466 replies to this topic

[Dymitry]

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 10:42 AM, said:

Kind of makes income taxes seem stupid, doesn't it?

And it is, since there are countless way (at least in this side of the pond) to avoid paying them, or drastically reduce the amount especially for the ultra riches. Question is, sticking to the idea that services are needed and have to be paid for, what can be done instead?

[Pht]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 10:47 AM, said:

You're not without a point, there. However, they're not really; a hybrid tax system has tended to work best for various reasons.

The only thing that complex tax systems ... and all hybrid systems either start that way or wind up that way ... serve to promote is making places for lobbyists to get loopholes for their interests via kickbacks from the biggest companies.

.. and the income tax quite perversely encourages people to NOT want to earn more income.

If you haven't read the fair tax books, you'd probably get a lot of good out of them.

[Osski]

Catamount, on 14 August 2012 - 09:57 PM, said:

I didn't even notice this...

I'm not sure I'd agree with that assessment. Granted, the modern democratic world has only existed for about 200 years, as compared to the prior 15,000 years of human civilization under oligarchical societies of one type or another, but in those 200 years, we've accomplished an order of magnitude more than in those 15,000 years prior.

The oligarchical societies of the 18th century that little by little gave way for their successors were not fundamentally much different from what we had during the 15,000 years prior. Reason and understand existed, but were not broadly accepted, as by far, the vast majority of society was oppressed and uneducated, and superstition not only held de facto rule over the thinking of the vast majority of people, but was even largely enforced by governments that ranged from being downright theocracies, to being "divine right" monarchies, at best. And most of what we now consider basic rights within a society were something held exclusively by a tiny minority, with absolutely no opportunity for the rest to gain them. Science and technology moved at a snails pace, and on the whole, people were dumb, oppressed and unhealthy, and generally had no opportunity to strive for anything better.


We've just now entered the 21st century, and the average person has far more knowledge than much of the tiny intellectual elite of the 18th century (if not the brightest of them), with opportunity to take that as far as one wishes, because we have universal education. Rights, while not perfect in depth or scope, are stronger and more egalitarian than they have ever been, going from a small set of privileges held by a smaller-still group of people, to a vast assortment held by everyone, on mostly equal terms, and the remaining disparities disappearing rapidly in most remaining areas. We've gone from theocracies ruled by superstition to secular governments, ruled (at least in theory, usually in practice) by reason and evidence, complete with national science academies and research agencies who are recruited in most levels of decision-making. Wealth disparities in the western world are smaller than anyone even would have dreamed two or three centuries ago...

and the result is that people are smarter, more empowered, and healthier, again, by an order of magnitude.

This is an example of 200 years of that so-called ineptitude of democratic society:





I'd invite you to show me an oligarchical society, EVER, that has achieved anything remotely close to what we have in the same amount of time, but obviously, it can't be done, because we've done more in less than 300 years, than the in the 15,000 year prior to advance society, largely thanks to egalitarian application of rights and public systems designed to maximize opportunity.

Well said.

I encourage the reading of The 5,000-year Leap. It's the concepts of the Constitution that are eternal, not the words themselves, and this book lays out the concepts quite handily and makes one really realize what the Constitution has done for the entire world in very short order.

All polarization aside, what really, really irks me is how much people take for granted (especially if you live in the U.S.A.) and how little historical perspective they have despite claiming to know the extent of our woes and the depths of our hopelessness. "We're screwed?" Really?

Things weren't always this good (YES, GOOD!!!!), and there is no guarantee that they will remain this way, which is why we should all do our best to keep as informed as we can.

Edited by Osski, 15 August 2012 - 11:00 AM.

[Pht]

Dymitry, on 15 August 2012 - 10:49 AM, said:

And it is, since there are countless way (at least in this side of the pond) to avoid paying them, or drastically reduce the amount especially for the ultra riches. Question is, sticking to the idea that services are needed and have to be paid for, what can be done instead?

What can be done?

Repeal the 16th amendment, get rid of the IRS, get rid of EVERY federal tax and replace them all with a national retail sales tax on new retail goods and also on services, at a rate equal to the current federal tax rates at the time of implementation.

Send a check to everyone in the entire united states at the beginning of the month that covers them up to the poverty line (so the tax is not regressive - punishing to the poor).

