lousy headline, but actually interesting article.

Hey I am the American taxpayer, and speak for yourself.

Yeah, awesome. Have them consider a flat tax. Because it would be totally rad for these dudes that farked up their taxes to get a break, while working class poor folks like me have to make up the difference.

Great idea.

no.

why should rich people not have to pay proportionally more for the proportionally greater value they get from a stable society?

A flat tax isn't any easier to do.

If you want to make the actual pain in the ass parts of taxes easier, get rid of deductions and what not, fine. But then you can stil look up your tax owed from the table in the back (how hard is that, really???) and have a higher percent taken from the wealthy.

LOL, the economic ignorance on display in this thread will be epic.

Steve Forbes on line two.

"Hello, Steve? Yes we'd like two larges; one with pepperoni and mushrooms and the other with-hold on...what!? awright I'll ask!..Sorry. The other with onions and green peppers, but listen, uh...can we make that second one half onions and green peppers and the other half Hawaaian? Fantastic...Huh? No, not unless you guys sell booze...right. 45 minutes it is then."

Wait... I thought we wanted those evil rich people to have a 90-100% tax? What's this 'flat tax'?

Cog: LOL, the economic ignorance on display in this thread will be epic.

Sure, now that you're here.

Cog: LOL, the economic ignorance on display in this thread will be epic.

Do you ever contribute or do you just mince about like a big, butthurt asshole?

There's nothing wrong with being imaginative but if you actually believe this is going to happen in any of our lifetimes, you can proceed to the nearest funny farm.

thamike: Hey I am the American taxpayer, and speak for yourself.


Damn straight.

As an American taxpayer, I say fark off flat tax. It will only make the country poorer.

And myabe I won't.

Okay, I'll be fair. I'll consider a flat tax, but only after switching completely over to Georgist and Pigovian taxes first.

Then you can put up a tiny little flat tax to make up any shortfall.

/tax things that are bad and things that are inelastically supplied first, and only tax other things if necessary.

Dear god - still with this? A flat tax is unfair, stupid, and really bad for society.

This debate was settled 100 freaking year ago.

I'd like to see the environmentalists start pushing for the Fair Tax idea, it being the most compatible system with producing high-quality, long lasting products (meaning less products in general) and not a lot of plastic crap to clog up our oceans. Of course, only 30% of us would have jobs.

As much fun as it sounds to be all greedy and give as little as possible to "the man", it becomes less fun when our economy is in the crappy due to rampant greed among the very rich, c.f. the French revolution.

I know that you rich people think that you are rich because you are an intrinsically better person. However, when you have no customers who can buy your products, no suppliers to sell you materials, and no government to regulate trade and transportation, you won't be so rich after all.

Don't believe me? Take your business to South Africa. They have much lower taxes there! You can keep everything you earn!

I still think we should do away with income tax and move to a sales and use tax only. Tax consumption at the checkout lane. Don't tax necessities, and give people under a certain income level a break on classes of items. Don't want people to get a break on 50 inch flat Screen TVs for instance.

Increase vice and estate taxes.

No more deductions or arguing over what is income and in what class. You buy something, you pay taxes on it.

It would put more money in the hands of the people that need it, and take more from the people that don't

A flat tax is "fair", the current system is unfair as it doesn't provide equal protection and all that crap; however the progressive tax is probably what is needed for the system to function considering the gap between the top and bottom.

I still think they are all crap.

king_nacho: A flat tax is "fair", the current system is unfair as it doesn't provide equal protection and all that crap; however the progressive tax is probably what is needed for the system to function considering the gap between the top and bottom.

Why is a flat tax fair?

kitryne: Have them consider a flat tax.

A flat tax is indeed well worth careful consideration...

HansensDisease: why should rich people not have to pay proportionally more for the proportionally greater value they get from a stable society?

...and this should be the result of the careful consideration.

Because people would be treated equally regardless of income level, i never said it would be good for society.

Progressive tax is income discrimination

thamike: Cog: LOL, the economic ignorance on display in this thread will be epic.

Do you ever contribute or do you just mince about like a big, butthurt asshole?

LOL. Where's Cog? Damn it, I want to see a response!

king_nacho: Progressive tax is income discrimination

Flat tax is regressive and discriminative. Your point?

king_nacho: A flat tax is "fair"

How is it fair to tax the poor at the same rate as the rich when the poor can't afford it and the rich can afford a lot more? There is nothing fair about a flat tax. Now, I could get behind a progressive flat tax, which would eliminate that discrimination.

king_nacho: Because people would be treated equally regardless of income level, i never said it would be good for society.

People are treated equally regardless of income level. Everyone pays the exact same percentage of taxes on the same amount of money earned.

king_nacho: Progressive tax is income discrimination

You say this like its a bad thing.

Aren't there a few countries in Europe that use a flat tax to some success? Why not give it a try? Just take a couple states and make them the pilot program. Maybe take a couple others and try out the Fair Tax while they're at it. If they work well, consider implementing one of them nationwide. If not, discard the idea and stick with our progressive tax system.

Simple.

jwadeo
Simply that any income tax is discriminative when you start treating people differently for any reason.

king_nacho: jwadeo
Simply that any income tax is discriminative when you start treating people differently for any reason.

We treat people differently all the time. If you get a 1.5 GPA you probably won't get into Harvard. Is Harvard discriminating against stupid people?

thamike: Steve Forbes on line two.

"Hello, Steve? Yes we'd like two larges; one with pepperoni and mushrooms and the other with-hold on...what!? awright I'll ask!..Sorry. The other with onions and green peppers, but listen, uh...can we make that second one half onions and green peppers and the other half Hawaaian? Fantastic...Huh? No, not unless you guys sell booze...right. 45 minutes it is then."

