O/T: BLOG POST OF THE DAY

Page 10 of 10  
On 08/21/2012 09:07 AM, Han wrote:

How about no deductions for anyone for any reason period?
How about a flat tax at time of *consumption* with a "prebate" to make sure the first $XX,XXX dollars are effectively untaxed so as to not put an undue burden on the poor?
This is called the "Fair Tax" and it would work swimmingly. But the left, especially, hates this. Why? There's getting the money and there's spending the money. Getting it should be simple. The problem is that not everyone agrees on how to spend it. So the left, especially, has used all manner of tax monkeybusiness to change how we get it, who pays, and who does. The right, seeing what was going on, joined the party. Fair Tax would make the getting part of it simple. Then the only argument would be the spending part which is FAR more evident and transparent to the taxpaying public.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Sounds indeed simple and very worthwhile. I could be persuaded. It would certainly eliminate a bunch of IRS employees, accountants and lawyers who don't really contribute to GDP. There is only 1 disadvantage I can see right off. It leaves us without a tax mechanism to promote things like home ownership, charity, etc. But perhaps we can do without, just like other countries (I think).
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/21/2012 1:20 PM, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

Uh, your "no deductions" plan starts off with a deduction. Your "prebate" is a deduction.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

That is the question whether total amount or percentage is more important. IOW, is progressive taxation good or not? A question of ideology, perhaps?
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

What's a flat tax in your opinion? Everyone should pay 9% here and 9% there? Without regard of minimum living costs?
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Han wrote:

Yes. Personally, I favor a per-capita tax. That is one AMOUNT, not a single percentage. Like a movie ticket or a can of jalapeno-flavored chicken nuggets. One money for all. [Currently, that would be about $15,000 per person per year]
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Perhaps you want to explain a little, because that is so far out. A family of 4 making 100K would then have 55K left. Which would mean that in order to keep near their current standard of living, they'd have to make at least 100K/yr more. Lower incomes would have to have a rise in income of (nearly) the same amounts. Unless, perhaps you meant this seriously, unless everyone should not only be paying the same in taxes, they should earn the same amounts. By Heybub decree, which of course supersedes government decree.
Just like a VAT, this type of proposal is a recipe for instant inflation. Moreover, I don't think Boehner and Ryan want to be brought down to a mere 200K/yr. Dream on ...
I apologize in advance for poking fun at your proposal, but to me it is indeed utopian drivel.
--
Best regards
Han
email address is invalid
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@NOSPAMgmail.com says...

So how do you deal with people whose income is $14,000 per year?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
J. Clarke wrote:

I haven't worked out all the details, but as I've said before such an individual could contribute a kidney. I call that my "Federal Withdrawal Plan."
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
snipped-for-privacy@NOSPAMgmail.com says...

You need to either use smiley faces or get some help.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 08/23/2012 08:22 AM, HeyBub wrote:

I see, so you're a fan of the Dead Kennedy's tune, "Kill The Poor". How very uncivil of you.
--
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Tim Daneliuk snipped-for-privacy@tundraware.com
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/23/2012 6:24 PM, Tim Daneliuk wrote:

I think it is a shame that there are those (49%) in this country who pay no income tax. I think every one should pay a minimum tax (Maybe $500/yr??) and there would be no reverse income taxes. ie those not paying anything and getting back several thousand dollars.
I am one of the 49% but still think it is not right.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On Thu, 23 Aug 2012 22:46:20 -0400, Keith Nuttle

Say you're age 70 & making a whopping $500 a month from the gummint. What month do you choose -not- to eat, pay your rent, or pay any of your utilities so you can pay the IRS?

Ditto, some recent years... What I dislike are those who abuse any of the gov't programs just because they can, double-dippers, etc.
-- I merely took the energy it takes to pout and wrote some blues. --Duke Ellington
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
Larry Jaques wrote:

Me too. Especially when in collusion with the powers that be...
A few months ago our city manager resigned. She did so because of the election of a new commissioner who had vowed to kick her ass out.
Her contract called for various payments to her if she were fired, nothing if she quit (other than accrued sick leave and vacation time). She wound up with the esteemed commissioners giving her more than $300,000. I know not how much was sick leave and vacation but - obviously - she recived far in excess of those.
What really galls me is that she in now drawing unemployment. And all these years I've been laboring under the impression that unemployment was not available to those who quit.
--

dadiOH
____________________________
  Click to see the full signature.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

It depends on the circumstances. Perhaps she was asked to resign?
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
On 8/24/2012 7:17 AM, dadiOH wrote:

Depends on the reason for quitting. If you quit for good cause you may be eligible.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Right. My wife will be quitting the end of next month. There is a good chance she'll be eligible for UI. She was eligible five years ago, and fifteen before that, but she didn't ask for it. She hasn't decided, this time.
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload
wrote:

Ditto the city manager of GP. She got $125k for sitting out the last year, plus medical, etc. Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!

Interesting. I always thought that, too. I guess nothing negative applies to anyone who has been in gov't, no matter how low. Farkin' sucks, wot? Arrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!
-- "Bother", said Pooh, as he chambered another round...
Add pictures here
<% if( /^image/.test(type) ){ %>
<% } %>
<%-name%>
Add image file
Upload

Site Timeline

Related Threads

    HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.