You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
I'm tired of IRS paperwork every year -- We Need a Change Now!
- Thread starter TopTrader8
- Start date
Any large inheritances should be taxed to the maximum. You want to reward people who have worked hard and contributed to the economy, not reward people just because of the family they were born into.
I disagree. I earned the money. I decide what to do with it. If I pass it onto my children, then that's my decision.
Besides, it is biblical to pass on an inheritance to your children and their children's children.
"A good man leaves an inheritance for his children's children, but a sinner's wealth is stored up for the righteous." Proverbs 13:22
To put this in perspective, the inheritance in biblical days was usually farmland. Obviously, a farmer passes on the farm to his children.
Likewise, I should be able to pass on my house(s) and pass on my businesses to my children.
Sharpone --
For this nation, the fair tax allows 'we the people' to easily have a say in how greedy the government is allowed to get because everything is simplified. There will be no complicated legislation to be added to a ridiculously complex tax code that very few, if any, can claim they understand in its entirety.
We as voters can have referendums that allow us to have a say on the limits to which we will allow the government to tax our goods and services. If the government says, for instance, that they want to charge a 30% fair tax and we the people think this is a bit greedy, we can say no and tell the government to cut their spending instead.
And, my personal pet peeve with the current tax system is the paper work I have to file every year -- this is work in itself.
Don't you think we should at least be paid an hourly wage to do this government's paper work every April 15th -- because right now, we are doing this work for free every year.
If I have to do extensive paper work for somebody then I want to get paid!
Also, when a person toils and sweats for every paycheck he should not have to be reminded each time that a good chunk of his income for the hard hard work he does everyday is being conficated by Uncle Sam -- Wouldn't this tend to make one feel like being less productive on the job? [/U]Many would say this is equivalent to working for the government for a good part of every year[/U]. [/B]But, I disagree with that because if we are working for the government, shouldn't they be paying us instead of us paying them?[/B]
For this nation, the fair tax allows 'we the people' to easily have a say in how greedy the government is allowed to get because everything is simplified. There will be no complicated legislation to be added to a ridiculously complex tax code that very few, if any, can claim they understand in its entirety.
We as voters can have referendums that allow us to have a say on the limits to which we will allow the government to tax our goods and services. If the government says, for instance, that they want to charge a 30% fair tax and we the people think this is a bit greedy, we can say no and tell the government to cut their spending instead.
And, my personal pet peeve with the current tax system is the paper work I have to file every year -- this is work in itself.
Don't you think we should at least be paid an hourly wage to do this government's paper work every April 15th -- because right now, we are doing this work for free every year.
If I have to do extensive paper work for somebody then I want to get paid!
Also, when a person toils and sweats for every paycheck he should not have to be reminded each time that a good chunk of his income for the hard hard work he does everyday is being conficated by Uncle Sam -- Wouldn't this tend to make one feel like being less productive on the job? [/U]Many would say this is equivalent to working for the government for a good part of every year[/U]. [/B]But, I disagree with that because if we are working for the government, shouldn't they be paying us instead of us paying them?[/B]
Sharpone --
For this nation, the fair tax allows 'we the people' to easily have a say in how greedy the government is allowed to get because everything is simplified. There will be no complicated legislation to be added to a ridiculously complex tax code that very few, if any, can claim they understand in its entirety.
We as voters can have referendums that allow us to have a say on the limits to which we will allow the government to tax our goods and services. If the government says, for instance, that they want to charge a 30% fair tax and we the people think this is a bit greedy, we can say no and tell the government to cut their spending instead.
And, my personal pet peeve with the current tax system is the paper work I have to file every year -- this is work in itself.
Don't you think we should at least be paid an hourly wage to do this government's paper work every April 15th -- because right now, we are doing this work for free every year.
If I have to do extensive paper work for somebody then I want to get paid!
Also, when a person toils and sweats for every paycheck he should not have to be reminded each time that a good chunk of his income for the hard hard work he does everyday is being conficated by Uncle Sam -- Wouldn't this tend to make one feel like being less productive on the job? Many would say this is equivalent to working for the government for a good part of every year. But, I disagree with that because if we are working for the government, shouldn't they be paying us instead of us paying them?
For this nation, the fair tax allows 'we the people' to easily have a say in how greedy the government is allowed to get because everything is simplified. There will be no complicated legislation to be added to a ridiculously complex tax code that very few, if any, can claim they understand in its entirety.
We as voters can have referendums that allow us to have a say on the limits to which we will allow the government to tax our goods and services. If the government says, for instance, that they want to charge a 30% fair tax and we the people think this is a bit greedy, we can say no and tell the government to cut their spending instead.
And, my personal pet peeve with the current tax system is the paper work I have to file every year -- this is work in itself.
Don't you think we should at least be paid an hourly wage to do this government's paper work every April 15th -- because right now, we are doing this work for free every year.
If I have to do extensive paper work for somebody then I want to get paid!
Also, when a person toils and sweats for every paycheck he should not have to be reminded each time that a good chunk of his income for the hard hard work he does everyday is being conficated by Uncle Sam -- Wouldn't this tend to make one feel like being less productive on the job? Many would say this is equivalent to working for the government for a good part of every year. But, I disagree with that because if we are working for the government, shouldn't they be paying us instead of us paying them?
Quote from gnome:
Your definition of "Democracy" is more restrictive than commonly used... and I'm not sure it's even technically correct.
By convention, the terms Democracy and Republic are used interchangeably when referring to the USA, with democracy the most common by far.
...
True, but regrettable. It would be nice to reserve the term "Democracy" to describe countries who are headed by someone elected by majority vote, such as India. And use the term "Republic" to describe countries such as the USA where the head of the government is elected by some means other than majority vote.
Ohh yeah, that thing were the guy with the least votes gets to be president [appointed by the supreme court of course] If it happens overseas then it's a mock to democracy, and a dictatorship... if it happens in Washington, it's just business as usual.Quote from piezoe:
True, but regrettable. It would be nice to reserve the term "Democracy" to describe countries who are headed by someone elected by majority vote, such as India. And use the term "Republic" to describe countries such as the USA where the head of the government is elected by some means other than majority vote.
Ohh yeah, that thing were the guy with the least votes gets to be president [appointed by the supreme court of course] If it happens overseas then it's a mock to democracy, and a dictatorship... if it happens in Washington, it's just business as usual.
The President is not appointed by the Supreme Court. Never has been and never will be. (btw, the Surpreme Court's decision regarding the election in 2000 was unanimous which includes all the "liberals" on the court voting in agreed with the rest of the court).
The President and the Vice President are elected directly by electoral votes (and indirectly by popular vote).
The winner of the popular vote in each state wins all the electoral votes in that state (except in Maine and Nebraska). There are 538 total electoral votes. A majority of the electoral votes is needed to win.
The original mechanics of presidential elections were established by Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution. This clause was superseded by the Twelfth Amendment.
Quote from TopTrader8:
We as voters can have referendums that allow us to have a say on the limits to which we will allow the government to tax our goods and services. If the government says, for instance, that they want to charge a 30% fair tax and we the people think this is a bit greedy, we can say no and tell the government to cut their spending instead.
it is not smart to talk about changing the way a major part of the government system works, specially if it involves such large quantities of cash, through out history this has almost always come at the cost of those who have tried, and yet many have not been successful
believe me even if you don't lose your life for it you will die trying, in the least you will have to help alot of stupid people understand many simple things and which they won't, otherwise they will lose their source of income, how do you think jobs like the ones in the TSA are created
an economy teacher I had used to say; governments are one of the most inefficient systems, if a government organization doesn't spend the budget assigned to it by year end, it will get a lower budget the next year and vise versa
Quote from TopTrader8:
Don't you think we should at least be paid an hourly wage to do this government's paper work every April 15th -- because right now, we are doing this work for free every year.
you know what the IRS would tell you if you asked them this same question;
NOOOOOOO, as a citizen it is your responsibility to do the paper work and filing, if you feel that you don't have enough time to do this on your own, there are many companies which offer this service at a reasonable rate
Quote from MGB:
(btw, the Surpreme Court's decision regarding the election in 2000 was unanimous which includes all the "liberals" on the court voting in agreed with the rest of the court).
Incorrect.
These ultimately resulted in a December 12 7-2 United States Supreme Court decision that the Florida Supreme Court's scheme for recounting ballots was unconstitutional, as well as a 5-4 United States Supreme Court decision that ended the Florida recounts and allowed Florida to certify its vote.
Any system were someone gets 2,000,000 votes more than the other guy and still loses the election is not OK.Quote from MGB:
The President is not appointed by the Supreme Court. Never has been and never will be. (btw, the Surpreme Court's decision regarding the election in 2000 was unanimous which includes all the "liberals" on the court voting in agreed with the rest of the court).
The President and the Vice President are elected directly by electoral votes (and indirectly by popular vote).
The winner of the popular vote in each state wins all the electoral votes in that state (except in Maine and Nebraska). There are 538 total electoral votes. A majority of the electoral votes is needed to win.
The original mechanics of presidential elections were established by Article II, Section 1, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution. This clause was superseded by the Twelfth Amendment.
The whole "electoral vote" system is a scheme to assure that only politicians get to choose the president and vice president. Making it nearly impossible for a third party to emerge.