If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(American Thinker)   Congressman John Conyers (D-umbfounded) confused and frightened by increasing Congressional opinion to actually, GASP, cut the US budget   (americanthinker.com) divider line 209
    More: Asinine, John Conyers  
•       •       •

8241 clicks; posted to Main » on 01 Jul 2011 at 11:46 AM (3 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



209 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all
 
2011-07-02 04:08:26 PM

imprimere: Flat tax. That is all.


Yeah, I'm rich, so this idea sounds fantastic.
 
2011-07-02 04:17:23 PM

lewismarktwo: imprimere: Flat tax. That is all.

Yeah, I'm rich, so this idea sounds fantastic.


That is a retarded argument. Their 25% will contibute way more than yours. I've never understood the opposition to this.
 
2011-07-02 04:45:31 PM

imprimere: lewismarktwo: imprimere: Flat tax. That is all.

Yeah, I'm rich, so this idea sounds fantastic.

That is a retarded argument. Their 25% will contibute way more than yours. I've never understood the opposition to this.


Because the poor folk will end up paying more money. The rich will end up paying less. That's why. See poor folk still have to pay the same amount for a speeding ticket or for sales tax as the guy who owns the local restaurant chain. A DISPROPORTIONATE amount of money would be taken from the poor, who have MUCH LESS DISPOSABLE INCOME.

Tho, if you take into account how little the uber rich pay anyway by hiding their money and playing shell games, it might actually be more costly for those uber rich (not the merely wealthy) to go to a simple flat tax. This could be the reason why we don't already have it.

If a 'flat tax' is ever implemented it will not be simple, I can assure you that.
 
2011-07-02 04:55:15 PM
Your argument (while I respect it) still doesn't ring ture for me. If everyone has 25% taken off the top, then the other 75% still goes to 'whatever'. You could also make fines a percentage and, again, we're covered (though I'd have issues with this).

A flat tax does not have to be complicated.

And yes, the fact that a flat tax has not been implemented tells you that the RICH don't want it. It would hurt them more.
 
2011-07-03 02:15:15 AM
As usual, the proggies have no ideas for deficit reduction, except take money away from the people/corps who actually create jobs. But that would go against their agenda for keeping the majority of us dependent on the government. Keep saying the repubs are insane all you want, not many are listening. The progressive view is about 20% of the population, and they want total control. You are going to lose yet again for never understanding that you cannot spend your way out of a recession. History yet repeats itself again and again.


I am disgustitated
 
2011-07-03 08:34:59 AM

imprimere: Your argument (while I respect it) still doesn't ring ture for me. If everyone has 25% taken off the top, then the other 75% still goes to 'whatever'.


The problem isn't in the tax rate.

Let's look at two people, call them A and B.

Person A flips burgers for a living and makes around $11k, year.
Person B was born with a silver spoon in their mouth and makes at least $100k/year on bank interest alone.

Let's enact your magical flat tax.
Person A would be losing $2,750 a year.
Person B would be losing $25,000 a year.

Herein lies the problem: that $2,750 is a much higher burden for person A than for person B. Person B makes most of their money on investments, person A holds down a job.

When you're only making around $800 a month working full time, losing a quarter of that to taxes is a huge life burden.

What i've just described is what's known as a regressive tax.
 
2011-07-03 10:41:12 AM

TsukasaK: imprimere: Your argument (while I respect it) still doesn't ring ture for me. If everyone has 25% taken off the top, then the other 75% still goes to 'whatever'.

The problem isn't in the tax rate.

Let's look at two people, call them A and B.

Person A flips burgers for a living and makes around $11k, year.
Person B was born with a silver spoon in their mouth and makes at least $100k/year on bank interest alone.

Let's enact your magical flat tax.
Person A would be losing $2,750 a year.
Person B would be losing $25,000 a year.

Herein lies the problem: that $2,750 is a much higher burden for person A than for person B. Person B makes most of their money on investments, person A holds down a job.

When you're only making around $800 a month working full time, losing a quarter of that to taxes is a huge life burden.

What i've just described is what's known as a regressive tax.


Still not a problem for me. We all know that what you make is not what you actually make. When you look at actual numbers it's easy to say 'it's a larger burden', however, it's the same burden. (I actually think this would drive up the middle class) Moreover, if you actually enforced this, the extra money from the 'rich', would actually lower the percentage for everyone (assuming you don't let the government spend too much).
 
2011-07-03 11:01:13 AM
In fact, let's look at all the flat taxes which already exist;

Bottle deposits
Licensing
Electricity
Gas
State taxes
Car Insurance

We all pay the same amount (based on usage). The 'rich' feel it a helluva lot less! Same argument.

FLAT TAX!
 
2011-07-04 10:25:20 AM

foxyshadis: 3StratMan:

You sure you didn't mean to sign up with 3StrawMan? Even most of the conservatives here actually try to refer to the actual budget before passing sweeping judgment...


#1: Sweeping judgment? Not hardly. Just pointing out the path the Liberals and Democrats are wanting the country go down, and their strategy on spending as a whole. Disagree? Prove me wrong.

#2: Conservatives? On this site? Yeah, there's maybe like about 10 of us, but when it comes to going toe to toe with the Liberals here, a couple chime in once in a while, but it's usually pretty lopsided. Usually 1 Conservative VS 4 or 5 Libs at a time.
 
Displayed 9 of 209 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | » | Last | Show all



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report