Phase Out Income Tax

Phase Out Income Tax (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

KenDckey -> Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 1:50:59 PM)
http://video.foxbusiness.com/v/4423050/rep-bilbray-phase-out-income-tax Rep Bilbray California says have a consumption tax and phase out income tax

KenDckey -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 2:09:22 PM)
Chuck Norris Says http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/11/16/nothing_certain_except_death_and_a_fairtax

Musicmystery -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 2:12:17 PM)
I'd support a VAT similar to Europe's. It's never going to happen in the U.S.

DarkSteven -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 2:18:58 PM)
I'd oppose it. Those who are stretched financially spend every penny they make. Those who are well off sock a bunch away. So a tax on consumption rather than income would be regressive, penalizing lower income people more than the current system.

KenDckey -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 2:27:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven I'd oppose it. Those who are stretched financially spend every penny they make. Those who are well off sock a bunch away. So a tax on consumption rather than income would be regressive, penalizing lower income people more than the current system. Robin Hood Style? If they sock it away then they sock it away or should we jsut do a value added tax that says that if you make over $X just send it to the govt because you don't deserve to make it? Come on Why is it that those that have money should be penalized? Seems to me that right now they have the ability to figure out how to write off the majority of their taxes so they don't have to pay much but a VAT would tax them for that Lamborgini, and private jet or whatever they have

Musicmystery -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 6:52:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven I'd oppose it. Those who are stretched financially spend every penny they make. Those who are well off sock a bunch away. So a tax on consumption rather than income would be regressive, penalizing lower income people more than the current system. Yes, but we have such taxes now (sales, gasoline), and we exempt food, some clothing, heating fuel, mortgage interest (which benefits the wealthy homeowner a lot more), and so forth. No reason this shouldn't continue. You could even exempt entirely certain income levels if you like, through either refunds or vouchers. Additionally, a VAT would add some incentives to save, and Americans have a negative savings rate. And finally, it's a built in luxury tax. I'd rather that than a flat income tax, which I absolutely oppose.

CarpeComa -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 7:06:27 PM)
Having strictly a consumption tax would be a bad idea as the burden of that tax would be felt greatest by those of lower incomes. Think if it this way; If I'm making minimum wage, how much of my money do I have to spend just to stay in reasonably good health, fed, and sheltered? The vast majority of it. While if I'm making $100K a year, I could easily only spend 70k (or less). Because the poor have a much harder time spending less money and generally have to spend a much greater proportion of their income, they will be hit the hardest by a consumption tax.

Aylee -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 7:11:34 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DarkSteven I'd oppose it. Those who are stretched financially spend every penny they make. Those who are well off sock a bunch away. So a tax on consumption rather than income would be regressive, penalizing lower income people more than the current system. If I recall correctly, every family receives a check from the government every year based on the number of people in the house to offset this. It is kind of like the basic deduction on your 1040A. I have only read one book on this and it was a few years ago. But I do recall there being some program to deal with this concern.

submittous -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 7:33:06 PM)
The biggest problem facing the US is all the wealth ending up in the hands of a small number of families. The only methods of dealing with that problem are progressive taxes, inheritance taxes and/or taxing wealth not income. Income taxes are by far the best way to keep taxation progressive but I would prefer high taxation on estates over a couple hundred million and some annual fee on wealth held or controlled over some similar dollar amount.... Consumption taxes are regressive and an affront to anyone with a moral view on public policy.

CarpeComa -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 7:47:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Yes, but we have such taxes now (sales, gasoline), and we exempt food, some clothing, heating fuel, mortgage interest (which benefits the wealthy homeowner a lot more), and so forth. No reason this shouldn't continue. You could even exempt entirely certain income levels if you like, through either refunds or vouchers. Additionally, a VAT would add some incentives to save, and Americans have a negative savings rate. And finally, it's a built in luxury tax. I'd rather that than a flat income tax, which I absolutely oppose. Vouchers are only good after the fact. The timing of when people have their money is important, not just the quantity. This is especially true in the lower income brackets. Consumption taxes (vouchers or not) still run smack into the problem that wealthy people will simply curtail their spending, which in the long run helps no one as they will simply accumulate money at a faster rate.

