National Sales Tax Replacing Income Tax

[McDad]

The reason is hardly inexplicable and is no more based on feelz than your opinion that everyone should pay an equal tax is based on feelz. You feelz one way, I feelz another.

I'm for an equitable sharing of the burden. It's a relatively straight forward concept.

Your HOA shares the burden equally among all the homeowners. 10 College buddies travel to see their favorite team and split the AirBnB equally, each paying 1/10th.

What you want is unequal sharing of the tax burden.

ETA: My position is based in logic, reason, and fact.

 

[luthervol]

Your HOA shares the burden equally among all the homeowners. 10 College buddies travel to see their favorite team and split the AirBnB equally, each paying 1/10th.

What you want is unequal sharing of the tax burden.

ETA: My position is based in logic, reason, and fact.

But property taxes are based on assessed value and me and 8 of my college buddies tell our 10th friend who has had some unfortunate luck that we'll be happy to cover his share on this trip.
What I want is an equitable sharing of the tax burden.
A good doctor doesn't view equality as giving every patient the same prescription, but giving every patient the prescription they need.
A good coach doesn't view equality as coaching every player the same way, but coaching every player the way they should be coached.
A good parent doesn't view equality as parenting each of their children exactly the same, but as parenting each of their children in the way that is best for that child.
Your view of equality is overly simplistic.
My position is based on logic, reason, fact.....and wisdom.

 

[VolStrom]

But property taxes are based on assessed value and me and 8 of my college buddies tell our 10th friend who has had some unfortunate luck that we'll be happy to cover his share on this trip.
What I want is an equitable sharing of the tax burden.
A good doctor doesn't view equality as giving every patient the same prescription, but giving every patient the prescription they need.
A good coach doesn't view equality as coaching every player the same way, but coaching every player the way they should be coached.
A good parent doesn't view equality as parenting each of their children exactly the same, but as parenting each of their children in the way that is best for that child.
Your view of equality is overly simplistic.
My position is based on logic, reason, fact.....and wisdom.

In your mind.

 

[BeecherVol]

But property taxes are based on assessed value and me and 8 of my college buddies tell our 10th friend who has had some unfortunate luck that we'll be happy to cover his share on this trip.

Theres nothing wrong with you or your friends helping out another friend.

It doesnt need to and shouldnt go through the government filter where your honorable deed is diluted before your friend receives the benefit if it ever got to him.

 

[luthervol]

Theres nothing wrong with you or your friends helping out another friend.

It doesnt need to and shouldnt go through the government filter where your honorable deed is diluted before your friend receives the benefit.

In a perfect scenario (society), government wouldn't need to stop in. Government fills in the gaps where society fails.
It's society's self designed safety net.

 

[BeecherVol]

In a perfect scenario (society), government wouldn't need to stop in. Government fills in the gaps where society fails.
It's society's self designed safety net.

Our government has become it's own business with it's own beneficiaries (and no that's not your everyday citizen). The unique part is those running the business dont have to be efficient with the pool collected. It's gotten really obvious over time that they are not looking out for your friend in a new or raised tax but how that best serves their end. Most on both sides of the aisle dont even try anymore.

 

[Orangeslice13]

Our government has become it's own business with it's own beneficiaries (and no that's not your everyday citizen). The unique part is those running the business dont have to be efficient with the pool collected. It's gotten really obvious over time that they are not looking out for your friend in a new or raised tax but how that best serves their end. Most on both sides of the aisle dont even try anymore.

The welfare system as designed by the government holds people down and enslaved them. The government isn’t going too lift people up. Lifting people up doesn’t make for good politics.

And have we seen anything from the government on law enforcement reforms or are they pandering to their base? They don’t want to solve these issues. They want them to continue so they can blame the oppression

 

[BeecherVol]

The welfare system as designed by the government holds people down and enslaved them. The government isn’t going too lift people up. Lifting people up doesn’t make for good politics.

And have we seen anything from the government on law enforcement reforms or are they pandering to their base? They don’t want to solve these issues. They want them to continue so they can blame the oppression

There is a percentage, (very small by comparison to those on the roll) of people in this country who cant take care of themselves and need assistance.

To the last, it's part of the game anymore. Say what you need to say and do as little as you have to about what you say to survive and continue to prosper your self.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Taxing consumption instead of income is far superior and fair. But only if it truly replaces the income tax.

Yep. It has to be a constitutional amendment.

This will never happen anyway.

 

[McDad]

But property taxes are based on assessed value and me and 8 of my college buddies tell our 10th friend who has had some unfortunate luck that we'll be happy to cover his share on this trip.
What I want is an equitable sharing of the tax burden.
A good doctor doesn't view equality as giving every patient the same prescription, but giving every patient the prescription they need.
A good coach doesn't view equality as coaching every player the same way, but coaching every player the way they should be coached.
A good parent doesn't view equality as parenting each of their children exactly the same, but as parenting each of their children in the way that is best for that child.
Your view of equality is overly simplistic.
My position is based on logic, reason, fact.....and wisdom.

