I'm tired of IRS paperwork every year -- We Need a Change Now!

T

TopTrader8

I come from a state where there is No State Income Tax.

All state taxes for individuals are collected when we make our daily purchases.

Our tax is called a state sales tax -- no paper work required.

I, for one, have longed for a sales tax on the National Level -- a National Sales Tax (or as Huckabee
would call it - The Fair Tax)

There is so much opposition to this -- you hear the talking heads saying that Huckabee
can't be taken seriously. But, talk like this will continue to keep us under the IRS's thumb (or foot)
forever.

I think we as a nation need to stand up and demand a change in the way taxes or collected in this country!

Or do you guys live for keeping the IRS happy every April 15 - Year After Year After Year After.......?

We don't necessarily have to put the IRS totally out of business. Let's just get them off the
backs of the average Joe -- Perhaps we can keep them around for the policing of the
Corporations and other business entities in America.

I only bring this up now because Super Tuesday is next week and Huckabee is the only
viable candidate espousing a National Sales Tax -- This may be our only chance to bring
about positive tax change in America because I have never known anyone to run on this
issue in the past but I have been wanting to see this issue come to the fore for years now.

If Huckabee continues to be thought of as 'not being taken seriously' then no candidate in
future elections is going touch this issue with a ten-foot pole.

As far as I can tell, it's never been brought up in the past and it won't be brought up in the
future ever again unless we as a people stand up and give a voice to support of Huckabee.

Vote Huckabee for tax change on Tuesday or whenever it comes your time to have your
voice heard!

I welcome any comments or debates on this issue before next Tuesday.

Thanks for listening,
 
Excellent Commentary

...........................................................................................

One of the most pressing issues at hand...is the valuation of the dollar...and the current economic standing of the US versus its peers in terms of costs in producing items for sale....

To be certain, if one country produces a stellar product...and it is superior in quality and cost....and the item can be sold to all countries on a level playing field...then the country that domiciles the company that produces the item will sell more of it than its peers...

Taxes, labor, education, raw materials, power, etc..all factor in to the productivity and price equation...

......................................................................................................

The US can alter it´s overall valuation by lowering input costs and increasing sales...

A national sales tax which would replace the income tax would place the US as the number one country for the world´s best companies to domicile and operate....

Although the dollar is heavily diluted at the moment, altering the tax structure would immediately bring values back into the dollar versus its peers...

A proper tax is one which would raise revenues by lowering taxes amongst an increasing base..whereas an improper tax would be one whereby taxes are raised amongst a decreasing base..

A national sales tax is a proper tax...and the developed countries that go in this direction are going to win the valuation game from every standpoint...
 
As a side note, inflation pushes people into higher tax brackets; so you're paying more without really making more. Another reason for keeping the old system?

Fundamentally I'm not disagreeing with OP, I'm just saying that the goal of government is not fair tax, its to collect as much as possible.
 
Quote from empee:

As a side note, inflation pushes people into higher tax brackets; so you're paying more without really making more. Another reason for keeping the old system? ... goal of government is not fair tax, its to collect as much as possible.
More...

"We the people"... don't mean SHIT to the Gummint except (1) assets to tap, and (2) votes from those given benefits so the greedy politicians can stay in power.

Only a grass roots uprising to REJECT government as we have it will change anything. Unfortunately, won't happen during any of our lifetimes.

America is just like nearly every other country... "Government at the EXPENSE of the people". It wasn't always that way here, and the Founding Fathers tried to give us safeguards against it. Nevertheless, we got it.
 
No way a national sales tax passes because there is one overriding rule in US politics currently and that is to ream people who save money as much as possible.
 
Quote from sprstpd:

No way a national sales tax passes because there is one overriding rule in US politics currently and that is to ream people who save money as much as possible.
More...

Nevertheless, we should have one. Mostly because it would capture tax revenue from the underground economy... last estimate I heard was for $200B in lost taxes from those who don't report or underreport.

The only fair tax system we should have would involve (1) flat tax above "_____", (2) national sales tax on every item except certain "life basics"... non-prepared food items at the grocery store, utilities, etc.