You'll have those who really are poor in a good position; because not only do they get the rebate, they tend to buy used goods (no federal taxes) and consume less services;

On the flip side, the rich, who consume more new goods and services, will pay more - but they'll be doing so in a voluntary way, so less games hiding money.

We would instantly become THE tax haven of the world (no federal taxes on capitol and investements), several billion if not a few trillion dollars forced offshore by our henoius tax code would come back...

Oh yeah, did I metion, GET RID of the irs?

The cash-only black market would start having to pay taxes ... illegals would be forced to pay taxes (without getting the monthly rebate)...

and, oh, yeah ... the politicians would have a horribly hard time messing with the taxes to give kickbacks to lobbyists... and every time they tried to raise the taxes; it would be instantly seen by everyone on all their reciepts.

also... require 75% of the house to bump the taxes up ... and not just 75% of those present; 75% of those elected.


----


AKA...

Implement the fair tax.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

What can be done?

*too much stuff to requote for no good reason*

Implement the fair tax.

I'm far from sure I agree but it's clear you have given this thought and researched it and you touch on many real and very relevant concerns about raising government revenue and what can be done with it.

[Pht]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 11:06 AM, said:

I'm far from sure I agree but it's clear you have given this thought and researched it and you touch on many real and very relevant concerns about raising government revenue and what can be done with it.

All I've done is ... told you what the fair tax would do, if implemented.

I didn't come up with any of it.

... another thing: don't let the politicians decide to make certain things tax free and other things not. That will, yet again, lead to special interests lobbying to be in the "non taxed" group.


... and did I metion, several billion dollars would get back into circulation that were tied up in the non-wealth producing job of complying with a tax code so complex that the IRS can't even get returns correct?

... and you wold be able to keep your entire paycheck? Not only the stuff you see on your stubs as tax, but also the FICA taxes that your employer is paying would come back to you?




http://www.fairtax.o...HowFairTaxWorks


----


I don't see why the states don't do this by voter initiatives; practically all of the states would be forced to do it, because of the massive drain they would experience of people to the states that implement it; and once the majority of the states had done it, there would be titanic pressure on the federal government to do it. too.

Edited by Pht, 15 August 2012 - 11:13 AM.

[SakuranoSenshi]

LOL

I know what you have done but that you have thought about it is clear, I was by no means under the impression you came up with it, I'm familiar with the ideas.

[dwbear]

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

What can be done?

Repeal the 16th amendment, get rid of the IRS, get rid of EVERY federal tax and replace them all with a national retail sales tax on new retail goods and also on services, at a rate equal to the current federal tax rates at the time of implementation.

Send a check to everyone in the entire united states at the beginning of the month that covers them up to the poverty line (so the tax is not regressive - punishing to the poor).

You'll have those who really are poor in a good position; because not only do they get the rebate, they tend to buy used goods (no federal taxes) and consume less services;

On the flip side, the rich, who consume more new goods and services, will pay more - but they'll be doing so in a voluntary way, so less games hiding money.

We would instantly become THE tax haven of the world (no federal taxes on capitol and investements), several billion if not a few trillion dollars forced offshore by our henoius tax code would come back...

Oh yeah, did I metion, GET RID of the irs?

The cash-only black market would start having to pay taxes ... illegals would be forced to pay taxes (without getting the monthly rebate)...

and, oh, yeah ... the politicians would have a horribly hard time messing with the taxes to give kickbacks to lobbyists... and every time they tried to raise the taxes; it would be instantly seen by everyone on all their reciepts.

also... require 75% of the house to bump the taxes up ... and not just 75% of those present; 75% of those elected.


----


AKA...

Implement the fair tax.

Here Here and the tax rate would not have to be high, cause there is no way to get around it.

Edited by dwbear, 15 August 2012 - 11:16 AM.

[dwbear]

Or go a flat rate tax with a yearly deduction of $20,000 single, $30,000 married and pay 15% tax on all income no deductions. Won't hurt the poor and everybody pays their fair share. Get rid of the death tax. that is so unfair, people having to pay tax on estates that have already been taxed

Edited by dwbear, 15 August 2012 - 11:18 AM.

