What tax system do you like best?

[DCSaints_fan]

Property tax.

[Tulane Skins Fan]

One tax. Your own personal income tax, that's it.

Whatever you get paid, a percentage comes out.

Does that include Capital Gains?

[Titaw]

Well who can show that it isn't? Beyond some dubious calculations made by egotistical radio hosts and nobody-politicians, nobody has really put anything forward that stands up to any kind of real scrutiny.

What countries out there have implemented a national sales tax of over 10% and been successful with it?

How anyone can see the thriving illegal drug market in this country, and how easily it exists- then on the same hand NOT think that a black market wouldn't flourish under a 30% sales tax- I don't get.

Also, do we want to turn every business in the country into tax collectors?

Also, the fair tax model places equal value on elastic and inelastic demand, and rules out many market forces such as prestige purchasing that are very real considerations in order to make the model work.

Thanks Zoony. You have shed a new light on the subject. It COULD work, but there needs to be more research on the subject and alot of the holes that you have alluded to need to be ironed out before it could ever be taken seriously.

[Koolblue13]

Does that include Capital Gains?

Only income. What you earn working.

[JMUGator19]

Lets see, we cant tax consumption because that discourages consumption and encourages going abroad (or black market) to get your "junk".

We cant tax flat because the rich wouldnt feel the bite as much as the poor.

PS a tax is a redistribution of wealth, so im not sure what option 3 really means other than progressive tax.

I vote no consumption tax, sales tax, etcr.

I'd vote for a flat tax if it was 17% or less... otherwise no...

I'm ok with progressive income tax. Income should be all sources derived unless it is a social benefit and you have received the cash in which to pay the tax. (gains are only paid if you got the cash from selling it, not just if you have a gain)

There should be 0 corporate or business tax. However all income should be reported anyway. corp taxes are about a quarter of the amount individual taxes are collected, and frankly companies do not pay those taxes, consumers do. so to save on accountants and product costs. lets just cut out the bs.

Death tax and gift tax should be way bigger. how can people hate on redistribution of wealth but then protest handouts to their friends and family. give a man a means to living, not cash. that man probably wouldnt know what to do with the wealth but joe schmoe might. put that money back into the economy.

all the tiny dumb taxes and state taxes should realize that people are paying federal tax and take that into account. if they dont those states will get poorer as people move out. so no big. as of now, if you fall into the 25 to 30% brackets for fed tax you probably end up paying between 40 to 50% of your income to some form of government. thats a joke.

i reserve the right to say just kidding for any dumb remarks ive made. after all, who just reinvents the whole taxation system in minutes right?

[Joe Sick]

All taxes are wealth redistribution, right? Poor poll choices and shows an obvious bias.

Thank goodness no one is seriously advocating either "fair" or "flat" taxes...

[SnyderShrugged]

All taxes are wealth redistribution, right? Poor poll choices and shows an obvious bias.

Thank goodness no one is seriously advocating either "fair" or "flat" taxes...

all taxes arent considered wealth redistribution. A tax that equally benefits all who pay it is certainly not. A tax that benefits some at the exclusive expense of another, is.:2cents:

[DirtyBird]

Only income. What you earn working.

Sign me up. My only income is capital gains.

[DarrellsMyHero28]

Wealth redistribution

Wooooooooo socialism!

[Koolblue13]

All taxes are wealth redistribution, right? Poor poll choices and shows an obvious bias.

Thank goodness no one is seriously advocating either "fair" or "flat" taxes...

Not all taxes are wealth redistribution. Do you know what that term means, or do you only argue that it's BS because it was said in a negative way regarding Obama?

I am advocating the Flat Percentage tax.

[Hubbs]

All taxes are wealth redistribution, right? Poor poll choices and shows an obvious bias.

Thank goodness no one is seriously advocating either "fair" or "flat" taxes...

They're not? I know a number of political groups that do. Hell, Mike Huckabee was a big advocate of the flat tax. And, honestly, it's not without merit. I don't say that from a "wealth redistribution" standpoint so much as a purely bureaucratic standpoint. The federal tax code is 55,000 pages long. Only the wealthy have the ability to fully take advantage of it, because the amount they spend on tax lawyers isn't as much as the amount they save by trimming even 1% off of what they pay. The same isn't true for some dude making $55,000 a year.

You can say "well, simplify" if until you turn red in the face. People have been saying that for decades. The problem is, what do you simplify? Everything in the tax code is there for a reason. We want to encourage some things and discourage others. We want to make the code "fair" for everyone, so we come up with deductions for everything. But those technicalities will always be taken advantage of, so we come up with new technicalities to seal the old loopholes, only those new technicalities will always create new loopholes. It's an endless cycle, and it's not as easy as saying, "Damnit, let's simplify the tax code." All sorts of groups will argue that you're screwing them over, and, in some way, they'll be right.

So if the choice is between a system like that and a simply flat tax system, I'm not at all convinced that the flat tax system isn't actually better. Of course, I'm not convinced that it isn't actually worse, either. I don't know enough about tax law to know for sure. What I do know is that you can't act as if there isn't a compelling argument for a flat tax.

[DCSaints_fan]

@Hubbs: Perhaps but would you really take $2300 from someone who is making $10,000 a year. If you go a flat tax (say 23%) with NO deductions, thats what it would be. Even at 15% (which wouldn't come close to funding the government as it is now), that would be $1500 on $10,000 of income.

[Ford]

Not all taxes are wealth redistribution. Do you know what that term means, or do you only argue that it's BS because it was said in a negative way regarding Obama?

I am advocating the Flat Percentage tax.

You really don't think your poll options are a joke? You're not as oblivious as you're making yourself out to be.

[Koolblue13]

@Hubbs: Perhaps but would you really take $2300 from someone who is making $10,000 a year. If you go a flat tax (say 23%) with NO deductions, thats what it would be. Even at 15% (which wouldn't come close to funding the government as it is now), that would be $1500 on $10,000 of income.

The first number was right. Sucks, I know, but in my opinion, it's the "right" thing to do.

We all equally share the burden.

The power is with the poor. If they knew what we spent on the Fed and for what, maybe we could have real change and accountability.

We would save millions on figuring out who spends what and there would be no argument on who is paying what.

I can see a lot of upside, outside of principle on the flat tax.

[Koolblue13]

You really don't think your poll options are a joke? You're not as oblivious as you're making yourself out to be.

Well fine, go ahead and make your point. I'll bite.

[Capt Rich Fla]

Don't make the poor pay taxes at all. Keno machines everywhere. I'm serious. The gov would get more from that than poor folks paying taxes. You best believe they'll put the money into Keno. Look what a shady convenience store does on Friday afternoon with Loto. People are pissing away their whole check.

[Ford]

Well fine, go ahead and make your point. I'll bite.

Argg I just had a decently long, thought out post about why I felt the various options could be perceived as leading the respondent in various ways. Somewhere in the process of hitting "post reply", something went wrong, and all was lost. Seeing as how I'm on here procrastinating and not writing papers I need to be writing right now, I won't type it all up again.

I did, however, include an apology as after reading over my first couple of swipes at your poll I realize they were probably overly abrasive and rude. Rather than saying "you're not as oblivious as you're making yourself out to be", I probably should have said something more along the lines of "you seem to generally be a thoughtful poster with a solid grasp of current affairs and politics, I think you could have phrased the options better".

[sjinhan]

you know we can argue all day and night about the tax system but it wont matter unless we get the government budget in control...

whats the point of arguing over who much the government should take when the government ends up spending whatever it collects and then prints money or borrow from over seas to pay for everything else...

lets first get a balance budget then we can argue about if the government should be using less, more, or who should be paying how much...

[sjinhan]

Also a question for the people who probably have much more in depth knowledge than I do about this "Cut taxes and wealth well spread down from the top down due to job creation and etc..."

I used to like that ideology but I have started to change my mind past 6-8 years about it... Do you think that ideology really stands up still with the Globalization age that we are in? I feel that the ideology used to work when the wealthy and large businesses were reinvesting most of the money within our own economy.

However, take Walmart as an example, if you give them a tax cut or break then wouldnt Walmart be spending American dollars to buy Chinese goods (sending wealth overseas) to sell to american consumers. When the manufacturing and production of most goods were in the USA, I can see how the distribution of wealth from top down might have been the most effective way of growing the local (national) economy but now with the globalization this will just send our wealth out of the country.

Since I think trying to reverse the manufacturing to return to the USA from other countries such as Mexico and China might be too late so wouldn't it be more effective to give incentives to middle and lower classes to get them educate through programs or education in order be a skilled (white colored) workers?

[Enzo]

Also a question for the people who probably have much more in depth knowledge than I do about this "Cut taxes and wealth well spread down from the top down due to job creation and etc..."

I used to like that ideology but I have started to change my mind past 6-8 years about it... Do you think that ideology really stands up still with the Globalization age that we are in? I feel that the ideology used to work when the wealthy and large businesses were reinvesting most of the money within our own economy.

However, take Walmart as an example, if you give them a tax cut or break then wouldnt Walmart be spending American dollars to buy Chinese goods (sending wealth overseas) to sell to american consumers. When the manufacturing and production of most goods were in the USA, I can see how the distribution of wealth from top down might have been the most effective way of growing the local (national) economy but now with the globalization this will just send our wealth out of the country.

Since I think trying to reverse the manufacturing to return to the USA from other countries such as Mexico and China might be too late so wouldn't it be more effective to give incentives to middle and lower classes to get them educate through programs or education in order be a skilled (white colored) workers?

Manufacturing jobs would return to the U.S. if people who do just one simple thing. Stop buying products "Made in China". I know things are made in other 3rd world countries but we have start with China then when that problem is solved worry about the other countries. I'm not saying buy only "Made in America" because there are plenty of countries where people are paid well & they make good products. How many of you realize that everytime you buy something that is "Made in China" or any other 3rd world country you are actually supporting legalized slavery. As far as the tax system goes the Progressive Tax is fine but it needs be retuned for the 21st century. I'm very wary of the Flat Tax & the Fair Tax because both of them are systems proposed by the very wealthy.

[Prosperity]

I don't mind the progressive tax (and I don't mind with the assumption that I will be in the top 1% one day) but a progressive consumption tax would sound good if I could be convinced that it would be practical.

[Koolblue13]

you know we can argue all day and night about the tax system but it wont matter unless we get the government budget in control...

That right there is exactly why I support a flat percentage income tax.

If every single person was paying the same amount/sharing the equal burden/ whatever you want to call it, I think more people would be inclined to care about exactly what we are spending our tax dollars on. (and it is what WE are spending it on, can't lay the blame on elected officials).

If a person came out, on national tv and said "We have grossly overspent and are now in debt to the Chinese government and need every single American to shoulder the responsibility, so our children don't have to. We will all pay an equal percent of our salaries and income and all feel the burden together. There will be no corporate taxes, so prices can come back down and jobs return home, there will be no loop holes for the rich, there will be no sales tax, so you can still afford everything. The burden will cost everybody 23% of your wages today. In 5 years, we hope to have that number cut in half."

I would support that person every way I can and I'm in the bottom percent.

[zoony]

That right there is exactly why I support a flat percentage income tax.

If every single person was paying the same amount/sharing the equal burden/ whatever you want to call it, I think more people would be inclined to care about exactly what we are spending our tax dollars on. (and it is what WE are spending it on, can't lay the blame on elected officials).

I don't see that in the least.

And a flat tax would be an enormous burden on the poor and middle class. Huge.

[JohnLockesGhost]

The current tax code is a cluster**** of corporate giveaways and social engineering. Scrap it.

National consumption tax sounds ok, but wouldn't work so well in practice.

I like the flat tax around 15% with a single standard deduction for personal living expenses (You can make 15,000 dollars tax free). Maybe a smaller deduction for each dependant.

[Midnight Judges]

flat fee. Every person pays the same dollar amount. I don't subscribe to that misleading "flat tax" wealth redistribution socialist marxist nonsense where you charge one guy $1,000 and another guy $50,000 in order to punish him for working harder and creating jobs. :mad: