad Thing.
|
| |
| 3 Comments |
|
|
Author: andresmuroandresmuro Date: Sep 12, 2008 22:34
On Sep 12, 10:45 am, Tim McNamara bitstream.net> wrote:> The "Fair Tax" basically boils down to "make somebody else pay for this
> stuff." Like the unceasing waffle over the "death tax," it's verbiage
> designed to bias the conversation by controlling the terminology and the
> underlying assumptions.
>
> It's funny that wealth redistribution through the abuse of capitalism
> and unfair exploitation of labor is considered a Good Thing, but
> progressively taxing the robber barons who gain by this is a Bad Thing.
It is not unfair. It is god willing.
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
Author: Michael BaldwinMichael Baldwin Date: Sep 12, 2008 23:02
Tenacious Tom Sherman writes:
>What this "Fair Tax" proposal will do is a couple
>of things. Firstly, it will reduce the tax share of
>the very rich, since they spend a much smaller fraction
>of their income on personal consumption than the working classes.
Now I'm confused. The standard rhetoric of a Leftist like yourself is
the "rich do not pay taxes". So now the rich _do_ pay taxes but, TFT
would reduce taxes paid by the rich. Tom breaks ranks and shows us his
maverick side!
>Secondly, it will gut the government in terms of revenue,
>which is likely the real goal - to create Grover
>Norquist's "government small enough to drown in a bathtub".
As proposed, TFT is revenue neutral. TFT proposal includes a provision
(by law) to roll back the consumption tax percentage when revenue
exceeds what is currently being collected. But that would only mean the
rich would pay even less of their income in taxes. Isn't that right
Tom?
|
| Show full article (1.30Kb) |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
|
Author: Michael BaldwinMichael Baldwin Date: Sep 12, 2008 23:07
Tim broadens the discussion and writes:
>It's funny that wealth redistribution through the abuse of capitalism
>and unfair exploitation of labor is considered a Good Thing,
>but progressively taxing the robber barons who gain by this
>is a Bad Thing.
I wasn't prepared to talk about China but now that you've brought it
up....you are talking about China right?
Best Regards - Mike Baldwin
|
| |
| no comments |
|
|
|
|
