Fair Tax

[Lucky2Coach]

Basically, it gets rid of all Property, Income, and Corporate taxes and replaces it with a higher Consumption (or Sales) Tax.

It makes way too much sense!!!

Please visit Fairtax.org

[PPHSfan]

I proposed this years ago. Al Gore will probably take credit and win a Nobel Prize if it passes.

[Lucky2Coach]

PPHS-

My Dad goes around and gives talks on the Fair TAx to all that will listen: Kiwanis, Rotary, even to CPA Assoc's (it would put them out of work), and everywhere he goes he gets nothing but positive responses. Please be active in promoting ths bill.

It could truely change the way government intervenes in our financial lives!!!

[Ernest T Bass]

Originally posted by Lucky2Coach

It could truely change the way government intervenes in our financial lives!!!

But the unemployment rate would skyrocket b/c of all those IRS folks who would be outta work.

[Lucky2Coach]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
But the unemployment rate would skyrocket b/c of all those IRS folks who would be outta work.

Yes, yet another positive of the Fair Tax!!! Much less government waste!!!

[Farmersfan]

Can't happen. Black Magic will scream and cry about how the poor people can't pay the same percentage of taxes as the fat cats do.

[Gsquared]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Can't happen. Black Magic will scream and cry about how the poor people can't pay the same percentage of taxes as the fat cats do.
Nah, we can just hand em a broom and tell em to sweep.

[GreenMonster]

It is the only way to do it and all of us be on a level playing field. The one's that HAVE will spend more and in return be taxed more. Lessened government involvement will spur business creation which will drive job creation and we will all be better off. :thumbsup:

[bolshavik]

WONT WORK

[Ernest T Bass]

Originally posted by bolshavik
WONT WORK

Wamp wamp waaaaamp

http://www.apartmenttherapy.com/uimages/la/110909_debbiedowner.jpg

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by GreenMonster
It is the only way to do it and all of us be on a level playing field. The one's that HAVE will spend more and in return be taxed more. Lessened government involvement will spur business creation which will drive job creation and we will all be better off. :thumbsup:



And how many Billions would be saved by almost completely disolving the IRS?

[Blastoderm55]

So, if I follow correctly, from the standpoint of a business this would eliminate corporate taxes, and thus the need (benefit of) for depreciation and/or depletion expenses. Instead, a tax on new capital purchases would be levied? Effectively, you'd remove both the tax benefit of depreciating tanglible equipment and the sales tax-exempt status of commerical entities, thus stifling capital investment and growth. In order words, no more writing off to the point that profits are minimized to minimize tax.

However, all this is offset by the opportunity keep 100% of operating profits (from the fed's hands at least).

I like the idea, but as simple as it may sound, it could get complicated.

[Farmersfan]

and how would it work for corporations? Would they pay taxes on the wholesale products they purchase for resale? And how about companies like Google that makes BILLIONS of dollars a year but never buy anything?

[Blastoderm55]

Also, what percent goes to the federal government and what, if any, stays with the state? Will we pay 23% tax and another 8% on top, or is that 23% supposed to fund federal and state activities combined?

[bolshavik]

Wont Work because the Govt. would kill for it not to happen.

[PPHSfan]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
So, if I follow correctly, from the standpoint of a business this would eliminate corporate taxes, and thus the need (benefit of) for depreciation and/or depletion expenses. Instead, a tax on new capital purchases would be levied? Effectively, you'd remove both the tax benefit of depreciating tanglible equipment and the sales tax-exempt status of commerical entities, thus stifling capital investment and growth. In order words, no more writing off to the point that profits are minimized to minimize tax.

However, all this is offset by the opportunity keep 100% of operating profits (from the fed's hands at least).

I like the idea, but as simple as it may sound, it could get complicated.

You don't need a tax write-off if you're not paying taxes on your profit.

Depreciation becomes "real" as it truly will be a cost of doing business. Now it's "overhead" instead of a tax write-off.

[PPHSfan]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
and how would it work for corporations? Would they pay taxes on the wholesale products they purchase for resale? And how about companies like Google that makes BILLIONS of dollars a year but never buy anything?

Huh?

So are you saying that all of Google's profits just get locked in a box? That the owners and employees don't consume anything?

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by PPHSfan
You don't need a tax write-off if you're not paying taxes on your profit.

Depreciation becomes "real" as it truly will be a cost of doing business. Now it's "overhead" instead of a tax write-off.

But that overhead has no tax implications in this system. And actually that's wrong. It becomes a tax in a sense, as business can no longer recoup the costs associated with amortizing goods and equipment, not to mention their obsolcense and maintenance, in a fashion that benefits the income statement. It evens the playing field between individual tax payers and businesses. Jack and Jane can't write off their cars or appliances, but James Corp. can. Not under this system.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
and how would it work for corporations? Would they pay taxes on the wholesale products they purchase for resale? And how about companies like Google that makes BILLIONS of dollars a year but never buy anything?

I think it should work like a state sales tax. No taxes on items purchased for resale. That would be double taxation. The tax is collected on the retail transaction.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Ernest T Bass
But the unemployment rate would skyrocket b/c of all those IRS folks who would be outta work.

The IRS folks would not be out of work. They would have to handle the fair tax returns that are filed instead of income tax returns. It would be the equivalent to what the State Comptroller's office does now.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by MUSTANG69
I think it should work like a state sales tax. No taxes on items purchased for resale. That would be double taxation. The tax is collected on the retail transaction.

So then only the final consumer would pay tax, completely relieving businesses of their tax burden? Sounds like a great system if you're the business. No tax on capital invetsment. No tax on income. No tax on shareholder gains.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
So then only the final consumer would pay tax, completely relieving businesses of their tax burden? Sounds like a great system if you're the business. No tax on capital invetsment. No tax on income. No tax on shareholder gains.

Not true. Businesses purchase many products that are not for resale and would pay the tax on these items.

[PPHSfan]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
But that overhead has no tax implications in this system. And actually that's wrong. It becomes a tax in a sense, as business can no longer recoup the costs associated with amortizing goods and equipment, not to mention their obsolcense and maintenance, in a fashion that benefits the income statement. It evens the playing field between individual tax payers and businesses. Jack and Jane can't write off their cars or appliances, but James Corp. can. Not under this system.

