US going to hell in a hand basket?

Quote from alfonso:


"Well, consider the alternative, AAA, where everybody pays the same, absolute dollar level of taxation, regardless of their earnings; or where everyone is taxed on the same percentage rate."

What could be more fair than being taxed the same
percentage rate? The more you make, the more you pay.
Simple and fair. Now I know people will argue about
ratio of income to the minimum required to live on, etc,
but those issues are solved in much better ways than
todays bracket nightmare.


"Since anyone with an elementary understanding of arithmetic can tell you that there is no way this side of reality that government revenues are going to even approach their current levels, that the America you know now would certainly be quite different indeed. Using your imagination a little, do you really think such a situation would lead to less (perceived) disparity, to less class warfare, to less resentment? Or to more? (Whether or not you, yourself, consider the ensuing social unrest 'justifiable' or 'irrational' notwithstanding.)"

This simple translates to: The under class will CRY when we
take away their stolen goods and return them to
their rightful owners ( the people who earned the money).
So what else is new? Of course they are gonna cry about it.
But they had a wonderful free ride on the back of the
earners for a long time now. It's time to set things straight
and create truly fair tax system. The government taking
over half my income is NOT fair.

You dodged my previous question as well.
What crime did I commit to deserve such incredibly
unfair taxation compared to lower wage owners????


"Furthermore, it's been highlighted by tatertrader and myself that very reason some are able to -- the "small group" you refer to -- amass such riches is very much because of the superb social infrastructure that their taxes helped to build (among other reasons). "

The fallacy in this statement lies in the fact that the lower
wage owners ALSO EXIST in this "superb social infrastructure
that their taxes helped to build".

But for some MAGICAL reason, all else being equal, you are
PUNISHED if you excel in the SAME ENVIRONMENT as everyone
else with disproportionally higher taxation.
Please explain how this is fair.


peace

axeman
 
Socialism and Communism are not the same ideologies. Throw in the word Democracy, and you get endless possibilities. But they are just words.

Nazi Germany was the National Socialist Party. Communist China is the Peoples Democratic Republic.

Does socialized medicine, for example, or social security make a country a socialist one (let alone a communist one)? Is Canada a Communist country? England?

The US is technically a Republic, with democratic liberties. Of the people and by the people. So maybe we should have a name like China has. It would be more suitable to what we have going on here than to what is going on there.

DDR was East Germany. Again Democratic Republic.

Freedom and economics are also not inexorably intertwined.

Calling someone a Communist if they believe that social justice may be improved by "socially just" economics is just senseless.

Just like calling anyone who believes in free enterprise a "capitalist pig" is senseless.

If there were clear and proven hard facts of what works in all situations, we would not have these arguments. The fact is, that things change. Sometimes good ideas stop working. Ideals are abandoned in the face of reality. New ideals emerge.

Nothing but keeping open minds has ever really worked. Experimentation and flexibility have kept the US going for longer than any other continuously consistent government on the planet.

When social programs were needed, they were implemented. When they no longer served their purpose, they were dismantled.

Shit happens. Staying on top of it is all that really matters.

Peace,
RS
 
Quote from axeman:


This simple translates to: The under class will CRY when we
take away their stolen goods and return them to
their rightful owners ( the people who earned the money).
So what else is new? Of course they are gonna cry about it.
But they had a wonderful free ride on the back of the
earners for a long time now. It's time to set things straight
and create truly fair tax system. The government taking
over half my income is NOT fair.
More...

So if you are born into a family of the "underclass", then you are by birth a thief? And you are to be punished as a child for the "sins" of your parents? Grandparents? Great grandparents, etc.?

Is the government taking over half your income really unfair? If you are using all the facilities built by tax dollars, (and you most likely are), and those inner-city "thiefs" that have been on their "free ride" don't use them, is that also unfair?

You use the roads, they don't have a car to drive on. You cross the bridges they don't ever cross. You use the airports that they never have a reason to enter. Your home is protected by law enforcement. They have nothing to protect.

At the same time, you pay and they pay exactly the same usage taxes on phone bills and other utilities. Your heating bills and electric bills are based on exactly the same rate of consumption as those of the poor. So are the taxes on the the clothes you buy.

I wouldn't complain too much about paying high taxes. At least you get something for your money.

Unless you would rather pay no taxes at all. You can do that. You can even have children and get an "earned income tax credit". See how far that gets you. You wouldn't feel you were getting a "free ride".

Life isn't fair.

SPC
 
>>Life isn't fair<<

That isn't the point because no-one could argue otherwise.

There is one point which is missed and that is that capital is better in the hands of the individual rather than the government.

