TomAiello 26 #26 July 16, 2009 Quote> It's actually the most efficient (meaning having the least distortion >on human behavior) tax possible. However, it's the least efficient in terms of a) collecting money and b) paying for prisons. Huh? I'm guessing that whooshing sound was your humor flying somewhere over my head.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #27 July 16, 2009 QuoteQuoteSo, no taxable work... no vote right? That would imply no votes for Mums... um.. Womens votes were hard earned... I'd like to see you get away with that one. Married couples filing jointly are both paying taxes. Regardless of which partner brings home the W-2, the income is legally earned and taxed jointly. And very few single moms I know aren't working at least one job...Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #28 July 16, 2009 Quote While our forefathers were somewhat divided on who should get the right to vote, I'm sure not even they envisioned a "freeloader majority" one day. Disregarding any taxes other than federal income taxes is a great way to create the illusion that many Americans don't pay taxes. That doesn't make the assertion true, but it is one way to try to fool people, nonetheless.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #29 July 16, 2009 QuoteThe FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment. The Fair Tax is the best way I know of to encourage Americans to stop shopping with domestic retailers and to buy as many goods as possible from foreign sellers in order to avoid paying tax.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #30 July 16, 2009 Quote Quote While our forefathers were somewhat divided on who should get the right to vote, I'm sure not even they envisioned a "freeloader majority" one day. Disregarding any taxes other than federal income taxes is a great way to create the illusion that many Americans don't pay taxes. That doesn't make the assertion true, but it is one way to try to fool people, nonetheless. True it does not account for state income taxes people might still have to pay or state sales taxes/property taxes etc. Hell, states are getting bailed out by the fed gov't too. But this is about federal spending with federal dollars. Other than income tax there is no big "moneymaker" tax at the federal level. Most of the smaller taxes collected (phone, gas, airport fees, etc.) generally don't even fully offset the costs of the department related to them.Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #31 July 17, 2009 QuoteQuoteThe FairTax plan is a comprehensive proposal that replaces all federal income and payroll based taxes with an integrated approach including a progressive national retail sales tax, a prebate to ensure no American pays federal taxes on spending up to the poverty level, dollar-for-dollar federal revenue neutrality, and, through companion legislation, the repeal of the 16th Amendment. . The Fair Tax is the best way I know of to encourage Americans to stop shopping with domestic retailers and to buy as many goods as possible from foreign sellers in order to avoid paying tax. While that could be the case with bigger ticket items, smaller items would not be worth the cost or trouble to avoid the tax like that and hopefully that "avoidance" would be taken into account when they decided on percentagesStupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,120 #32 July 17, 2009 >I'm guessing that whooshing sound was your humor flying somewhere >over my head. Nope. Although I often tell very bad jokes this isn't one of those times. You are correct in that the flat/poll tax is the fairest tax of all. Divide the government's spending by the number of taxpayers and send everyone a bill. (Would be around $42,000 a person when I ran the numbers last year.) Everyone benefits from living in the US so everyone pays the same amount. However, there are some practical problems depending in implementation. The first case is that everyone pays it or goes to jail. That would result in millions of people in jail, and the costs of housing millions of people would quickly destroy any savings you got through eliminating the IRS. The second case is that you don't have to pay it, but if you don't you don't get certain privileges (like voting.) End result - you penalize people for voting, so few people do. As the taxable population decreases, you reach a point where the remaining voters are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for the right to vote, and the very rich then run the US. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,151 #33 July 17, 2009 Quote As the taxable population decreases, you reach a point where the remaining voters are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for the right to vote, and the very rich then run the US. And that will be different?