Why Kerry?

[lookout123]

what is more fair than taking the same % of everyone's pay? certainly not a sliding scale.



i just reread the last few posts and cringed - i hope radar doesn't pop into this.

[jaguar]

I always thought VAT/GST flat taxes were much fairer, tax people on what they buy, not what they earn, much harder to dodge as well.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by lookout123

people have more money than you think. i was shocked when i started in the market to find out who had money, and how much

So poor people actually have lots of money?

so fine how about we start with anybody over $25,000 earned income in a single year is subject to a 15% flat tax? no loopholes.

that is $3750 our of the $25K guy's pocket and $75000 out of the $500K guys pocket. fair enough for you?

Well, first I'd remove that sudden $3750 step at $25K, and say that the first $25000 is tax free. Otherwise, if you were getting $24900 and got a $100 raise, you'd actually lose $3650, which is silly. Second, I'd put a few more gradations in there, to reflect the qualitative differences between having enough, being comfortable, being wealthy, and being superwealthy.

I'll go with you on the no loopholes, though, for sure.

[lookout123]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

Well, first I'd remove that sudden $3750 step at $25K, and say that the first $25000 is tax free. Otherwise, if you were getting $24900 and got a $100 raise, you'd actually lose $3650, which is silly.

that is the problem, if you say that someone at the bottom doesn't pay taxes because they are at the bottom, then the guy who made $1 too much feels like he is getting screwed. it is much more fair to say that everyone pays 7%, no loopholes, no breaks.


on the surface i do like the sales tax method, but in order for it to work you have to tax at a high enough rate that the lower income folks would choke on it, while the higher income folks just wouldn't buy anything.

[jaguar]

Australia uses a mixed system of both, it seems fairly effective.

[Happy Monkey]

No, the person who makes $1.00 too much pays $0.15 in taxes. If he feels screwed by that, the problem is with him, not the tax system.

[lookout123]

ok, i see what you are saying now. my bad. the first 25K tax free, x% on everything above that - across the board. i think that is fair.

it'll never happen though. the cpa's, attorneys, and everyone else involved would see their future drying up and would campaign hard. first thing they'd do is get ahold of the unions and tell them -"this screws blue collar america" then they'd rally the pols and tell them, "this screws the middle class" *hands a check with 000000's on it* joe public says "hey, i'm getting screwed by those rich guys that want to get out of paying their fair share" and everyone votes against it. for in america the needs of the few outweigh the needs of the many.

[Happy Monkey]

Actually, with the exception of "no loopholes", I described the current tax system (a few more gradations). It was sort of a joke.

edit - But you're right, the "no loopholes" would anger the CPA lobbies.
edit again - and so would the charity lobbies.

[Beestie]

Originally Posted by jaguar

I always thought VAT/GST flat taxes were much fairer, tax people on what they buy, not what they earn, much harder to dodge as well.

In theory, they are very fair. Problem is, they supress consumption and consumption is what makes the engine hum. Another problem is that tax revenue becomes very difficult to predict since the tax can be easily avoided by not consuming.

The US uses both income and consumption tax (sales tax) but the sales tax goes to the state while the income tax goes mostly to the fed. The state of residence also collects between 0% (FL has no state income tax) and 10% (District of Columbia is at or close to 10%) of income for its use.

The US tax system is the biggest Fing mess - the tax code is unreadable and no one has an incentive to fix it.