Took you two days to finally present your position coherently. I'll overlook all the private sector, volunteer examples you presented to support your version of equity. As you know, taxes are not voluntary.
To your point, you offered no equitable scenarios. Everyone treated as they should be for their need. No equitable interaction in the lot. There is no equitable burden on the sports team.

What you're trying to say is that you want equitable outcomes. Not equitable burdens. Not equitable sharing. Government should not attempt to provide outcomes. Government should provide opportunity. Taxation should not exists as a tool to manipulate society. Taxation exists to raise revenue.

This is the fundamental reason your ideas must be defeated at (almost) any cost. Your ideas are corrupt...and they are dangerous in the hands of the power hungry.

There is no logic in your argument. There is charity. Charity isn't logical. Charity is not a reason to establish tax policy.

 

[Pepe_Silvia]

Took you two days to finally present your position coherently. I'll overlook all the private sector, volunteer examples you presented to support your version of equity. As you know, taxes are not voluntary.
To your point, you offered no equitable scenarios. Everyone treated as they should be for their need. No equitable interaction in the lot. There is no equitable burden on the sports team.

What you're trying to say is that you want equitable outcomes. Not equitable burdens. Not equitable sharing. Government should not attempt to provide outcomes. Government should provide opportunity. Taxation should not exists as a tool to manipulate society. Taxation exists to raise revenue.

This is the fundamental reason your ideas must be defeated at (almost) any cost. Your ideas are corrupt...and they are dangerous in the hands of the power hungry.

There is no logic in your argument. There is charity. Charity isn't logical. Charity is not a reason to establish tax policy.

 

[NorthDallas40]

Took you two days to finally present your position coherently. I'll overlook all the private sector, volunteer examples you presented to support your version of equity. As you know, taxes are not voluntary.
To your point, you offered no equitable scenarios. Everyone treated as they should be for their need. No equitable interaction in the lot. There is no equitable burden on the sports team.

What you're trying to say is that you want equitable outcomes. Not equitable burdens. Not equitable sharing. Government should not attempt to provide outcomes. Government should provide opportunity. Taxation should not exists as a tool to manipulate society. Taxation exists to raise revenue.

This is the fundamental reason your ideas must be defeated at (almost) any cost. Your ideas are corrupt...and they are dangerous in the hands of the power hungry.

There is no logic in your argument. There is charity. Charity isn't logical. Charity is not a reason to establish tax policy.

 

[luthervol]

Took you two days to finally present your position coherently. I'll overlook all the private sector, volunteer examples you presented to support your version of equity. As you know, taxes are not voluntary.
To your point, you offered no equitable scenarios. Everyone treated as they should be for their need. No equitable interaction in the lot. There is no equitable burden on the sports team.

What you're trying to say is that you want equitable outcomes. Not equitable burdens. Not equitable sharing. Government should not attempt to provide outcomes. Government should provide opportunity. Taxation should not exists as a tool to manipulate society. Taxation exists to raise revenue.

This is the fundamental reason your ideas must be defeated at (almost) any cost. Your ideas are corrupt...and they are dangerous in the hands of the power hungry.

There is no logic in your argument. There is charity. Charity isn't logical. Charity is not a reason to establish tax policy.

Not sure what you're smoking, but I'll take some.

I'm for an equitable sharing of the burden, pure and simple. Outcomes will never be equitable. That's a big reason why burden sharing should be. Say whatever you wish, but it doesn't change that fact.
And who said anything about taxation being used to manipulate society?
My ideas will not only not be defeated, they are your future.

Take a couple more tokes and do a little deep breathing.

 

[Rasputin_Vol]

How about we just leave everybody’s income alone since they earned it and not us.

Baby steps...

I mentioned abolishing the 16th Amendment earlier in the thread and nearly got my head taken off...

 

[McDad]

Not sure what you're smoking, but I'll take some.

I'm for an equitable sharing of the burden, pure and simple. Outcomes will never be equitable. That's a big reason why burden sharing should be. Say whatever you wish, but it doesn't change that fact.
And who said anything about taxation being used to manipulate society?
My ideas will not only not be defeated, they are your future.

Take a couple more tokes and do a little deep breathing.

You initially joined the conversation because you were bored. Now I'm bored disproving your vague version of equity.

You want to offer your concept of ideal tax? I'd love to hear it and discuss it.

 

[luthervol]

You initially joined the conversation because you were bored. Now I'm bored disproving your vague version of equity.

You want to offer your concept of ideal tax? I'd love to hear it and discuss it.

No exemptions: Everyone files single.
2% 1 - 25k
5% 25+ - 50
10% 50+ - 100
13% 100+ - 200
15% 200+ - 300
17% 300+ - 400
20% 400+ - 500
25% 500+ - 1 m
30% 1 m+ - 5 m
35% 5 m+ - 20 m
40% 20 m+ - 100 m
45% 100 m+ - 1 b
50% 1 b+

 

[mr.checkerboards]

Baby steps...

I mentioned abolishing the 16th Amendment earlier in the thread and nearly got my head taken off...

I dont think it should be abolished but it needs to be changed. It will never happen but the people need a voice in how their tax dollars are spent. Congress should have to come up with a plan and the people should vote on if it happens or not etc... state and local ideas should be the same way. Too much tax payer money gets wasted on stuff like congressional pay raises and so on and so forth

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

Took you two days to finally present your position coherently. I'll overlook all the private sector, volunteer examples you presented to support your version of equity. As you know, taxes are not voluntary.
To your point, you offered no equitable scenarios. Everyone treated as they should be for their need. No equitable interaction in the lot. There is no equitable burden on the sports team.

What you're trying to say is that you want equitable outcomes. Not equitable burdens. Not equitable sharing. Government should not attempt to provide outcomes. Government should provide opportunity. Taxation should not exists as a tool to manipulate society. Taxation exists to raise revenue.

This is the fundamental reason your ideas must be defeated at (almost) any cost. Your ideas are corrupt...and they are dangerous in the hands of the power hungry.

There is no logic in your argument. There is charity. Charity isn't logical. Charity is not a reason to establish tax policy.

I wish I knew who you were arguing with in this thread. This is a killer response to almost any leftist attempt at justifying their desired thievery of American financial success.

 

[LouderVol]

The reason is hardly inexplicable and is no more based on feelz than your opinion that everyone should pay an equal tax is based on feelz. You feelz one way, I feelz another.

I'm for an equitable sharing of the burden. It's a relatively straight forward concept.

The issue is you are for a pretty much ever increasing burden. Your list of burdens that you think people should bear is huge. And then once you have set this massive burden on the public you think that somehow it's fair that the rich should pay more of it than the poor.

You place no financial responsibilities on those who are increasing the burden.

 

[SpaceCoastVol]

The issue is you are for a pretty much ever increasing burden. Your list of burdens that you think people should bear is huge. And then once you have set this massive burden on the public you think that somehow it's fair that the rich should pay more of it than the poor.

You place no financial responsibilities on those who are increasing the burden.

Truth. I also think that child tax credit should stop at 2 children. After you replace you and your wife... you get no more credit.

 

[LouderVol]

But property taxes are based on assessed value and me and 8 of my college buddies tell our 10th friend who has had some unfortunate luck that we'll be happy to cover his share on this trip.
What I want is an equitable sharing of the tax burden.
A good doctor doesn't view equality as giving every patient the same prescription, but giving every patient the prescription they need.
A good coach doesn't view equality as coaching every player the same way, but coaching every player the way they should be coached.
A good parent doesn't view equality as parenting each of their children exactly the same, but as parenting each of their children in the way that is best for that child.
Your view of equality is overly simplistic.
My position is based on logic, reason, fact.....and wisdom.

But you are treating all the poor the same, and all the rich the same. You arent making individual decisions. You are just lumping people together based on divisions that fit your argument than instead of reviewing the circumstances of those situations.

You are making the assumptions based on their income vs the burden they place. That would be an equitable way to do things, make you pay for your own costs.

I go eat out with friends. They just order some side salads and water, while I eat surf and turf and have some adult bevarages. Bill comes and I demand we split it equally. In your world that's equitable because I make less than my friends. In my world that isnt because i have placed the biggest burden on the group.

And in our country it's not 9 supporting 1.

Its 1% supporting 50%. And the 50% gets to determine what the 1% pays for. How is that fair?

 

[LouderVol]

Not sure what you're smoking, but I'll take some.

I'm for an equitable sharing of the burden, pure and simple. Outcomes will never be equitable. That's a big reason why burden sharing should be. Say whatever you wish, but it doesn't change that fact.
And who said anything about taxation being used to manipulate society?
My ideas will not only not be defeated, they are your future.

Take a couple more tokes and do a little deep breathing.

You literally just talked about taxation manipulating society here. Burden sharing is manipulation. You are manipulating some parts of society to pay more taxes in order to support other parts of society.

 

[LouderVol]

Truth. I also think that child tax credit should stop at 2 children. After you replace you and your wife... you get no more credit.

I cant support that as it starts to divide society. Either every child is a deduction or none are.

Besides, replacing population isnt enough.

 

[luthervol]

I cant support that as it starts to divide society. Either every child is a deduction or none are.

Besides, replacing population isnt enough.

Child deductions are manipulations, as are charitable deduction.....careful on that slippery slope.

 

[hog88]

I cant support that as it starts to divide society. Either every child is a deduction or none are.

Besides, replacing population isnt enough.

I go with none should be.