The Obamanation

[TheMercenary]

It needs to be changed.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

It needs to be changed.

Why?

Has the progressive income tax stifled or adversely impacted economic growth over the last 80+ years? (no evidence to suggest that)

Has it discouraged people from working harder to make more money and move up to a higher tax bracket (no evidence to suggest that either..in fact, the number of millionaires and billionaires continues to grow)

Are the top 1-2% of income earners objecting in great numbers that they pay too much? (not that I have read or heard).

What it really comes down to is the question of if a progressive income tax is inherently unfair?

Thats a matter of opinion on which we obviously disagree, but which every president and Congress (and overwhelming majority of the public) for the last 80+ years are in agreement, with the only differences being the question of rates...how much more should people pay as their income rises.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

Why?

Because:

The top-earning 25 percent of taxpayers (AGI over $64,702) earned 68.2 percent of the nation's income, but they paid more than four out of every five dollars collected by the federal income tax (86.3 percent).

So you dont really have any evidence that it adversely impacts economic growth or is a disincentive for people to aspire to greater income and wealth.

You just think its inherently unfair?

OK.

[TheMercenary]

Any progressive tax is unfair. Income or otherwise. It adversely affects economic growth because if everyone pays the same, with a few exceptions, and you eliminate many of the loop holes, we could significantly receive more collected taxes. And that would be an opportunity for economic growth.

[lookout123]

I support a flat tax as I've described it in the past but I know that won't happen because it cuts into too many empires. My only major complaint with current tax rates comes mainly when I hear people earning under $40K/year who are already paying relatively little bitch about how someone else should pay more so they can pay less.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

....It adversely affects economic growth because if everyone pays the same, with a few exceptions, and you eliminate many of the loop holes, we could significantly receive more collected taxes. And that would be an opportunity for economic growth.

cite please....from an objective source.

Originally Posted by lookout123

My only major complaint with current tax rates comes mainly when I hear people earning under $40K/year who are already paying relatively little bitch about how someone else should pay more so they can pay less.

It was that wild and crazy socialist, wealth redistributor Ronald Reagan who expanded the earned income tax credit!

I agree those earning under $40K got a pretty good deal.

[TheMercenary]

There is no such thing as an objective source these days when it comes to a controversial issue, esp one as hot as taxation. You obviously support a progressive tax. I support a consumption tax. For every opinion that supports progressive taxation there are opinions that support a consumption tax.

I would close this discussion with the fact that I share the views of The Tax Foundation:

As an institution, the Tax Foundation believes that the current income tax system is fundamentally broken and should be replaced with a code adhering to the principles we have advocated for 70 years: neutrality, simplicity, stability, transparency, and growth promotion.

We do not align ourselves with any particular tax reform camp. Indeed, we have Flat Tax advocates and sales tax advocates on our Board of Directors, and our research was cited in both Steve Forbes' book on the Flat Tax and Neil Boortz's book on the FairTax.

From an economic perspective, there are many similarities between the FairTax and a Flat Tax. For example:

Both the FairTax and the Flat Tax are "consumption taxes." In other words, people are taxed for spending money, not earning it. The Flat Tax would require citizens to file tax returns as they do now, paying tax on all spent money (income minus savings). The FairTax would rely on merchants to collect tax at the point of sale, as they now collect state and local sales taxes.

Both would eliminate the estate and capital gains taxes.

Both plans are single tax rate systems that eliminate double taxation.

Both plans would dramatically reduce compliance costs and the tax system's dead-weight loss to the economy.

Any tax reform plan will have transition issues and these will have to be thought through carefully. That said, the long-term benefits of fundamental tax reform should far outweigh the short-term transition costs.

http://www.taxfoundation.org/publica...how/22562.html

According to this economics professor at Princeton, simply a 5% increase in the form of a consumption tax would raise $500billion a year.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...odays-economy/

More than enough to deal with many of our problems in a few short years.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

According to this economics professor at Princeton, simply a 5% increase in the form of a consumption tax would raise $500billion a year.

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/20...odays-economy/

More than enough to deal with many of our problems in a few short years.

$500 billion would barely cover the annual interest on the US national debt.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

$500 billion would barely cover the annual interest on the US national debt.

Tell it to Obama and the Dems in Congress.

Which is why it should be 23% IMHO and not 5%.

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Tell it to Obama and the Dems in Congress.

Which is why it should be 23% IMHO and not 5%.

LOL....it took awhile for you to blame Obama and the Dems in Congress.

The fact remains that every president and Congress, Dems and Repubs alike, for the last 80+ years has supported a system of progressive taxation rather than a flat consumption tax.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Redux

LOL....it took awhile for you to blame Obama and the Dems in Congress.

The fact remains that every president and Congress, Dems and Repubs alike, for the last 80+ years has supported a system of progressive taxation rather than a flat consumption tax.

Not when you compare the national debt and the way money is being spent by Congress in the last three months.

[Happy Monkey]

Originally Posted by TheMercenary

Any progressive tax is unfair. Income or otherwise. It adversely affects economic growth because if everyone pays the same, with a few exceptions, and you eliminate many of the loop holes, we could significantly receive more collected taxes. And that would be an opportunity for economic growth.

Originally Posted by Redux

cite please....from an objective source.

You would also recieve more collected taxes if you have a progressive tax and you eliminate many of the loop holes.

Just like you can lose weight if you eat my new herbal supplement and exercise more.

[TheMercenary]

Originally Posted by Happy Monkey

You would also recieve more collected taxes if you have a progressive tax and you eliminate many of the loop holes.

Just like you can lose weight if you eat my new herbal supplement and exercise more.

Maybe, but I wouldn't participate in either of your schemes to make you more money.