"I was on Ched Choppel's show 'Pightline', when, during a commercial break, Ched confessed to me that he often engages in autoerotic asphyxiation. It was on Ched's show that At Buchanan and Teve Torbes first agreed that Dob Bole should drop out. At said, 'Teve, what about Dob?' Then Dob motioned for At to come towards Steve... Teve Torbes, At, Dob Bole, Uchanan, Ucotos, Ucomos, Ucant, Teve, At, Bole, Dat, Boba Fett, Toni Kukoc, Bee-Bo-Bo, Lamar Alexander 2."

DamnYankees: Is Harvard discriminating against stupid people?

I don't think stupid people is a protected class.

Probably wouldn't be a good idea to include them in the group.

Though then again, how would they know?

HansensDisease: no.

why should rich people not have to pay proportionally more for the proportionally greater value they get from a stable society?

Then you agree that people should pay taxes based on their net cost to society, rather than on their net profit to themselves?

king_nacho: jwadeo
Simply that any income tax is discriminative when you start treating people differently for any reason.

We embed our society's values in our tax code. Having children is good for the future of our society, so we have deductions for having children. Buying a house is good because it encourages stability and real estate investment, so mortgages get a tax break. Ditto for investing in retirement funds (IRAs), investing in the stock market (capital gains), paying for college, etc. The goal is to provide an individual financial incentive for activities which benefit society as a whole.

Now we can argue about what should be our society's priorities and whatnot, but a flat tax essentially removes any benefits all of the above activities. As a result, fewer of these beneficial activities will occur and our society will be worse off for it.

Shostie: I don't think stupid people is a protected class.

Neither is "people who make over X amount of dollars".

But that's besides the point. We are allowed to discriminate. The issue is whether the discrimination is legal. Racial discrimination is very rarely legal, gender discrimination is sometimes legal, and so on.

Sure implement the flat tax, I will just buy everything in the black market.

DamnYankees
But it doesn't actually work out that way, different types of income get taxed differently, or not at all. People with the know-how can work the system to get out paying more, while people that don't probably overpay.

It isn't a fair system today.

With Tax Credits and deductions it is very difficult to keep up with, while we spend millions on a government agency that nobody likes.

king_nacho: But it doesn't actually work out that way, different types of income get taxed differently, or not at all. People with the know-how can work the system to get out paying more, while people that don't probably overpay.

This has nothing at all to do with a flat tax. It's an entirely different issue. You could have a flat tax with deductions and credits also.

A flat tax is nothing more than one tax rate.

king_nacho: It isn't a fair system today.

Correct. It's actually much more regressive than it should be. We should be raising taxes on higher brackets.

king_nacho: With Tax Credits and deductions it is very difficult to keep up with, while we spend millions on a government agency that nobody likes.

The solution is to have the IRS do the taxes wholesale, and just mail us a check or bill when it's done. That way, we don't have to mess with it. 95% of people would be better served by doing this.

DamnYankees
Absolutely they are, but Harvard is a private institution and can put those limits in place.

But two wrongs still don't make a right.

DamnYankees: king_nacho: jwadeo
Simply that any income tax is discriminative when you start treating people differently for any reason.

We treat people differently all the time. If you get a 1.5 GPA you probably won't get into Harvard. Is Harvard discriminating against stupid people?

People drive drunk and kill people all the time, too. So is it ok, then?

king_nacho: DamnYankees
Absolutely they are, but Harvard is a private institution and can put those limits in place.

But two wrongs still don't make a right.

1) You think its a 'wrong' for Harvard to only allow smart people in?
2) The government is allowed to discriminate based on your grades also. When you apply to work for a government agency they can look at your grades.

Dr. Rosenrosen
I'm not for the flat tax, i'm for getting rid of all income taxes, and put those same values into a sales tax structure.

Razorwolf: People drive drunk and kill people all the time, too. So is it ok, then?

Ladies and gentlemen, I present to you the worst argument ever made. Congratulations!

The reasons DamnYankees is for a progressive tax are good reasons to support a flat tax. Some are just supporting what ever will feed their hate of the rich.

king_nacho: I'm not for the flat tax, i'm for getting rid of all income taxes, and put those same values into a sales tax structure.

Such a structure would have some nice ramifications, like being more sustainable and ecologically friendly.

The problem is simply that it would drive us into depression by reducing demand. But, yes, it would satisfy cravings for justice and fairness, for what it's worth. Not much, if I'm starving, really.

Arkie: The reasons DamnYankees is for a progressive tax are good reasons to support a flat tax. Some are just supporting what ever will feed their hate of the rich.

Yes. I loathe the rich. They smell like poo.

Shostie: Aren't there a few countries in Europe that use a flat tax to some success? Why not give it a try? Just take a couple states and make them the pilot program. Maybe take a couple others and try out the Fair Tax while they're at it. If they work well, consider implementing one of them nationwide. If not, discard the idea and stick with our progressive tax system.

Simple.

In Tennessee, there is no income tax. We pay ~10% sales tax on almost everything. There are a few "tax-free" weekends each year primarily for educational supplies (and clothes, computers, etc.)

It takes a while to get used to the high sales tax, but I like it better than the other states I've lived in with traditional sales tax.

DamnYankees
Discrimination is a bad thing in any area, however Harvard or any place that uses various keys for selecting membership is probably doing so because they know that the applicant with the 1.5 GPA will not make it through, and instead of just taking their money, they don't want to waste their time.

You are talking about areas where there are a limited number of openings with multiple applicants, it is a totally different situation. If they didn't rank people by who my best fill the opening, then that would cause more problems, it isn't directly discrimination, just selection.

DamnYankees: I loathe the rich. They smell like poo.

Me too. Some of them have a butlerish aroma that I find crude and vulgar.