I guess I'm missing something.

Why do you need a write-off on an income statement, when there is no longer a tax on your income?

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by MUSTANG69
Not true. Businesses purchase many products that are not for resale and would pay the tax on these items.

So they would pay tax on their plant, property, and equipment, but not on their raw materials? That's fair.

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
But that overhead has no tax implications in this system. And actually that's wrong. It becomes a tax in a sense, as business can no longer recoup the costs associated with amortizing goods and equipment, not to mention their obsolcense and maintenance, in a fashion that benefits the income statement. It evens the playing field between individual tax payers and businesses. Jack and Jane can't write off their cars or appliances, but James Corp. can. Not under this system.




Businesses WILL recoup the costs associated with the amortizing of goods and equipment. It's called product markup. If it negatively effects profit it will be carried over to the consumer.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by PPHSfan
I guess I'm missing something.

Why do you need a write-off on an income statement, when there is no longer a tax on your income?

Yeah I missed that too. :doh:

[upper20]

Tax attorneys/accountants will fight the fair tax tooth-and-nail!!! Those fields employ many that are highly educated and highly compensated. With the current highly complex IRS regs, their services are a necessity for many businesses and individuals. That said, in reality, their efforts are non-productive (in fact, from the government's perspective, they are counter-productive - they reduce tax revenues).

[Farmersfan]

Originally posted by MUSTANG69
The IRS folks would not be out of work. They would have to handle the fair tax returns that are filed instead of income tax returns. It would be the equivalent to what the State Comptroller's office does now.



Why would we have to file a fair tax return? Wouldn't this tax work just like the state sales taxes? A business is required to report their sales and turnover the appropriate tax amount to the Government. If they fail to collect from the consumer then that is their problem. IRS would still exist but about 1/100 of it's current size.

[Lucky2Coach]

Originally posted by upper20
Tax attorneys/accountants will fight the fair tax tooth-and-nail!!! Those fields employ many that are highly educated and highly compensated. With the current highly complex IRS regs, their services are a necessity for many businesses and individuals. That said, in reality, their efforts are non-productive (in fact, from the government's perspective, they are counter-productive - they reduce tax revenues).

My Dad is a CPA and a huge proponent of the Fair Tax.

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by Lucky2Coach
Basically, it gets rid of all Property, Income, and Corporate taxes and replaces it with a higher Consumption (or Sales) Tax.

It makes way too much sense!!!

Please visit Fairtax.org

I'm on board.
Just don't tax propane...:D

[nobogey72]

Think about how great it would be if you didn't have to pay any income tax. NOW YOU KNOW WHY BANKS HATE CREDIT UNIONS!!!! Credit Unions pay "0" income tax. Try competing against that. We price a loan to a customer and they say "oh I can get it cheaper at the credit union". Yeah well 35% of our net income goes to the IRS and your little pissant credit union doesn't have to pay any.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by SintonFan
I'm on board.
Just don't tax propane...:D

Calm down Buck Strickland. :p

[NastySlot]

Originally posted by nobogey72
Think about how great it would be if you didn't have to pay any income tax. NOW YOU KNOW WHY BANKS HATE CREDIT UNIONS!!!! Credit Unions pay "0" income tax. Try competing against that. We price a loan to a customer and they say "oh I can get it cheaper at the credit union". Yeah well 35% of our net income goes to the IRS and your little pissant credit union doesn't have to pay any.


wow i did not know that......I was going to check into getting loan.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by nobogey72
Think about how great it would be if you didn't have to pay any income tax. NOW YOU KNOW WHY BANKS HATE CREDIT UNIONS!!!! Credit Unions pay "0" income tax. Try competing against that. We price a loan to a customer and they say "oh I can get it cheaper at the credit union". Yeah well 35% of our net income goes to the IRS and your little pissant credit union doesn't have to pay any.

CU's are non-profit. And they're still paying pretty good interest whereas the banks are not.

[garciap77]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Can't happen. Black Magic will scream and cry about how the poor people can't pay the same percentage of taxes as the fat cats do.
I like Flat Taxes Better! 15%
It's the other way around, ths fat cats will scream and cry about having to pay the same percentage of taxes as the poor people pay. If it's 15% the poor people making 20K will have to pay 3K and the poor poor poor fat cat making 1 Billion will have to pay 150 Million.

[nobogey72]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
CU's are non-profit. And they're still paying pretty good interest whereas the banks are not.

You really don't want to get into this argument.

[Old LB]

Originally posted by nobogey72
You really don't want to get into this argument. :1popcorn:

[BwdLion73]

Originally posted by nobogey72
You really don't want to get into this argument.

:thinking: I've banked at a piss ant little credit union for over 30 years. I don't want to argue either but I am a little confused. It was a Teachers Credit union when I started.

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Can't happen. Black Magic will scream and cry about how the poor people can't pay the same percentage of taxes as the fat cats do.
You guys may want to continue to balance the budget on the backs of the old folks, kids, police, fire fighters,teachers and blue collar workers but it aint gona happen.

Got an Idea. Lets Take the top tax rate back to a time when we had the greatest growth in american history. the 1950s. That top rate was 90% on the wealthy for everyone making more than $100,000 a year. For dollar over that amount would be subject to 90% tax bracket... I say raise that amount to $1,000,000 a year and tax tem at 90% for everything over that amount. We solve most of the debt problem.

[Blastoderm55]

Originally posted by nobogey72
You really don't want to get into this argument.

What's the argument? The credit unions seem to be meeting the needs of their customers a little better these days. And I've got nothing against banks, I was employed by one for three years.

[BEAST]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
You guys may want to continue to balance the budget on the backs of the old folks, kids, police, fire fighters,teachers and blue collar workers but it aint gona happen.

Got an Idea. Lets Take the top tax rate back to a time when we had the greatest growth in american history. the 1950s. That top rate was 90% on the wealthy for everyone making more than $100,000 a year. For dollar over that amount would be subject to 90% tax bracket... I say raise that amount to $1,000,000 a year and tax tem at 90% for everything over that amount. We solve most of the debt problem.


Yea and penalize smart business folks.