One would expect the individual to put his money to work thus creating employment. The government on the other hand just spends it and it is gone.

Now even if a particular individual doesn't put his money to work it would nevertheless finds its way into the hands of others who would (put it to work).

So skimming off too much from the individual is a recipe which produces NO growth except in the unemployment numbers and organisations to deal with the latter.

freealways
 
Quote from SlowerPussyCat:


"So if you are born into a family of the "underclass", then you are by birth a thief? And you are to be punished as a child for the "sins" of your parents? Grandparents? Great grandparents, etc.?"

Of course not. Who said anything about punishment?
Putting an end to the blatant punishment of the earners and
the extreme wealth distribution of the wealthy is not
punishing anyone. It is putting an end to "robbing Peter
to pay Paul". The government is the theif in this case, not
the people recieving the stolen goods.

"Is the government taking over half your income really unfair? If you are using all the facilities built by tax dollars, (and you most likely are), and those inner-city "thiefs" that have been on their "free ride" don't use them, is that also unfair?"

Yes it is unfair. I'm not referring to just the inner city people.
Im referring to anyone who makes significantly less than me.
For every bracket you step down, they are being treated
more fairly than I am. WHY? Everyone has equal freedom to use
the services which are available. If they choose not to, that is
their choice. People who are in a higher tax bracket get ass
raped more than me. Why do they deserve this? Why am
I more SPECIAL somehow in the government eyes? Why do
I deserve to be taxed less than the people above me?? Why?
We all have equal access to the services provided by
the tax system. So I dont want to hear any more lame arguments
about how I deserve to be taxed to death because I succeeded
in this current tax system. EVERYONE exists in the very
same system as I do, and have EXACTLY the same advantage
that I did, so I shouldnt be taxed disproportiantely
to them. They have the freedom to do what I did.


"You use the roads, they don't have a car to drive on. You cross the bridges they don't ever cross. You use the airports that they never have a reason to enter. Your home is protected by law enforcement. They have nothing to protect."

They send their kids to free public schools, and I dont have any.
They receive welfare checks and I dont. They get taxed a fraction
of what I do. If they dont choose to use those roads or
airports, you cant put that blame on me, so what is your point?

"At the same time, you pay and they pay exactly the same usage taxes on phone bills and other utilities. Your heating bills and electric bills are based on exactly the same rate of consumption as those of the poor. So are the taxes on the the clothes you buy. "

How is that not fair? Equal treatement sounds good to me.
Whats your point? I deserve to pay MORE? Why?
Why should I be punished for being successful?
How is that fair?


"I wouldn't complain too much about paying high taxes. At least you get something for your money. "

Ummmmmmmmmm.... and they dont? People who make
35K a year dont get something for their money?
50k a year? 75k a year? 100k a year? They dont get
something for their money? What are you trying to say?


"Unless you would rather pay no taxes at all. You can do that. You can even have children and get an "earned income tax credit". See how far that gets you. You wouldn't feel you were getting a "free ride". "

I believe in taxes. But I dont believe in being punished by
taxes simply because I made the right decisions in life and
put in an extraordinary effort. People who do that better
society and should be rewarded not punished.
They are the business leaders who make the world go round.
Placing the governments foot on the achievers heads while
picking their wallets and then giving the stolen goods to
the unachievers is not going to get us anywhere.


"Life isn't fair."

We agree here. I use the word FAIR a lot because its a
favorite word of the democrats and socialists/marxists etc.
The irony of course is that nothing they say even remotely
resembles anything "fair".

True, life isnt fair, but in the areas which we can control,
a best effort at equality should be made. I just want
equal tax treatement from my government.

Taking 60% of my gross in taxes, and only 20% from
someone else is not equal treatement any way you cut it.
It's blatant discrimination against the achievers.

peace

axeman
 
Quote from axeman:



Taking 60% of my gross in taxes, and only 20% from
someone else is not equal treatment any way you cut it.
It's blatant discrimination against the achievers.

peace

axeman
More...

60%? Where do you live?

I agree with much of what you say, and disagree with about an equal amount.

If you believe in regressive taxation, we will never agree on that. If you think the government wastes money, we will always agree on that.

The only place I can imagine you living in the US and approaching a possible 60% overall tax would be NYC. If you live there, you probably know that the subways turned a profit when they were run independently (and charged 5 cents). As soon as the city took over, all they ever did was raise fares, and loose money. That's government for you. And what they don't run, they regulate.

But I will point out one specific fault in your argument just for fun. You seem to imply that the poor don't use the roads by choice? Hard to do without a car. Even if they were given a free car, they still need insurance. Which is regulated. And like virtually all govt. regulated industries, we get ripped off. Example.....an insurance company pays out 10mm in claims, and takes in only 9.5mm in premium. So of course they ask for, and get to raise their rates. But the fact that they make far more money on the investments of the premiums than they pay out in claims is never considered. Ever hear of an insurance company going out of going bankrupt?

There are no easy answers when it comes to economics. But again, between total socialism, and total "free enterprise" are compromises that must be made. Nothing is permanent. Do what needs to be done when it needs to be done.

The TVA had it's time and place. Social Security was a radical concept fought against very vehemently by the republican Party. Now it is one of their pet causes. The NRA (not Heston's, Roosevelt's) was declared unconstitutional. Was it wrong? Or was it politics?

The only thing for sure, is change will happen. Sometimes for the better, and sometimes not. But to say in advance what will and what won't work is no more than a guess.

Tax cuts for the rich? Sounds good to the rich. I am sure. I also remember getting a big nominal income tax cut in Reagan's 1986 tax reform. I also know that I ended up paying FAR more taxes by the time I was done with my return. While my rate was lower, I lost virtually all my deductions.

Bottom line...there is no free ride. You say robbing Peter to pay Paul...tough to do if Peter ain't got no money.


Peace,
:)RS

PS: School taxes are local. Based on property taxes. If you have kids, that will be a big determining factor in where you choose to live. You can live in a school district and have your across the street neighbors in another school district paying completely different property taxes. This is common. I pay more than 6k a year to live where I live in school taxes alone. For me, it was a bargain compared to private school tuition. Now my youngest kid is done with school. So I can move and sell my house to someone with young kids. Which is actually exactly what I did. We are in the "best" public school district in Florida.

The taxes were not a determining factor for me in selling, but the schools were THE determining factor when I was buying....

Most of my neighbors send their kids to private school anyway. So they pay their high taxes, pay their private school tuition, and though I don't know for sure how they feel about the subject, I never once heard a single complaint about taxes from any of my neighbors. They complain about the price of gasoline...they feel they are getting ripped off. But they CHOSE to live where they live. And so can anyone.....at least anyone who considers themselves to be overtaxed.

 
Quote from Error 404:


"60%? Where do you live?"

At the time, San Francisco.


"If you believe in regressive taxation, we will never agree on that. If you think the government wastes money, we will always agree on that."

Agreed.

"The only place I can imagine you living in the US and approaching a possible 60% overall tax would be NYC. "

If people added up every single tax they pay to the penny, and
then compared it to their gross, I think they would be
pretty shocked. Think about how many taxes we REALLY pay.
Fed, state, city, fica, social, medicare, property,
telecommunications, sales, transportation, cap gains, dividends,
alcohol, gas, death, payroll, the list is nearly endless. Lots of
double and triple taxation in there as well.
I bet a lot more people pay over 50% than they know.

"If you live there, you probably know that the subways turned a profit when they were run independently (and charged 5 cents). As soon as the city took over, all they ever did was raise fares, and loose money. That's government for you. And what they don't run, they regulate. "

Yup. Government is rarely efficient at spending or running anything. So why give them the money to spend?
Your right on .

"But I will point out one specific fault in your argument just for fun. You seem to imply that the poor don't use the roads by choice? Hard to do without a car. "

This is true, but you can't fault me for that. Thats my point.
They get other benefits which I will never get as well.
Ive never collected unemployment or welfare.
I'm also not focusing on the poor. Someone who makes
75K a year is getting treated a lot better than me as well,
and that sux. I shouldnt have to carry a 75K a year
wage earners tax weight.

"There are no easy answers when it comes to economics. But again, between total socialism, and total "free enterprise" are compromises that must be made. Nothing is permanent. Do what needs to be done when it needs to be done. "

Reasonable.


"Tax cuts for the rich? Sounds good to the rich. I am sure. I also remember getting a big nominal income tax cut in Reagan's 1986 tax reform. I also know that I ended up paying FAR more taxes by the time I was done with my return. While my rate was lower, I lost virtually all my deductions. "

Well....I agree with getting rid of all deductions :)
The rich are far better at weaseling their way out of paying
taxes through lots of creative deductions. But thats another
debate. Something *similar* to a flat tax would make our
tax code super simple and more fair.

"Bottom line...there is no free ride. You say robbing Peter to pay Paul...tough to do if Peter ain't got no money. "

Someone who makes no money wont be paying any taxes,
so there is no issue here.

peace

axeman
 
>> I also remember getting a big nominal income tax cut in Reagan's 1986 tax reform. I also know that I ended up paying FAR more taxes by the time I was done with my return. While my rate was lower, I lost virtually all my deductions. "<<

Serves you right Axeman for voting for him.

freealways
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top