It's illegal to discriminate in this country against race, religion, sexual preference, weight, gender... damned near everything... except INCOME! Wrong, man. Really wrong.
 
More Food For Thought.....

The fair tax, I feel, can be adjusted to suit everyone. Perhaps the IRS can also be in charge of seeing that the lower income wage earners get some sort of rebate for the sales taxes they would have to pay for goods and services purchased.

Furthermore, I don't think the taxes would be as high as 30% -- last I heard it was 23%. But, if we keep the IRS in the equation to oversee all Business Entities taxes then perhaps a further percentage reduction can be proposed down from 23% to maybe 15% or less.

Realize that (as I understand it), our Founding Fathers explicitly stated in our constitution that there was to be no taxes render on income but on goods and services only -- At least that's what I heard. And, these were very smart men who supposively created a near perfect document (with the exception of a few amendments that needed passing).

So, this means that our tax system is unconstitutional to begin with. So, the fact that a huge industry has been built around the income tax just means that it was done on an unconstitutional foundation to begin with. So sure, a lot of jobs will be displaced but these jobs were unconstitutionally established in the first place.

On the other hand, just think -- we've got at least 30 million illegal aliens in this country right now -- many of whom are working for cash only thereby not paying taxes to our government. Furthermore, what aboutn all of the illegal activities in this country that never have to pay taxes?

All of this additional revenue via sales tax payments for goods and services will be so huge that the government should have surpluses out the wazoo -- even better than when Clinton was in office.

By the way, like Huckabee, Clinton came from Arkansas too. Could this possibly mean that any candidate coming from Arkansas may show promise of being very positive for this country's tax implications?

Remember, Clinton not only balanced the budget with a surplus to boot but the also cut taxes. And, now maybe Huckabee can one-up things over Clinton by advocating a National Sales Tax.

And, as far as some congressmen or senators introducing National Sales Tax legislation as a pet project each year -- these efforts will always fall on deaf ears because the tax lobbyist are too powerful. Only a Presidential Candidate will be
able to carry a mandate to push this legislation through both houses of congress.
 
do we really want another idiot in the white house who does not understand science or is willfully ignorant?

Huckabee, creationism, and the presidency

Huckabee wants to avoid the issue, because “I'm not planning on writing the curriculum for an eighth grade science book.” He seems to think that it's irrelevant that his personal beliefs contradict an overwhelming body of scientific evidence. And don't think he can escape by arguing that he's a theistic evolutionist, a la Mitt Romney. He clearly doesn't accept the idea of common descent. He clearly doesn't understand that he shares a common ancestor with chimps and gorillas (and fruit flies and fungus and sunflowers, for that matter). It is dangerous to have someone so resistant to evidence and reason as President of the United States.

Here's how Daniel Finkelstein put it in the Times of London on Tuesday.

Huckabee contends that it doesn't matter, because he is not intending to insist that schools stop teaching evolution. But that really isn't the point.
The reason that his support for intelligent design matters is that it is ridiculous. Who wants a President of the United States who doesn't accept the basic principles of science, taking refuge instead in a load of mumbo jumbo?

The religious beliefs of a President are a matter of conscience, but intelligent design is not a religious idea. It is, deliberately, put as an alternative scientific theory. But it is, sadly, nonsense.

It is clearly vital that he or she be someone who accepts and understands scientific methods. By rejecting evolution in favour of intelligent design Huckabee illustrates that he does not reach scientific conclusions based on evidence.

This is a serious downside in a President, whatever his other qualities.

http://darwin.eeb.uconn.edu/uncommon-ground/archives/2007/12/huckabee-creati.html

does anyone else think he looks and sounds like gomer pile of the andy griffith show everytime he speaks?
 
Quote from TopTrader8:

".. Remember, Clinton not only balanced the budget with a surplus to boot but the also cut taxes. ...
More...

Your recollection is history is wrong here. Clinton "balanced the budged", because (1) he was LUCKY to catch the tax revenues from the peak of the tech/dot.com bubble, and (2) he RAISED taxes.

Clinton's "budget balancing" leaves nothing to be admired. Any dickweed can balance the budget if they raise taxes enough. Why can't they do it by refusing to spend in deficit?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top