This country has had two of the largest boom and busts on record in the past decade, what on earth are you talking about, think before you speak, nit wit.
Abolish the Income Tax: Steve Forbes and Peter Schiff
- Thread starter achilles28
- Start date
This country has had two of the largest boom and busts on record in the past decade, what on earth are you talking about, think before you speak, nit wit.
Let's remember the states are going to still want their taste, so when you use a consumption tax, how much do they go with? Someone mentioned a 15%, that's pretty large, and add the states tapping your wallet, and I don't see it helping. I would hold off on large purchase and avoid buying some things all together if I end up paying 20-30 % + in taxes on it.
I iwsh I had the ideal answer, but I believe amneding the current code to a flat tax is much better. It will be next to impossible also as would the consumption tax. Too many special interest groups would be paying their pet legislator.
On another note, I just paid $2200 more in state tax than federal. #%#%&!
I iwsh I had the ideal answer, but I believe amneding the current code to a flat tax is much better. It will be next to impossible also as would the consumption tax. Too many special interest groups would be paying their pet legislator.
On another note, I just paid $2200 more in state tax than federal. #%#%&!
I challenge anyone of these pro Fed supporters on here to tell me how the current Fed policy of 0.25% interest rates is benefiting anyone? besides the member banks of the Federal Reserve system.
Retired seniors are earning ZERO on there savings, while banks are raking in record profits due to free Fed money used to speculate in the markets.
Banks are not lending, and if they did the rates are so high it make no since unless your desperate and if your desperate you more then likely going to go bust soon. But Iâm sure the banks will have sufficient collateral to not loose any of the free money they have been handed. Fractional Reserve banking what a racket.
Retired seniors are earning ZERO on there savings, while banks are raking in record profits due to free Fed money used to speculate in the markets.
Banks are not lending, and if they did the rates are so high it make no since unless your desperate and if your desperate you more then likely going to go bust soon. But Iâm sure the banks will have sufficient collateral to not loose any of the free money they have been handed. Fractional Reserve banking what a racket.
Everything ia a Pareto distribution guys, so stop figthing about it. 20% of people produce 80% of the wealth and at the same time 20% of people pay as much as the remaining 80% in taxes.
80% os people are just wasting energy, financial and other resources. The paradox is that if you try to eliminate the extra cargo, you are just raising the level and you end up with the same problem.
The Pareto curse...
There is no solution. There is no direct link between wealth and consumption. I know many wealthy people who live in small apartments, drive old cars and eat fast food. Actually, most consumption is driven by lower income people and thus the necessity for an income tax that redistributes income from rich to poor to keep consuption going.
Now, listen some of you, income tax works to the benefit of rich, since that consumption finances their wealth production.
Thus, up to a certain point, whatever the rich contribute in income tax, it comes back to them in the form of earnings.
So, watch out for covert Marxists who push for a consumption tax because they know that leads to socialism faster than revolution.
Again, up to a certain point income tax is beneficial, after that it becomes a wealth-out effect. I think the cut-off point is 35%, absolutely.
80% os people are just wasting energy, financial and other resources. The paradox is that if you try to eliminate the extra cargo, you are just raising the level and you end up with the same problem.
The Pareto curse...
There is no solution. There is no direct link between wealth and consumption. I know many wealthy people who live in small apartments, drive old cars and eat fast food. Actually, most consumption is driven by lower income people and thus the necessity for an income tax that redistributes income from rich to poor to keep consuption going.
Now, listen some of you, income tax works to the benefit of rich, since that consumption finances their wealth production.
Thus, up to a certain point, whatever the rich contribute in income tax, it comes back to them in the form of earnings.
So, watch out for covert Marxists who push for a consumption tax because they know that leads to socialism faster than revolution.
Again, up to a certain point income tax is beneficial, after that it becomes a wealth-out effect. I think the cut-off point is 35%, absolutely.
Is that just your own half-cocked notion, or can you cite an example or two?
And who pays for that liquidity?
Scat, nobody has a bigger mouth on ET than you. I could make a post about my dog dieing and you would somehow turn that into Obama's fault and how the USA is going to collapse and the world will end.
I would rather read Increasenow's journals than read your repetitive, political rhetoric. Every single one of your posts should be in the P&R forum. You do not have the first clue about finance or economics, as demonstrated by your posts every single day.
Learn to do your own homework.