CarpeComa -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 7:53:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: submittous The biggest problem facing the US is all the wealth ending up in the hands of a small number of families. The only methods of dealing with that problem are progressive taxes, inheritance taxes and/or taxing wealth not income. Income taxes are by far the best way to keep taxation progressive but I would prefer high taxation on estates over a couple hundred million and some annual fee on wealth held or controlled over some similar dollar amount.... Consumption taxes are regressive and an affront to anyone with a moral view on public policy. I agree in that the wealth concentration in the U.S. is a major looming problem. Addressing that is going to be no small feat as money begets power, and people don't want to let either go.

Musicmystery -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 8:20:16 PM)
quote: wealthy people will simply curtail their spending, which in the long run helps no one as they will simply accumulate money at a faster rate. This makes no sense. We currently have sales taxes. Do the wealthy spend less?

CarpeComa -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 8:56:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: wealthy people will simply curtail their spending, which in the long run helps no one as they will simply accumulate money at a faster rate. This makes no sense. We currently have sales taxes. Do the wealthy spend less? I misspoke slightly. They will buy less (in pre-tax dollars). They will buy fewer items, and the revenue companies generate from said products will drop. As taxes increase, the trade-off of money spent for utility gained is going to drop below the perceived net gain for some items (more items as the taxes increase) as the more something costs, the less likely you are to buy it. It is possible that they will end up spending less as well, depending on how many items fall into the 'not worth it' category vs. the taxed items they continue to consume. That tends to be the big pitfall of luxury taxes.

Real0ne -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 10:02:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: wealthy people will simply curtail their spending, which in the long run helps no one as they will simply accumulate money at a faster rate. This makes no sense. We currently have sales taxes. Do the wealthy spend less? one family can only eat su much, they can only drive so many cars, wealthy people dont buy a new car every week or go to the grocery store any more than the next guy. those with wealth dump it in specie or hard assets that the middle and poor cannot do, hence the middle and poor keep the money circulating in the public as fast as they get it and the wealthy also hoard it taking it out of circulation placing it in private corporations stock accounts driving inflation up. any tax not by choice is a direct tax. Little do people know that "very" few of you out here make "income" LOL But the truly wealthy do and I have no problem with the truly wealthy paying shit loads of tax because they drive our costs of doing business up.

Charles6682 -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/21/2010 11:29:18 PM)
I think a fair professive income tax is the way.Otherwise it continue's to make the poor poorer and the rich richer.

rulemylife -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/22/2010 4:52:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: KenDckey Chuck Norris Says http://townhall.com/columnists/ChuckNorris/2010/11/16/nothing_certain_except_death_and_a_fairtax Well if Chuck Norris said it, with all his qualifications and expertise then it must be a sound idea.

allthatjaz -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/22/2010 6:00:09 AM)
A very interesting read http://www.businessinsider.com/america-take-example-on-hong-kongs-simple-and-efficient-flat-tax-2010-7

Edwynn -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/22/2010 9:41:16 AM)
FR Hong Kong as comparison or example of alternate taxing scheme. I'm not sure if the comparison is appropriate when there is hardly any other example of a situation such as exists in Hong Kong. Were we to hypothetically isolate London or NYC as independent sovereignties and have their national defense covered 100% by someone else (for Hong Kong that was Britain, now China) then we would have an apples to apples comparison here. Not much argument but that a high revenue financial center in a small area with zero military expense could have a much lighter and less complicated tax regime.

Edwynn -> RE: Phase Out Income Tax (11/22/2010 10:24:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: CarpeComa quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: wealthy people will simply curtail their spending, which in the long run helps no one as they will simply accumulate money at a faster rate. This makes no sense. We currently have sales taxes. Do the wealthy spend less? I misspoke slightly. They will buy less (in pre-tax dollars). They will buy fewer items, and the revenue companies generate from said products will drop. As taxes increase, the trade-off of money spent for utility gained is going to drop below the perceived net gain for some items (more items as the taxes increase) as the more something costs, the less likely you are to buy it. It is possible that they will end up spending less as well, depending on how many items fall into the 'not worth it' category vs. the taxed items they continue to consume. That tends to be the big pitfall of luxury taxes. Any study I've seen on taxes vs. spending of the wealthy says that taxes affect their spending minimally, if at all. The increase/decrease in personal consumption of the wealthy is based almost entirely on the change in personal fortune, i.e. the change in value of their holdings. The size of these larger fortunes is such that e.g. a 3-5% change in value completely dwarfs the effect of a 3-5% change in income tax. quote: As taxes increase, the trade-off of money spent for utility gained is going to drop below the perceived net gain for some items (more items as the taxes increase) as the more something costs, the less likely you are to buy it. That is true for most everybody else, not for the wealthy.

Page: [1]

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.171875