[Slab Squathrust]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 10:39 AM, said:

Quite possibly true, in fact, I am sure they will have their figures straight. I was not talking income tax. I realize this might look like hair splitting but I was deliberate in not saying 'Federal (or state) Income tax'. A great deal of taxation is levied through other means than directly at source, probably the bulk of that would be sales taxes (Texas has no personal income tax, after all and I don't think it's alone). I also said quite specifically, wealth, not income. You can have huge income and huge outgoings (liabilities such as rent, etc) and thus not be rich. You can have no taxable income but be enormously rich.

Edit:

P.S. Tax dodges, as in minimizing liability under the legislation, are entirely relevant to why you can be rich and pay very little tax, even allowing for spending more (so being subject to more sales tax).

I figured you were talking only about federal taxes considering this is a topic on the national election, but you are entirely correct to also factor in State and local tax rates, as the federal tax is only portion of ones total tax liability.

I assume you are referring to investments for the rich with no income? Any short term investments are taxed at the ordinary income tax rate. Anything held for over a year is taxed at 15% currently, however if I remember correctly this is scheduled to rise at years end. Any dividend paying stocks are taxed at 15% unless their dividends are considered unqualified, at which point they are taxed at the individual's tax rate. I think we need to be very careful with these numbers. Many people seem to think that these people are getting money for nothing. Many people forget that the principal investment is risked especially when purchasing common or even preferred shares if the company were to go bankrupt. Further, many members of the middle class have eschewed stocks in favor of things like mutual funds. These own a basket of stocks across various sectors, many of which pay dividends. By increasing these rates, we would be disincentivizing saving. Some have proposed various tax brackets based on total investments, as a means of solving this problem.

Also another interesting note. Did you know you can deduct state income tax on your federal tax balance. I saw an article about it in the Seattle Times recently.
http://seattletimes....deductible.html
I have always thought a state income tax made more sense than sales tax in the event of a recession. While tax revenues will go down under both systems, many workers will keep their job but quit spending (out of fear of potentially losing their job). The state still realizes some tax revenue from these individuals. It certainly makes it easier on the state to balance its budget, which if I recall correctly, is a requirement in all state constitutions.

[Pht]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 11:09 AM, said:

LOL

I know what you have done but that you have thought about it is clear, I was by no means under the impression you came up with it, I'm familiar with the ideas.

I just wanted to be sure everyone realized that It wasn't my idea...

dwbear, on 15 August 2012 - 11:11 AM, said:

Here Here and the tax rate would not have to be high, cause there is no way to get around it.

Oh, there will always be those who try and cheat on taxes; but in order to do so you'd have to be buying wholesale as a buisness (so you have to keep 5 years of records on hand) ... and as a seller ditto, as for services, you'd have to do it outright illegally under the table, so no liscensing, that sort of thing.

dwbear, on 15 August 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

Or go a flat rate tax with a yearly deduction of $20,000 single, $30,000 married and pay 15% tax on all income no deductions. Won't hurt the poor and everybody pays their fair share. Get rid of the death tax. that is so unfair, people having to pay tax on estates that have already been taxed

Actually, the current federal income taxes started out as a flat tax. than they started expanding the taxes... because there is no built in specific dis-incentive to NOT mess with a income tax like they do currently.

We are actually on a flat tax now; ... it just happens to have progressive flat brackets. We need a system that discourages politicians from messing with it; and I can't think of a better one that advertising the tax rate on every reciept in the country.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Only the very naive rich invest in such a way that the federal or state governments can even see it. Let's not pretend they actually pay the rightful tax on their investments. There is a reason places like the Isle of Man, Luxemburg, etc are well known to people who have never visited them and it's not because they're holiday destinations.

[Pht]

Speaking of so-called tax dodging...


There's also the cost of compliance and the cost of the accountants and lawyers to find the so-called loop holes; and every time you take the suposedly "loopholed" wealth out of whatever shelter you've got it in, you are taxed on it, AGAIN... either in the form of capitol taxes, complaince costs, hidden taxes due to the production chain passing down all sorts of taxes and costs associated...

Even people purely on welfare and not paying, on paper, ANY taxes, federal or state, pay taxes in the form of these things. There is a massive, hidden, built in tax on virtually everything in this country.

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 11:25 AM, said:

Only the very naive rich invest in such a way that the federal or state governments can even see it. Let's not pretend they actually pay the rightful tax on their investments.

