what is wrong with a flat tax?

2»

Comments

  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    know1 wrote:
    But what does that have to do with taxes? Are you saying the rich should pay more taxes because they get more benefit from private industry? That makes no sense.
    Private industry is their benefit. It exists - and exists quite well - because of our society. Private industry is the individual, and society the oxygen he or she breathes. Or, more simply, you can't run a train without a track.

    It makes sense. Without structure - and a structure where everyone has something - then all your claims of personal initiative mean nothing and earn nothing.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    RainDog wrote:
    Private industry is their benefit. It exists - and exists quite well - because of our society. Private industry is the individual, and society the oxygen he or she breathes. Or, more simply, you can't run a train without a track.

    It makes sense. Without structure - and a structure where everyone has something - then all your claims of personal initiative mean nothing and earn nothing.

    And this is justification for taxing people at higher rates?
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    know1 wrote:
    And this is justification for taxing people at higher rates?
    Yes.
  • know1know1 Posts: 6,794
    RainDog wrote:
    Yes.

    I disagree completely and I think they are two different things.
    The only people we should try to get even with...
    ...are those who've helped us.

    Right 'round the corner could be bigger than ourselves.
  • RainDogRainDog Posts: 1,824
    know1 wrote:
    I disagree completely and I think they are two different things.
    Fair enough. Everyone has an opinion.

    But my society (the West - the one with the progressive tax structure) is the most powerful and affluent the world has ever known. Where's yours?
    ;)
  • DCGARDENDCGARDEN Posts: 515
    RainDog wrote:
    So people making 65-70k a year should be exempt from taxes? We'll have to disagree.

    Besides, in a society that has a progressive tax structure, millionaires like Eddie Vedder and Sean Penn pay a higher tax rate than the restaurant owner anyway. In fact, if that 65-70K per year restaurant owner has 4 or 5 kids, chances are he or she is getting a tax break in addition to paying a lower rate overall. Sure, that leads to complications like the IRS, but let's not throw out the baby with the bath water here.

    Not quite what I was saying, but it was probably my fault for not being clear -

    I don't have a problem with taxes for government to function, but I do have a problem with taxing middle class for other people who have no desire to improve themselves to function...or even worse.. for government to act as a middle-man in this transaction.
    I'll keep taking punches
    Untill their will grows tired
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Whether or not a person is successful is determined by fate.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • surferdudesurferdude Posts: 2,057
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Whether or not a person is successful is determined by fate.
    False. Scientific study has shown that the number one determining factor in being successful is not fate but persistence.
    “One good thing about music,
    when it hits you, you feel to pain.
    So brutalize me with music.”
    ~ Bob Marley
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,616
    Pacomc79 wrote:
    because of the endless reforms and codes that will inevitably be dumped in in the later years winding up with a tax code that looks remarkably like the one we have now. Lobbiests, corporations, special interest groups all want exemptions etc etc.

    That's why I'm not a big fan of the Flat Tax, it works for all of maybe one year before it's "reformed" Then we have the same issue, a big hulking complicated pile of gobbledy gook.

    I think a simpler system would be be for the benefit of all.

    No one should need an accountant to do taxes.

    EVERYONE should use an accountant to do their taxes!

    Sincerely,

    Joe F, CPA
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,616
    Bu2 wrote:
    What if we put higher taxes on the income (salaries) of the rich, and gave tax breaks to the people with lower incomes (salaries), and put a flat tax on their respective inheritances and windfalls and other means of investment income?

    There is already a reduced tax rate for qualified dividends and long-term capital gains.

    Also, there are estate and gift taxes that apply to those who wish to transfer (either voluntarily, or due to their death) their wealth, however, those taxes are being greatly reduced over the next few years.
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    Is this the opposite of the fat tax? We gonna tax anorexics and bolemics too?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • JOEJOEJOEJOEJOEJOE Posts: 10,616
    Ahnimus wrote:
    Is this the opposite of the fat tax? We gonna tax anorexics and bolemics too?


    My friend, stick to citing facts...no comedy!
    :)
  • AhnimusAhnimus Posts: 10,560
    JOEJOEJOE wrote:
    My friend, stick to citing facts...no comedy!
    :)

    Yea, I know I'm hurting.

    I got some laughs yesterday.

    I ordered an adult soda from a restaurant and wondered if it came in a see-through glass.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • beachdwellerbeachdweller Posts: 1,532
    could someone make it perfectly clear to me what is wrong with a flat tax? not only is it simple, it's entirely fair. are any of the candidates proposing or supporting this system? i can't remember any of them discussing it specifically.

    it takes all the loopholes away for the rich so they would have to be their fair share.

    Of course the currently pay a lot, but percentage wise it doesn't work out as fair.

    Of course what to tax would be a huge fight, income, small business vs big business, investment, etc....
    "Music, for me, was fucking heroin." eV (nothing Ed has said is more true for me personally than this quote)

    Stop by:
    http://www.facebook.com/group.php?gid=14678777351&ref=mf
Sign In or Register to comment.