BEAST

[icu812]

I can only image how much more productice I and a lot of other small business owners could be without the IRS. Think of all the wasted time spent on income tax records. I've voted for Fair Tax supporters in every election I can. Make April 15 just other day!!

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by BEAST
Yea and penalize smart business folks.

BEAST
I volunteer for that kind of punishment. with a smile. pay me $1,000,000 and then on every dime 90% after that..

[Old LB]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
I volunteer for that kind of punishment. with a smile. pay me $1,000,000 and then on every dime 90% after that..

A lot of difference in being paid a million and earning a million, some folks are born into money, but there are a lot that earn what they have. Evidently you choose a course in life that did not afford you a rich life and now it seems you hold that against those that have more than you.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
So they would pay tax on their plant, property, and equipment, but not on their raw materials? That's fair.

Yes

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Why would we have to file a fair tax return? Wouldn't this tax work just like the state sales taxes? A business is required to report their sales and turnover the appropriate tax amount to the Government. If they fail to collect from the consumer then that is their problem. IRS would still exist but about 1/100 of it's current size.

You misunderstood what I was saying. Maybe I should have been a little clearer. Individuals would not file returns. Only the organizations that collected the tax would file a return and submit the funds. I am well aware of how the state sales tax is handled. I am a comptroller for a dealership and deal with that every month.

[MUSTANG69]

Originally posted by nobogey72
Think about how great it would be if you didn't have to pay any income tax. NOW YOU KNOW WHY BANKS HATE CREDIT UNIONS!!!! Credit Unions pay "0" income tax. Try competing against that. We price a loan to a customer and they say "oh I can get it cheaper at the credit union". Yeah well 35% of our net income goes to the IRS and your little pissant credit union doesn't have to pay any.

Credit unions are tax-exempt because they are supposed to return all disposable profits to their shareholders. They are required to maintain a certain level of reserves by whichever regulatory agency they fall under. Not saying this is right or wrong but that is the basic reason they don't pay taxes.

[nobogey72]

Originally posted by Blastoderm55
What's the argument? The credit unions seem to be meeting the needs of their customers a little better these days. And I've got nothing against banks, I was employed by one for three years.

My point is that it's a lot easier to "meet the needs of customers" when you've got a raw material cost of $.65 and your competition pays $1.00 The problem banks have with credit unions is not only the unlevel playing field, but how they have drifted away from their original purpose. Originally, for example, the Abilene Teachers Credit Union was specifically for Teachers in Abilene. They all had a common bond. Now, anybody can belong to the Abilene Teachers Credit Union. All you have to do is show up and say you want to be a member. When the members were all required to have a common bond it was fair. Now it's not. Yeah, I'm whining. CU's have damn good lobbiests, I'll give them that.

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by nobogey72
CU's have damn good lobbiests, I'll give them that.


ehhh...My mom has been a president of a CU for 10 years now and been with them since 85..They have to jump thru so many legal hopps because of the S and L Scandals it is not even funny. So if they have such great lobbyists they did not help on that front.

[nobogey72]

Originally posted by Txbroadcaster
ehhh...My mom has been a president of a CU for 10 years now and been with them since 85..They have to jump thru so many legal hopps because of the S and L Scandals it is not even funny. So if they have such great lobbyists they did not help on that front.

All lenders jump through the same hoops (lobbyists or no lobbyists) due to scandals of the past. If CU's dealt in real estate lending, which the big majority don't, they would know how small their hoops are. And, TXB, absolutely no disrespect towards your mom and what she does for a living. She didn't make the rules. One of my life long friends runs a credit union and I rag his ass all the time.

[Blastoderm55]

The credit union I'm a member of offers all the same services I struggled to sell at my old bank. They pay higher rates on deposits, lower on mortgage and auto loans, and have a fee schedule that's realistic (I used to charge people $3 for a black and white copy). The requirements are pretty minimal, just be a resident of the service area, and they just made a huge investment in the community by shuttering their old location in a strip mall that was leased in favor of building a brand-new stand-alone banking center.

[PPHSfan]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
I volunteer for that kind of punishment. with a smile. pay me $1,000,000 and then on every dime 90% after that..

Ok.

How about everything over a hundred grand?

No?

I'm just negotiating.

You've said your willing to let 90% go to uncle Sam, so why is a million the magic number?

It's funny how people who don't have a lot of money think that they know just how much is plenty.

[garciap77]

Originally posted by nobogey72
My point is that it's a lot easier to "meet the needs of customers" when you've got a raw material cost of $.65 and your competition pays $1.00 The problem banks have with credit unions is not only the unlevel playing field, but how they have drifted away from their original purpose. Originally, for example, the Abilene Teachers Credit Union was specifically for Teachers in Abilene. They all had a common bond. Now, anybody can belong to the Abilene Teachers Credit Union. All you have to do is show up and say you want to be a member. When the members were all required to have a common bond it was fair. Now it's not. Yeah, I'm whining. CU's have damn good lobbiests, I'll give them that.

I'm a member of two credit unions (Teachers & Communities of Abilene), but I get better deals from Banks when it comes to loans and just about everything else.

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
You guys may want to continue to balance the budget on the backs of the old folks, kids, police, fire fighters,teachers and blue collar workers but it aint gona happen.

Got an Idea. Lets Take the top tax rate back to a time when we had the greatest growth in american history. the 1950s. That top rate was 90% on the wealthy for everyone making more than $100,000 a year. For dollar over that amount would be subject to 90% tax bracket... I say raise that amount to $1,000,000 a year and tax tem at 90% for everything over that amount. We solve most of the debt problem.