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #34 July 17, 2009 QuoteWhile that could be the case with bigger ticket items, smaller items would not be worth the cost or trouble to avoid the tax like that and hopefully that "avoidance" would be taken into account when they decided on percentages Fair point. It would only discourage purchases from US retailers when the difference in shipping exceeds the tax. Of course, since the sales tax would necessarily be much higher than rates common today if they were to replace the federal income tax, the subtotal needed to justify using foreign retailers wouldn't be very high. Some foreign companies might even find it advantageous to offer free shipping so that it would always be advantageous to buy a product from them versus a US retailer at the same pre-tax price. Some foreign governments might even decide that it would be economically beneficial to subsidize shipping to US buyers in order to provide more income to their country's retailers. The Fair Tax sounds nice, but in the real world, it's economic repercussions would be disastrous unless tax avoidance is addressed.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #35 July 17, 2009 QuoteTrue it does not account for state income taxes people might still have to pay or state sales taxes/property taxes etc. Hell, states are getting bailed out by the fed gov't too. it also fails to account for other federal payroll taxes, such as FICA. QuoteBut this is about federal spending with federal dollars. Other than income tax there is no big "moneymaker" tax at the federal level. Most of the smaller taxes collected (phone, gas, airport fees, etc.) generally don't even fully offset the costs of the department related to them. The "freeloaders" tend to "freeload" from state and local programs (i.e. the programs for which their taxes are paying).Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #36 July 17, 2009 Quote Quote As the taxable population decreases, you reach a point where the remaining voters are paying hundreds of thousands of dollars for the right to vote, and the very rich then run the US. And that will be different? They wouldn't have to manipulate the stupid people to push their agenda... Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #37 July 17, 2009 Quote Quote While that could be the case with bigger ticket items, smaller items would not be worth the cost or trouble to avoid the tax like that and hopefully that "avoidance" would be taken into account when they decided on percentages Fair point. It would only discourage purchases from US retailers when the difference in shipping exceeds the tax. Of course, since the sales tax would necessarily be much higher than rates common today if they were to replace the federal income tax, the subtotal needed to justify using foreign retailers wouldn't be very high. A lot of purchases on the Internet or mail order state and local sales taxes are generally not even paid today. I was thinking more of good 'ol 'merican laziness and brick and mortar purchases. Sure you might be able to save a few bucks if you buy your groceries and other staples overseas and waith the week or 2 but how many people are really going to bother. They want and need it right now. I personally don't like buying stuff on the Internet cuz when I buy it, I want it now. I don't want to wait a few days to ship cuz I might not want it by then anymore... Resturants and services it'd be hard for them to avoid the tax as well. Agree it would need to be enforced but the worst thing they could do would be try to impose the tax on overseas purchases as it would be impossible to enforce. Instead focus on "black market" enforcement. No jail times, just hefty fines on a per product basis. Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #38 July 17, 2009 QuoteWould be around $42,000 a person when I ran the numbers last year. At current levels of spending. If everyone had to pay their fair share, it would provide a pretty good incentive to cut spending. What would the numbers look like if we had DrewEckardt's military spending proposed in the other thread? And what if we didn't have debt payments? Assuming that this motivated us to right our fiscal house and pay off the debt, and not run more up? If we do just those two things (and I bet we'd do more with proper motivation), what would the tax bill look like? QuoteThe first case is that everyone pays it or goes to jail. You could allow people to borrow money from the government to pay it, at whatever rate the government is currently getting on it's debt. Kind of let the people feel directly what the government is doing for them indirectly now.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
DrewEckhardt 0 #39 July 17, 2009 QuoteQuoteTrue it does not account for state income taxes people might still have to pay or state sales taxes/property taxes etc. Hell, states are getting bailed out by the fed gov't too. it also fails to account for other federal payroll taxes, such as FICA. FICA is mostly a retirement plan, with disability and life insurance thrown in. Single earner low wage couples have 75% of their income replaced after retirement in exchange for just 6.2% before which isn't a bad deal. FUTA/SUTA are insurance policies for when people become unemployed. It's arguably inappropriate to call the premiums attached to these mandatory employee benefit plans "taxes". Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #40 July 17, 2009 Quote A lot of purchases on the Internet or mail order state and local sales taxes are generally not even paid today. Exactly. We have no problem avoiding sales taxes when possible. Increase the sales tax rate via Fair Tax implementation, and there is even more economic incentive to avoid sales tax. Only, with Fair Tax, avoiding the federal sales tax will require use of foreign retailers instead of out of state retailers. Quote I personally don't like buying stuff on the Internet cuz when I buy it, I want it now. I don't want to wait a few days to ship cuz I might not want it by then anymore... I tend to avoid brick and mortar stores (except for groceries) whenever possible because it is usually cheaper to purchase things online, often significantly so. Plus, it gives me more product options, the ability to do more in depth product research prior to purchase, and allows me to avoid the hassle of traffic on the way to and from the brick and mortar store. I'm more than happy to trade away instant gratification in order to to save money and be able to shop from home at my own convenience.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #41 July 17, 2009 QuoteFICA is mostly a retirement plan, with disability and life insurance thrown in. Single earner low wage couples have 75% of their income replaced after retirement in exchange for just 6.2% before which isn't a bad deal. FUTA/SUTA are insurance policies for when people become unemployed. It's arguably inappropriate to call the premiums attached to these mandatory employee benefit plans "taxes". Generally, all taxes are used to pay for things that directly or indirectly benefit taxpayers.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #42 July 17, 2009 QuoteGenerally, all taxes are used to pay for things that directly or indirectly benefit taxpayers. Very generally. The operative questions are "taxes paid by who" and "benefiting which taxpayers?" Federal Income Tax is largely paid by very different people than benefit from the resultant federal spending.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
jcd11235 0 #43 July 17, 2009 QuoteFederal Income Tax is largely paid by very different people than benefit from the resultant federal spending. I would argue (and have argued) that the rich receive greater tax benefit than the poor do, justifying their higher taxes paid. Bill (billvon) disagreed with me. Rather than rehashing the same arguments in a new thread, I'll leave it to you to search for the old one if you're interested.Math tutoring available. Only $6! per hour! First lesson: Factorials! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
diablopilot 2 #44 July 17, 2009 QuoteQuoteFor when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so RAH was brilliant. His writings may be entertaining fiction, but some very thought provoking gems come from them too....---------------------------------------------- You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #45 July 17, 2009 QuoteQuoteThe first case is that everyone pays it or goes to jail. You could allow people to borrow money from the government to pay it, at whatever rate the government is currently getting on it's debt. Kind of let the people feel directly what the government is doing for them indirectly now. What would be the colateral or what penalties would be impose for nonpayment?Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #46 July 17, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteFor when the plebs discover that they can vote themselves bread and circuses without limit and that the productive members of the body politic cannot stop them, they will do so RAH was brilliant. His writings may be entertaining fiction, but some very thought provoking gems come from them too.... Absolutely. Those who promise rob Peter to pay Paul will always have Paul's support at the voting booth. (another Heinlein quote, I believe - but probably not exact wording)Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #47 July 17, 2009 QuoteQuoteQuoteThe first case is that everyone pays it or goes to jail. You could allow people to borrow money from the government to pay it, at whatever rate the government is currently getting on it's debt. Kind of let the people feel directly what the government is doing for them indirectly now. What would be the colateral or what penalties would be impose for nonpayment? Since the thing you are paying for is the right to live in the USA, perhaps non-payment should simply result in expulsion? You wouldn't be able to send them to another established country, though. I wonder how much it would cost to outfit some basic farming communities in the Nevada desert, so that people could opt out of the USA? That way people could simply decide the price wasn't worth the benefit, and they'd have a place to go.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Bolas 5 #48 July 17, 2009 Or Oklahoma? Stupidity if left untreated is self-correcting If ya can't be good, look good, if that fails, make 'em laugh. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #49 July 17, 2009 Quote Or Oklahoma? If I really wanted to start a ruckus, I'd suggest sending them all to Texas. I mean, isn't it just a huge patch of worthless nothingness? -- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
TomAiello 26 #50 July 17, 2009 Quote Or Oklahoma? There's actually a Heinlein novella called Coventry about this concept.-- Tom Aiello Tom@SnakeRiverBASE.com SnakeRiverBASE.com Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
