the answer is simple: perhaps tax increases would not be required if those who should..would pay their proportionate share of taxes..
Just when you think it can't get worse, you get this in the mail..
- Thread starter nitro harley
- Start date
harley's are NOT girly..but a man in a jag?
ginwilly
Well-Known Member
What if conservatives were cool with local taxes (which is what pays for schools, police and fire and roads (except Interstate system) but not cool with ball washing lessons and drunk chinese hooker studies? Or with subsidies to the rich fuckers who can afford Teslas? Or with GE having their tax burden lifted because we like them? I could go on, you mention 5 things out of more than 50,000 things we are taxed for and justify those 50,000 other things by those 5. It's not an honest argument.
echelon1k1
New Member
ask your leftist heroes to put up or shut up... Those billionaires you admire and aspire to be DO NOT, I repeat DO NOT pay their fair share... Half of congress are millionaires and lets be honest, their positions allow them access to information, not available to you and I, and this can really pay financial dividends...
nitro harley
Well-Known Member
You make it sound like every small business should pay more tax's..Who are these people that don't pay?.I pay a lot of tax's more than most people make in a year..You need to be more specific. I don't know any of these kind of people that have a small business that makes money and doesn't pay there fair share..You should figure out who they are and turn them in to the IRS, Maybe they have a reward program?..The biggest crooks are some of BarryOs closest friends, Like Jamie Diamond for starters. So maybe start with Jamie and work down from there....And leave the rest of us alone with the higher tax crap..
my plan includes both sides of the aisle..billionaires i admire and aspire to..you mean like the dried up, decrepit old wrinkly balls low to the ground koch brothers kind?
all pubster derived..they don't pay anywhere near their proportionate share:
1. separation of church and state - tax churches
2. uncap social security contributions
3. regulation on offshore
4. re-vamp tax code (every CPA in america wants this..it's broken)
there would be plenty of revenue
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
Wow you're a greedy little whore. The whole point of Social Security is security not to make money. But I'm glad you realize it's a MLM scam. I still suggest you take Macro Economics 101. Then you'll understand the concept of at some point living expenses effectively reaches zero which is why SS is capped and no longer adding to "security." With such information, you'll become my communist foe, indeed.
londonfog
Well-Known Member
Dude we have 3000 dollar coffee pots on some of our military aircrafts...WTF.
Antidisestablishmentarian
Well-Known Member
Like an at home coffee pot or the coffee maker for several hundred people?
The first is ridiculous. The second isn't too bad at all.
enlighten me rabbit..i don't understand the bolded line.
Rob Roy
Well-Known Member
Not "who", "what". The system itself will eventually collapse of its own weight. More and more "entitled" people, which would include all who receive a check from government: workers, sub contractors, retirees, welfare etc. will mean fewer and fewer non entitled people to actually pay the way. Every floating ship will eventually sink if it carries too many passengers. This one is not different.
Define all forms of payment and worth as income, and flat tax everyone.
echelon1k1
New Member
I did say leftist sky... Do the Kock brothers qualify?
The billionaires you admire and aspire to are those members and contributors to orgs. like "Democracy Alliance" which in turn funds Priorities USA and CAP, not to mention ACORN... Yep don't think the dirty little democrat secret goes unnoticed...
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
QUICK
Name one flat tax scamnario that taxes capital gains?
When you come up with the answer of none.
Then you will understand why assholes like Mitt Romney and Steve Forbes push for flat tax scamnarios.
because then they will pay even less than they do now.
And guess who will take up the slack from the loss in revenue
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
MPC (marginal propensity consume) + MPS (marginal propensity save) = 1. With the abject poor, MPC is nearly 1 and MPS is nearly 0. With the greedy evil filthy rich, MPC is nearly 0 and MPS is nearly 1. If MPC is nearly 0, any income "taxed" for "security" in your old age that already well exceeds basic needs with the Social Security taxed annuity fund, is pointless. You confuse SS with contributing to injecting into community MPC, when it's supposed to supplement your personal MPS in the event your MPC approaches 1, you still have a MPS of at least 0.124 for retirement. This is simple high school honors level Economics.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
No it won't. The abject poor have nearly a 1 MPC, meaning nearly 100% of their income would be taxed. The filthy rich have nearly 0 MPC, meaning nearly 0% of their income would be taxed. Your model would devistate the poor.
Uh, wouldn't capital gains be defined as income by payment or worth? Maybe current models don't tax capital gains, but I never mentioned them so I don't know why you brought them up.
Canna Sylvan
Well-Known Member
It's a catch 22. You can tie up assets in order to tie up even more. But you risk eating up more than just paying the tax. I like the current system. With great risk comes great rewards. Midas people were their worst enemy at death.
ChesusRice
Well-Known Member
Right now they are taxed at 15%
Under all flat tax proposals that goes to 0%
Think Mitt Romney draws a paycheck?