Who is "you guys"?:thinking:
Maybe you want to demonize those you don't agree with with lies or outright distortions...
but that kite don't fly far. Stop it, please. We have wizened up to that kind of rhetoric.:hand:

Prove your points on the the 50's and how it was the "greatest growth in American history" with a top income tax rate of 90%. Your point doesn't make sense. How can taking 90% of the income of top earners equate to "greatest growth?" It is NOT possible. The higher the taxes, the bigger and more numerous the loopholes. That is history here and almost everywhere in the world.
I guess if you hear a lie enough you start to believe it...
so please prove it to us please.:)

[Reds fan]

Originally posted by SintonFan
Who is "you guys"?:thinking:
Maybe you want to demonize those you don't agree with with lies or outright distortions...
but that kite don't fly far. Stop it, please. We have wizened up to that kind of rhetoric.:hand:

Prove your points on the the 50's and how it was the "greatest growth in American history" with a top income tax rate of 90%. Your point doesn't make sense. How can taking 90% of the income of top earners equate to "greatest growth?" It is NOT possible. The higher the taxes, the bigger and more numerous the loopholes. That is history here and almost everywhere in the world.
I guess if you hear a lie enough you start to believe it...
so please prove it to us please.:) Yes, BM is a Michael Moore disciple, play some sad music, tug at the ol' emotions and viola, a disciple is born. Tax rate and effective tax rate are two very different things.

[SintonFan]

Originally posted by Reds fan
Yes, BM is a Michael Moore disciple, play some sad music, tug at the ol' emotions and viola, a disciple is born. Tax rate and effective tax rate are two very different things.

That very well could be. I have friends who still haven't figured out how to stop using emotions from their intelligent thoughts. I'm working on them though. It is tough, but someone has to jog them out of the "mental malaise"...:thinking:

[Black_Magic]

In the 1950 we all know those were the years in our nations history when we had the greatest prosperity and growth. the interstate highways were built. Income for working class were high. a pay check went farther. Single income families did fine. and the top income bracket payed 90% in tax over 100,000 a year. Im not saying we should raise it to 90%. I say jack it to 50% over $700,000 or $1,000,000 a year.

I think its a hoot that some of you dont think thats "Fair" when YOUR party Gives "corporate welfare" to companies with the highest profits in the history of man kind ( Oil companies ). Tax breaks to the top income earners. Tax cuts for all the Yacht folks out there so they dont have to pay sales tax on those huge boats. And then at the same time say we need to have "Sacrifice" and want to Cut Education for kids, Medicaid for the elderly, social security for the elderly, Benifits for teachers, firefighters, and other blue collar workers..... Its messed up. No wonder the rich get richer.. :rolleyes:

[PPHSfan]

I get the feeling you have no idea how much someone who earns seven figures pays in taxes right now. 50% is sounding good to a lot of folks right now. At least do a little research before you start spouting off numbers.

[Lucky2Coach]

Originally posted by nobogey72
My point is that it's a lot easier to "meet the needs of customers" when you've got a raw material cost of $.65 and your competition pays $1.00 The problem banks have with credit unions is not only the unlevel playing field, but how they have drifted away from their original purpose. Originally, for example, the Abilene Teachers Credit Union was specifically for Teachers in Abilene. They all had a common bond. Now, anybody can belong to the Abilene Teachers Credit Union. All you have to do is show up and say you want to be a member. When the members were all required to have a common bond it was fair. Now it's not. Yeah, I'm whining. CU's have damn good lobbiests, I'll give them that.

Fair Tax will get rid of lobbyists and special interests groups that control our politicians.

[Lucky2Coach]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
In the 1950 we all know those were the years in our nations history when we had the greatest prosperity and growth. the interstate highways were built. Income for working class were high. a pay check went farther. Single income families did fine. and the top income bracket payed 90% in tax over 100,000 a year. Im not saying we should raise it to 90%. I say jack it to 50% over $700,000 or $1,000,000 a year.

I think its a hoot that some of you dont think thats "Fair" when YOUR party Gives "corporate welfare" to companies with the highest profits in the history of man kind ( Oil companies ). Tax breaks to the top income earners. Tax cuts for all the Yacht folks out there so they dont have to pay sales tax on those huge boats. And then at the same time say we need to have "Sacrifice" and want to Cut Education for kids, Medicaid for the elderly, social security for the elderly, Benifits for teachers, firefighters, and other blue collar workers..... Its messed up. No wonder the rich get richer.. :rolleyes:

Far Tax alleviates this whole argument. Everyone above the poverty line pays tax based upon what they spend. The more you have... the more you spend! Everyone pays in: homeowners, renters, millionaires, undocumented workers, etc, etc.

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by Lucky2Coach
Far Tax alleviates this whole argument. Everyone above the poverty line pays tax based upon what they spend. The more you have... the more you spend! Everyone pays in: homeowners, renters, millionaires, undocumented workers, etc, etc. This "Fair tax" as you guys call it is a tax cut for millionares and an increase for the Janitor :rolleyes:

The Top Tax % is 36% if Im not mistaken.


We Need to get rid of the wellfare tax break for the most profitable corporations in History ( Oil ). Crack down on speculation of all kinds on Wall street. Exxon president stated that if the price of oil was based on pure supply and demand means the price for a barrel of oil would be about $65-$70... Right now it is at $98-$100 a barrel. That means we pay $30 a barrel for wall street speculators .... Esentialy we pay $30 a barrel for nothing but Greed on wall street...

Again I say its laughable to hear the "Shared sacrifice" talk comming from congressmen and senators who support the subsides and tax breaks for the wealthy while they also support slashing education, medicare, medicade, and benifits for blue collar workers in this country..

:rolleyes:

[Lucky2Coach]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
This "Fair tax" as you guys call it is a tax cut for millionares and an increase for the Janitor :rolleyes:

The Top Tax % is 36% if Im not mistaken.


We Need to get rid of the wellfare tax break for the most profitable corporations in History ( Oil ). Crack down on speculation of all kinds on Wall street. Exxon president stated that if the price of oil was based on pure supply and demand means the price for a barrel of oil would be about $65-$70... Right now it is at $98-$100 a barrel. That means we pay $30 a barrel for wall street speculators .... Esentialy we pay $30 a barrel for nothing but Greed on wall street...

Again I say its laughable to hear the "Shared sacrifice" talk comming from congressmen and senators who support the subsides and tax breaks for the wealthy while they also support slashing education, medicare, medicade, and benifits for blue collar workers in this country..

:rolleyes:

I like it because of the simpicity. It gets rid of Red Tape, tax breaks, all the loop holes and waste. The janitor pays tax on what he spends at Walmart, the millionaire pays tax on buying his Jaguar.

All those social programs will be funded to help people in lower poverty level get educated and become the middle class, the upper middle class, or even wealthy.