Tell me, do you honestly think anyone who's actually paying into the system at ANY level on paper isn't looking for every way they can pay less taxes?

Tax fraud is not a creature that only exists amongst the rich.

The more opressive the tax sytem, the more widespread the tax fraud ... and our tax system is horrid.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Oh, not suggesting everyone else wouldn't like in on that too... please, that's pretty close to being strawman twisting of what I said. :-)

However, it's obvious (or should be) that the rich and well educated (or well advised typically both, really) have the advantage here. For a start, the sums need to be significant.

[Constati]

I think that Pres.Obama is a marxist and his policies show it. The fastest route to a socialist state is through health care. Once they (government) is paying for your health care they will feel that they can now dictate any activity that could possible affect your health.
Obama knows this and that is why Obamacare was so important to him. He had said it numerous times that he wants to fundamental change the US and he means it.

He hates the United States as it was founded. He is the worst president ever, Wilson being a close second. Progressives can't stand having people make decisions for themselves. How do you all feel paying taxes while half the population pays nothing. And then live on unemployment for TWO YEARS while the rest of us have to work.
And his treatment of the US military, which he also despises.

Basically he hates and wants to destroy everything great about this nation. Freedom, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness. That last one doesn't mean the government is suppose to ensure you are happy it means in the US you get the chance to be happy an not have some fat government bureaucrat telling what you can do and when you can do it, from cradle to grave.

And those in Europe no offense but your goose has already been cooked by socialism, your all at the brink of bankruptcy (except mybe England, not to mention none of you have been able to compete with the US economically or militarily for 80 years. And for the last 60-70 years we have basically provided your protection.

I am not saying we are better then you I 'am saying that our constitution, and capitalist system (which I hope will survive this disaster of a President) have given us a vastly superior system of government and have provided the opportunity and motivation to succeed and excel in life. Where as your socialist systems kill motivation and fail to reward hard work.

Edited by Constati, 15 August 2012 - 11:52 AM.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Constati, on 15 August 2012 - 11:44 AM, said:

*usual nonsense*

Umm, no. I mean this in the nicest possibly way but... you have absolutely no idea.

[Pht]

SakuranoSenshi, on 15 August 2012 - 11:39 AM, said:

However, it's obvious (or should be) that the rich and well educated (or well advised typically both, really) have the advantage here. For a start, the sums need to be significant.

Is it?

Advantage in what? Being taxed at a higher percentage? Being taxed in more areas? Paying a higher percentage of taxes than those who fall into lower tax brackets? Being taxed so hard in death and estate taxes that they can't pass on their stuff to their children?

It's hard if not impossible to find a way under the current tax system in which people who fall into the higher brackets have any advantage; the system is built to punish achievement by politicians pushing bigotry against anyone who achieves.

[Quinn Allard]

Deathsiege, on 14 August 2012 - 01:43 PM, said:

All I have to say is, if we elect a mormon as president, I'll move to Canada.

And you're fine with a Muslim?

[Gingo]

Okay, to everybody saying Obama is marxist or communist:

Have you read any, any at all, communist writings? The Capital? The Communist Manifesto? What Is To Be Done? The Red Book? The Permanent Revolution? Any single one of these?
No?

Then you dont know what either of these words mean. (Hint: The Red Scare isnt correct)

Obama isnt communist. He's barely in the middle of the political spectrum. Only someone so far right that he cant even see where the Middle is could ever say Obama is anything left of it.

[SakuranoSenshi]

Pht, on 15 August 2012 - 11:50 AM, said:

Is it?

Advantage in what? Being taxed at a higher percentage? Being taxed in more areas? Paying a higher percentage of taxes than those who fall into lower tax brackets? Being taxed so hard in death and estate taxes that they can't pass on their stuff to their children?

It's hard if not impossible to find a way under the current tax system in which people who fall into the higher brackets have any advantage; the system is built to punish achievement by politicians pushing bigotry against anyone who achieves.

If you have to ask, it's obvious that you need to some research into this. I'm not sure where to suggest you start, now I think of it but aye, obvious. In order to hide money in offshore accounts or complicated schemes you need to realize this is possible and ideally have professional advice on how it could be done without actually breaking any laws in the act of doing it (though failing to declare those accounts later almost always *is* a crime).