Amazon 7 #101 March 24, 2011 QuoteQuoteno, just making a point that you refuse to acknowledge - when they come after your livelihood (or your kids'), too, for the good of society, you'll see I already admit that I and the business pay too little, if any taxes. so "you'll see" does not affect me.... I admit that part of the problem is we spend too much without funding it from the tax base. We need to decide WHAT programs we want, and we need to fund them from taxes primarily. Then the "You'll see" moment will be the realization from everyone that Holy Shit, this costs money, and the country will probably prioritize. And I bet we will prioritize things like, no wars, and more for social security, education and Medicare - i am all for it. How about a new tax that funds ONLY the military? And we put it into a separate fund. Now there is a tax I would like to see. And only tax those who seem to BELIEVE that never ending wars that enrich the military industrial complex is a good way to run a country. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
tkhayes 348 #102 March 24, 2011 Microsoft is laying off thousands over the past year. Yet they are breaking all projected profit estimates. no, no, no, thank YOU for making my argument. But seriously, Apple and Microsoft are not always the culprits. Some companies have good employee programs. PLENTY of companies, even good ol' American old fashioned technology have vacated after getting millions from the government in tax cuts and benefits, and STILL left the country for whatever reasons they can conjure up - but the real reason is greed. Government CAN actually change that. Few in Congress have the balls since these same companies line the pockets of politicians with money to get them elected, and on and on.....I digress... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #103 March 24, 2011 QuoteIf a VAT was *in place of* income tax, I could agree to that. In addition to income tax, nope - there's always creep and just like business taxes, VAT gets passed down the line to the consumer. While taking another 5% of the national income is perhaps a bit much, I think you are dreaming if you think there is a way out of this without the federal share of the economic pie rising to some extent Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Amazon 7 #104 March 24, 2011 QuoteMicrosoft is laying off thousands over the past year. Yet they are breaking all projected profit estimates. no, no, no, thank YOU for making my argument. But seriously, Apple and Microsoft are not always the culprits. Some companies have good employee programs. PLENTY of companies, even good ol' American old fashioned technology have vacated after getting millions from the government in tax cuts and benefits, and STILL left the country for whatever reasons they can conjure up - but the real reason is greed. Government CAN actually change that. Few in Congress have the balls since these same companies line the pockets of politicians with money to get them elected, and on and on.....I digress... I have a rather simplistic approach... IF you want to do business and sell your goods in America... you WILL produce X amount of your compainies goods with American workers in America. If they try to use the lame excuse that American workers are not good enough or not educated enough.. then they better damn well pony up the training to make them "good enough". There are more than a few countries that do exactly this sort of thing. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rehmwa 2 #105 March 24, 2011 QuoteAnd I bet we will prioritize things like, no wars, and more for social security, education and Medicare - i am all for it. How about a new tax that funds ONLY the military? And we put it into a separate fund. Now there is a tax I would like to see. I'm good with the part I cut, TK, thanks. I don't agree with the part "more for ......" we can't afford it even with cuts to the military (which I also agree to). and itemize my tax bill for the 'Big 3?' (military, social sec, medi(cade/care)) and education? absolutely - let the taxpayers know where the beef is. 1 - Everybody will have to pay more to start to pay off the debt - right now, we can't even break even. But, I can't ask the entire tax base to even start to pay more unless the government proves to us they will be responsible. That means they have to cut everything - even the stuff I like and even the stuff you like. 2 - If they are unwilling (i write "unwilling" on purpose, it's not even close to "unable") to show simple 'control' of their spending, how can you ask those that currently pay nothing to start paying again? 3 - And why wouldn't that attitude be applicable to everybody that also pays something every year - even us moderately "doing ok" or even the 'rich' (whatever that means)? I can't handle the "take more and now spend that extra over here", or the "cut these programs and then spend it on my favorites" philosophies - it doesn't work - tried it already several times. The government has to cut significantly to show they can balance the budget with what they are already taking. And they have to maintain that for a few years. Once they show they are responsible to at least hold the line? Then raise taxes so we can start regaining ground - MAYBE we can trust them enough to have a buffer that pays off the debt, then. Everybody's debt, everybody pays something. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Andrewwhyte 1 #106 March 24, 2011 Quote>1. It is a flat tax. Spend a buck, throw a nickle in the middle, no exceptions. So this is on top of the current income tax? See above. >It does not distort the economy by picking winners and losers. That was precisely the idea behind our current system of taxation. Then politics got involved. I see no reason this wouldn't happen with a sales tax. "Greedy Washington politicians want to TAX YOUR BABY'S FOOD! Don't let those greedy callous politicians get away with it; vote for the infant food tax exemption." Sadly you are correct. That is precisely what happened in Canada at implementation. Groceries are exempt but snack food is not. This led to purveyors of snacks to change their volumes to one gram or one ml over the bureaucrat set line. The good news is successive governments have been able to eschew further tampering despite a non-stop chorus to do so. >2. It is taxed when you consume, not when you invest. American individuals >need to reign in personal spending while keeping the productive engine >flowing. And - the distortion of the economy (i.e. encouraging investment, discouraging spending) begins. Might not be a bad thing, but it's definitely that social engineering thing again. Investing is deferred consuming. You pay the tax later when you consume. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,150 #107 March 24, 2011 Quote ...- Robert Heinlein Sorry, I don't find Heinlein remotely impressive as a source of wisdom.... 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
rehmwa 2 #108 March 24, 2011 QuoteQuote ...- Robert Heinlein Sorry, I don't find Heinlein remotely impressive as a source of wisdom. I do find him a bit of a dirty old man for his generation though. So that's a plus. ... Driving is a one dimensional activity - a monkey can do it - being proud of your driving abilities is like being proud of being able to put on pants Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #109 March 24, 2011 QuoteQuote ...- Robert Heinlein Sorry, I don't find Heinlein remotely impressive as a source of wisdom. Wisdom? Maybe, maybe not. Observation? When's the last time you read Starship Troopers professor?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