You keep arguing about the 50's. In the 50's, Social Programs were minimal compared to today. Prosperity for people will never be handed out!!!

[BleedOrange]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
This "Fair tax" as you guys call it is a tax cut for millionares and an increase for the Janitor :rolleyes:

The Top Tax % is 36% if Im not mistaken.


We Need to get rid of the wellfare tax break for the most profitable corporations in History ( Oil ). Crack down on speculation of all kinds on Wall street. Exxon president stated that if the price of oil was based on pure supply and demand means the price for a barrel of oil would be about $65-$70... Right now it is at $98-$100 a barrel. That means we pay $30 a barrel for wall street speculators .... Esentialy we pay $30 a barrel for nothing but Greed on wall street...

Again I say its laughable to hear the "Shared sacrifice" talk comming from congressmen and senators who support the subsides and tax breaks for the wealthy while they also support slashing education, medicare, medicade, and benifits for blue collar workers in this country..

:rolleyes:

What's "laughable" is that almost 50% of individuals pay no tax whatsoever and survive off the hard work of the other 50%. Fair tax makes everyone have a stake in the game. When you fail to have stake you create a society that lacks motivation and develops reliance on the entitlements. Believe it or not, lower taxes stimulate economic growth by leaving more money in the private sector for investment in things such as capital improvements, corporate expansion, etc. Ultimate end is more jobs, higher tax revenue, less people on welfare, lower gov't expeditures and ultimate reduction in the deficit. Finally, the premise that taking more from corporations and giving it to an inept government to utilize is good for the society and the economy is beyond reason. Government simply cannot effectively manage anything and if you give them more they will find ways to spend it and again ask for more. They continue to rob from Peter to pay Paul and we should give them more? Give me a break. They couldn't run a neighborhood lemonade stand.

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by Lucky2Coach
You keep arguing about the 50's. In the 50's, Social Programs were minimal compared to today. Prosperity for people will never be handed out!!! what social programs are you taking about that were minimal. The mass majority of Americans dont want a hand out. They want a fair wage for work they do. Right now we dont have it. The Gap between the rich and poor keeps growing. In the 1950 the CEO made 10 times what the factory worker made... Today its 50-100 times what the factory worker makes.. WHY??:thinking: Becasue he is working harder and the worker does not work as hard??? NO. of course not. They are just taking a larger piece of the pie and giving the guys who actualy do the reall work less. Thats not right. you may say it is but its not. The deck is stacked in favor of the wealthy and wall street folks right now. Needs to be re shuffled buy the people.

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by BleedOrange
What's "laughable" is that almost 50% of individuals pay no tax whatsoever and survive off the hard work of the other 50%. The 50% you say that pay no tax make just enough money to stay above the poverty level working two jobs sometimes... THEY are doing the REAL work in this society. they dont leave work at 1 for a golf date with the other "Hard working execs"...Its the Execs Leaching off of the guy in the plant. NOT the other way around:rolleyes: Further more the Inept government you speak off is resposible for the investment of technoligy that lead to some of the most profitable things in the economy today. Microwaves, Internet, cell phones, ect and on and on.. the interstate Highway system has created wealth that cant be measured.

[BleedOrange]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
The 50% you say that pay no tax make just enough money to stay above the poverty level working two jobs sometimes... THEY are doing the REAL work in this society. they dont leave work at 1 for a golf date with the other "Hard working execs"...Its the Execs Leaching off of the guy in the plant. NOT the other way around:rolleyes: Further more the Inept government you speak off is resposible for the investment of technoligy that lead to some of the most profitable things in the economy today. Microwaves, Internet, cell phones, ect and on and on.. the interstate Highway system has created wealth that cant be measured.

The private sector had nothing to do with internet, cell phones, microwaves, etc. :rolleyes: With regard to the "leaching" execs, I believe they create the jobs not our wonderful goverment. In fact without these "leaching" execs we would not have the government revenue to pay for the entitlement programs and all of the government jobs of which most are not essential. Keep increasing taxes on individuals and corporations and they will take their toys and go home. Why do you think a corporations take their business overseas? Could one of the reasons be our corporate tax structure? Could it be government's continued medding in their affairs? Give me a break, the government is now trying to tell Boeing it cannot move portions of its operations to a better business environment in South Carolina. WOW!!

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by BleedOrange
The private sector had nothing to do with internet, cell phones, microwaves, etc. :rolleyes: With regard to the "leaching" execs, I believe they create the jobs not our wonderful goverment. In fact without these "leaching" execs we would not have the government revenue to pay for the entitlement programs and all of the government jobs of which most are not essential. Keep increasing taxes on individuals and corporations and they will take their toys and go home. Why do you think a corporations take their business overseas? Could one of the reasons be our corporate tax structure? Could it be government's continued medding in their affairs? Give me a break, the government is now trying to tell Boeing it cannot move portions of its operations to a better business environment in South Carolina. WOW!! 1) The Private Sector has not benifited from the inventions like Microwaves, Internet , cell phones, and the interstate???:rolleyes: you know they have and have BIG time.
2) Leaching Execs Hire people to do a job to fill a need and provide a service . Work is done by those workers to fullfill that need and money is made. They dont take money out of thier pockets to give some poor slag a job out of the goodness of thier hearts.:rolleyes:
3) Take the Toys and go home?? you mean take the tax breaks we give them and go over seas to hire a kid in a sweat shop.. NEWS FLASH... Already happening... Real Patriotic too.... I say hit them in the mouth with taxes unless they produce goods and services right here in the good old USA..
4) AND NO, the problems we are faced with are not because the government medles... Heck we are in a mess right now because of too LITTLE oversite and enforcement on wall street... Greed and speculation is to blame for our problems right now. And the greedy are not the guys on the assembly line.. Its in the corporate offices ( Or on the Green of the golf course if its after 1 PM )

Bottome line you support Giving these guys huge cuts in taxes from everything from income to sales tax for Yachts, and at the same time think its ok to CUT benifits for the poor elderly, kids, police, firefighters, and Teachers so the buget can be balanced.. WOW..:clap: :clap:

[Black_Magic]

WASHINGTON — Republican presidential candidate Newt Gingrich said Friday that General Electric's aggressive legal and accounting strategy, which led to zero corporate tax payments last year, was a clever and rational response to the nation's high tax rates.


WOW.. Now that Patriotic!!or as an Oil Executive would say "Very American".. funny how the rest of US working americans cant afford to screw over the rest of the country by skirting our resposibilities to the nation.

If we could afford it I wonder If this guy would give us a hand? or do you think he only approves of big business not paying any taxes..

:thinking:

[BleedOrange]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
1) The Private Sector has not benifited from the inventions like Microwaves, Internet , cell phones, and the interstate???:rolleyes: you know they have and have BIG time.
2) Leaching Execs Hire people to do a job to fill a need and provide a service . Work is done by those workers to fullfill that need and money is made. They dont take money out of thier pockets to give some poor slag a job out of the goodness of thier hearts.:rolleyes:
3) Take the Toys and go home?? you mean take the tax breaks we give them and go over seas to hire a kid in a sweat shop.. NEWS FLASH... Already happening... Real Patriotic too.... I say hit them in the mouth with taxes unless they produce goods and services right here in the good old USA..
4) AND NO, the problems we are faced with are not because the government medles... Heck we are in a mess right now because of too LITTLE oversite and enforcement on wall street... Greed and speculation is to blame for our problems right now. And the greedy are not the guys on the assembly line.. Its in the corporate offices ( Or on the Green of the golf course if its after 1 PM )

Bottome line you support Giving these guys huge cuts in taxes from everything from income to sales tax for Yachts, and at the same time think its ok to CUT benifits for the poor elderly, kids, police, firefighters, and Teachers so the buget can be balanced.. WOW..:clap: :clap:

1) Private sector had involvement in development and most of the advances in internet technology, cell phone, microwaves, etc.
2)Who identified the need a created the job for the poor downtrodden worker class Mr. Marx??
3)Really??? Where in this great free society do our laws allow gov't to dictate where a company conducts business? Try reading the constitution (please throw away Das Kapital) and specifically focus on the enumerated powers you might find it enlightening.
4)I could probably right a treatise on this fictional perception you have on the causation of the problems we have and are experiencing. While it the private sector does share some blame look to our wonderful government and such things as the Community Reinvestment Act which were the ultmate root cause of the problem.

[WildTexan972]

liberal gubmint backer flunkies....so dim-witted...

if those corporations pay tax they pass that cost on to consumers....so it won't help Americans to raise prices more since they had higher costs....and then that tax money will be wasted in DC by all the hand-out morons wanting to buy votes with their "helping the poor" drivel.....is running up the cost of gas and good to normal folks really helping all those poor welfare scum?

I say no....

I will be on the side of helping out those welfare scum when they aren't using a better cell phone than me (constantly while in line at the store) and using welfare cards to buy all their groceries (including steak for the dog since LoneStar does not cover dog food) and their rent assistance to buy beer and cigs and dope and driving newer cars since they use fake check stubs to get car loans.....yes its true.....

[BEAST]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
In the 1950 we all know those were the years in our nations history when we had the greatest prosperity and growth. the interstate highways were built. Income for working class were high. a pay check went farther. Single income families did fine. and the top income bracket payed 90% in tax over 100,000 a year. Im not saying we should raise it to 90%. I say jack it to 50% over $700,000 or $1,000,000 a year.

I think its a hoot that some of you dont think thats "Fair" when YOUR party Gives "corporate welfare" to companies with the highest profits in the history of man kind ( Oil companies ). Tax breaks to the top income earners. Tax cuts for all the Yacht folks out there so they dont have to pay sales tax on those huge boats. And then at the same time say we need to have "Sacrifice" and want to Cut Education for kids, Medicaid for the elderly, social security for the elderly, Benifits for teachers, firefighters, and other blue collar workers..... Its messed up. No wonder the rich get richer.. :rolleyes:

You dont get it. For me its not about what party you vote for. Its about the damn gov't STEALING YOUR money. Before WW2(maybe WW1) there wasnt a damn income tax. It was supposed to be put on the books TEMPORARILY to fund the war. Well, like good politicians do, once they figured out they could STEAL YOUR money, they just kept doing it.




BEAST

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by BleedOrange
1) Private sector had involvement in development and most of the advances in internet technology, cell phone, microwaves, etc.
2)Who identified the need a created the job for the poor downtrodden worker class Mr. Marx??
3)Really??? Where in this great free society do our laws allow gov't to dictate where a company conducts business? Try reading the constitution (please throw away Das Kapital) and specifically focus on the enumerated powers you might find it enlightening.
4)I could probably right a treatise on this fictional perception you have on the causation of the problems we have and are experiencing. While it the private sector does share some blame look to our wonderful government and such things as the Community Reinvestment Act which were the ultmate root cause of the problem.

) It was the Military that invented the Internet. Microwaves ect... It was after investment in R&D for the military ( GOVERNMENT) that comercial use was seen and developed.
2) Identifying the demand or Need has nothing to do with what is equitable. Again. I say the CEO is not 50-100 times more valuable than the guy doing the actual work. You aparently do.
3) The govenrment does not and should not dictate where a company does business. IT SHOULD however NOT give tax breaks for businesses for creating Jobs that are in BANGLADESH! and SHOULD NOT give tax breaks for companies that are having the highest profits of any company in the history of the planet while discusing how to slash medicare benifits for the poor elderly! :mad:
4) You can talk your self into what every you want . either way its commonly known that the Wall street mess and unregulated Greed and Speculation has caused this mess under the watch of the former administration (FACT).

SIde with the fat cats if you want . its your perogative and right. I will side with the average Joe who just wants a fair wage for a hard days work as well as wanting an education for his kids and at the same time having the gaul to want to be able pay for health insurance for his wife and kids without taking out a loan.

[PPHSfan]

When I was young my daddy told me. "son, we live in the USA, you're either a greedy capitalist, or you work for one. Work hard as the latter until you can become the former."

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by WildTexan972
and then that tax money will be wasted in DC by all the hand-out morons wanting to buy votes with their "helping the poor" drivel.....is running up the cost of gas .

EXXON CEO him self said yesterday that if the price of Oil was based on Pure Supply and Demand pricipals ( you know... CAPITALISM) that the price of a barrel of oil would be $65-$70!!! Not the $98-$105 we have been seeing... That means that WALL STREET SPECULATORS make it so $30 of every barrle goes to them!!! Get rid of all speculators on wall street and the speculation of oil. YOU think its ok for you to pay 30% of all barrels of oil to wall street speculators??:doh:

[icu812]

The Fair Tax would also tax 12 million+ illegals.

[PPHSfan]

Originally posted by icu812
The Fair Tax would also tax 12 million+ illegals.

It would also tax drug dealers and sheetrockers.

[icu812]

Originally posted by PPHSfan
It would also tax drug dealers and sheetrockers.

and folks who lie about their income............sheetrockers :doh:

[Txbroadcaster]

I cannot honestly understand why anyone would be agianst the fair tax

[Lucky2Coach]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
EXXON CEO him self said yesterday that if the price of Oil was based on Pure Supply and Demand pricipals ( you know... CAPITALISM) that the price of a barrel of oil would be $65-$70!!! Not the $98-$105 we have been seeing... That means that WALL STREET SPECULATORS make it so $30 of every barrle goes to them!!! Get rid of all speculators on wall street and the speculation of oil. YOU think its ok for you to pay 30% of all barrels of oil to wall street speculators??:doh:

What does that have to do with Fair Tax?

And yes, The CEO's make way too much. So do Actors, Professional Athletes, and Singers. That is a very small percentage of the taxable workforce, but great for your argument because they are high profile.

Please visit Fairtax.org

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by WildTexan972
liberal gubmint backer flunkies....so dim-witted...

if those corporations pay tax they pass that cost on to consumers....so it won't help Americans to raise prices more since they had higher costs....and then that tax money will be wasted in DC by all the hand-out morons wanting to buy votes with their "helping the poor" drivel.....is running up the cost of gas and good to normal folks really helping all those poor welfare scum?

I say no....

I will be on the side of helping out those welfare scum when they aren't using a better cell phone than me (constantly while in line at the store) and using welfare cards to buy all their groceries (including steak for the dog since LoneStar does not cover dog food) and their rent assistance to buy beer and cigs and dope and driving newer cars since they use fake check stubs to get car loans.....yes its true.....

Your doing the same think Black is..your using the extreme to justfy your position..Yes there are those that manipulate the system but not everyone on welfare does that, just like not ever CEO plays golf at 1pm every day

[Black_Magic]

A "Fair Tax" as you like to put it is an Increase in taxes on the lower class and lower middle class while its a tax CUT for the wealthy.

I say our concept of progessive tax code IS fair. Those who are more foutunate partly because of our nation and economic and political system should pay more. In that notion a progesive tax code is fair. Fair does not nessisarily mean EQUAL or the SAME.

[BleedOrange]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
) It was the Military that invented the Internet. Microwaves ect... It was after investment in R&D for the military ( GOVERNMENT) that comercial use was seen and developed.
2) Identifying the demand or Need has nothing to do with what is equitable. Again. I say the CEO is not 50-100 times more valuable than the guy doing the actual work. You aparently do.
3) The govenrment does not and should not dictate where a company does business. IT SHOULD however NOT give tax breaks for businesses for creating Jobs that are in BANGLADESH! and SHOULD NOT give tax breaks for companies that are having the highest profits of any company in the history of the planet while discusing how to slash medicare benifits for the poor elderly! :mad:
4) You can talk your self into what every you want . either way its commonly known that the Wall street mess and unregulated Greed and Speculation has caused this mess under the watch of the former administration (FACT).

SIde with the fat cats if you want . its your perogative and right. I will side with the average Joe who just wants a fair wage for a hard days work as well as wanting an education for his kids and at the same time having the gaul to want to be able pay for health insurance for his wife and kids without taking out a loan.

1) You obviously don't understand the interaction between the private sector an Gov't regarding technological advances.
2)You are paid what the market will allow. I do not begrudge these people for making huge salaries. I say well done and it just confirms what a great country we live in that allows people to succeed. Anybody can succeed in this country with hard work if the Gov't stays out of the way.
3)Any tax break that stimulates growth and investment is good by me. History proves that lower taxes stimulate growth and job creation.
4)Let agree to disagree. Do some research and you will see where a vast majority of the problem arose. You say greed...I say working toward making a profit for the benefit of stockholders and the overall well being of the worker is as it should be. Profits up...salaries of workers rise. Profits up...companies expand and create jobs. Profits down....layoffs. Profits down.....no expansion. Gov't increased taxes....less profits....less investments....less job growth....lower salaries....you get the picture????

[Txbroadcaster]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
A "Fair Tax" as you like to put it is an Increase in taxes on the lower class and lower middle class while its a tax CUT for the wealthy.

I say our concept of progessive tax code IS fair. Those who are more foutunate partly because of our nation and economic and political system should pay more. In that notion a progesive tax code is fair. Fair does not nessisarily mean EQUAL or the SAME.


how would it be a cut for the rich? they would be taxed on whatever they buy..I can bet u right now ONE PURCHASE would create more tax from a rich person than a whole year of purchases by a poor person.

Seems to me your just simply wanting people who make more to pay more just because

[Black_Magic]

Originally posted by BleedOrange
1) You obviously don't understand the interaction between the private sector an Gov't regarding technological advances.
2)You are paid what the market will allow. I do not begrudge these people for making huge salaries. I say well done and it just confirms what a great country we live in that allows people to succeed. Anybody can succeed in this country with hard work if the Gov't stays out of the way.
3)Any tax break that stimulates growth and investment is good by me. History proves that lower taxes stimulate growth and job creation.
4)Let agree to disagree. Do some research and you will see where a vast majority of the problem arose. You say greed...I say working toward making a profit for the benefit of stockholders and the overall well being of the worker is as it should be. Profits up...salaries of workers rise. Profits up...companies expand and create jobs. Profits down....layoffs. Profits down.....no expansion. Gov't increased taxes....less profits....less investments....less job growth....lower salaries....you get the picture????

1)Government Funded R&D created the Items listed (FACT).
2)Same arguments were made by Lazes fare economist in regards to the proplems faced by workers of the Industrial Revolutionary period in the early to late 1800's.
3) If tax breaks Stimulated growth and investment like you say we would be in a booming economy because the fat cats have had the biggest in history in the last 10 years:rolleyes:
4) if you were correct then all taxes of all kinds should be abolished and the world would be more fair and prosperous.. we all know better.

[BleedOrange]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by Black_Magic
1)Government Funded R&D created the Items listed (FACT).
2)Same arguments were made by Lazes fare economist in regards to the proplems faced by workers of the Industrial Revolutionary period in the early to late 1800's.
3) If tax breaks Stimulated growth and investment like you say we would be in a booming economy because the fat cats have had the biggest in history in the last 10 years:rolleyes:
4) if you were correct then all taxes of all kinds should be abolished and the world would be more fair and prosperous.. we all know better. [/QUOTE

Rather than argue against your theoretical nonsense on taxes and a system of inequality why don't you share you vision on "fair". How much should the tax rate be on individuals and what income levels do they kick in? I would think you could at least acknowledge if corporations and individuals have less disposable income it will inhibit growth and job creation. I guess that thats where the gov't comes in. Tax more and give to those who don't contribute in the way of entitlements sure makes a lot of sense. I am sick and tired of paying more than my fair share of taxes while those on welfare contribute little or nothing. I am more than willing to help those in need but there needs to be a determination of those in need and those too lazy to get off their butt other than to go to the mail box to pickup a gov't check.

[garciap77]

Originally posted by BEAST
You dont get it. For me its not about what party you vote for. Its about the damn gov't STEALING YOUR money. Before WW2(maybe WW1) there wasnt a damn income tax. It was supposed to be put on the books TEMPORARILY to fund the war. Well, like good politicians do, once they figured out they could STEAL YOUR money, they just kept doing it.




BEAST


Who do these good politicians work for? And, how can we stop them from stealing our money?

[garciap77]

Originally posted by BleedOrange
[QUOTE]Originally posted by Black_Magic
1)Government Funded R&D created the Items listed (FACT).
2)Same arguments were made by Lazes fare economist in regards to the proplems faced by workers of the Industrial Revolutionary period in the early to late 1800's.
3) If tax breaks Stimulated growth and investment like you say we would be in a booming economy because the fat cats have had the biggest in history in the last 10 years:rolleyes:
4) if you were correct then all taxes of all kinds should be abolished and the world would be more fair and prosperous.. we all know better. [/QUOTE

Rather than argue against your theoretical nonsense on taxes and a system of inequality why don't you share you vision on "fair". How much should the tax rate be on individuals and what income levels do they kick in? I would think you could at least acknowledge if corporations and individuals have less disposable income it will inhibit growth and job creation. I guess that thats where the gov't comes in. Tax more and give to those who don't contribute in the way of entitlements sure makes a lot of sense. I am sick and tired of paying more than my fair share of taxes while those on welfare contribute little or nothing. I am more than willing to help those in need but there needs to be a determination of those in need and those too lazy to get off their butt other than to go to the mail box to pickup a gov't check.

I agree with you on everyone paying their fair share, but I also feel that tax payers should not have to subsidize the private sector in any way, shape or form. If I want to run a business, then it's on my own to get the money and run the business, and not expect the Government (tax payer) to help me out.

[icu812]

The Fair Tax actually lowers the effective tax rate of the low and middle class. Those under the poverty line pay zero taxes. Those spending at twice the poverty level still pay 3.5% less than the current 15%. A person spending 10 mil would pay a tax of $2.3 mil or 23% under the Fair Tax. The difference in tax rates is due to the Fair Tax's annual consumption allowance. A couple with 3 kids would have an annual consumption allowance of $32,880. Anybody who thinks this increases taxes on the poor and middle class while giving people who buy million dollar homes a tax break hasn't read any of the bill.

[Blastoderm55]

I think this is a more equitable means of taxation, but I think proponents of tax reform will push harder for the flat income tax of 17% as proposed by guys like Forbes.

[Reds fan]

Originally posted by icu812
The Fair Tax actually lowers the effective tax rate of the low and middle class. Those under the poverty line pay zero taxes. Those spending at twice the poverty level still pay 3.5% less than the current 15%. A person spending 10 mil would pay a tax of $2.3 mil or 23% under the Fair Tax. The difference in tax rates is due to the Fair Tax's annual consumption allowance. A couple with 3 kids would have an annual consumption allowance of $32,880. Anybody who thinks this increases taxes on the poor and middle class while giving people who buy million dollar homes a tax break hasn't read any of the bill. Agreed, those who think that way are only interested in redistributing the wealth.

[JasperDog94]

Originally posted by Black_Magic
A "Fair Tax" as you like to put it is an Increase in taxes on the lower class and lower middle class while its a tax CUT for the wealthy.

I say our concept of progessive tax code IS fair. Those who are more foutunate partly because of our nation and economic and political system should pay more. In that notion a progesive tax code is fair. Fair does not nessisarily mean EQUAL or the SAME. Actually a fair tax would stop all the loopholes and keep companies like GE from not paying taxes in any given year. This would also be true for all those rich millionaires who shelter their money over seas. Seems pretty simple to me. Some people's taxes will actually go up who are in the top tax bracket right now just by eliminating all the loopholes.

[Farmersfan]

A lot of people are forgetting one of the biggest benefits of the Fair tax. It taxes spending! That means it also encourages saving. Put money in savings and you don't have to pay taxes on that money. This country is headed for a disaster as more and more baby boomers are heading towards retirement.

[Farmersfan]

Fair Tax Bill vs Obama Tax Bill:



http://i873.photobucket.com/albums/ab300/timbo4225/fairtax.jpg

[Phantom Stang]

Originally posted by Farmersfan
Fair Tax Bill vs Obama Tax Bill:



http://i873.photobucket.com/albums/ab300/timbo4225/fairtax.jpg
The Underground Economy is called "underground" for a reason. So how will they be able to tax it under a Fair Tax system?:thinking:

[Phantom Stang]

Originally posted by Phantom Stang
The Underground Economy is called "underground" for a reason. So how will they be able to tax it under a Fair Tax system?:thinking:
Nevermind
The answer came to me right after I hit the Post Reply button.:doh: