Modern slavery

[Retribution]

Because all those schools and roads will pay for themselves.

Because all that welfare for lazy people and the $200,000+ salaries for Californian lifeguards will pay for themselves.

[HeyYou]

I seriously doubt it would work that way. Currently, I pay taxes on any car I buy, whether I buy it new, used, or anything in between. If I don't pay at the point of sale, I pay when I go to transfer the title into my name.

 

There are a hell of a lot more 'used' houses on the market than there are new...... the government isn't going to not tax a major sale like that. Just ain't gonna happen.

 

You are basing the new tax system on the old one, and BTW what FEDERAL taxes do you currently pay on any cars or houses? Answer: none.

 

Ah, so, this federal tax would be in addition to any state sales tax? (also, the fed DOES charge sales tax on certain commodities, they just call it an "excise tax".... same thing, different name.)

 

Do you really think the government is going to ignore a couple multi-billion (trillion?) dollar opportunities to generate revenue?

 

The so called "fair" tax, is anything but.

 

The first step in the Fair Tax is a repeal of the 16th amendment, at which point the sales taxes take over. Why would you assume that is tax will make them more greedy than they are now? At least with this tax people will see it every time they go to the store, makes it much harder to hide.

 

Much harder to hide? How so? All you need to do is look at your paycheck, and you can see exactly how much the government is extracting from you. It's where it GOES that is the mystery.

 

The main problem I see with it, is public perception of the price of just about everything taking an almost 25% jump. They won't notice the bit of a bump in their check, but, they sure as hell will notice that everything now costs significantly more.

 

The real problem isn't gathering the revenue, it's how the government perceives it, and how they blithely spend it. If our government exercised some flavor of fiscal responsibility, quit blowing money on pie in the sky projects, made some intelligent decisions, they wouldn't have the issues they do now. Trouble is, those folks that pass the laws want to keep their cushy (tax free...) jobs, and how do they do that? By bringing money into their area's they represent. Government paid for projects, with no clue where the money is going to come from. Its the magic font that never runs out. Well, ok, not until lately. And now, the fad of the day is "government financial responsibility". Putting 'government" and "responsibility" in the same sentence seems to me to be one of the greatest ironies I have seen. They don't work for the money. If they spend too much, they just legislate themselves some more. Only governments can get away with that kind of behavior. If any private citizen tried that, they would be in prison so fast, they would be there a week before they figgered out what happened.

 

We currently spend 25% of our budget on Defense. 23% on health care, and 21% on pensions..... (not to mention at least 5% on just interest... to say nothing about paying down the principle, which ain't happenin'.) The US has more foreign military bases than EVERY other country COMBINED. Why? Do we NEED all those bases? This aint the cold war any more. A bunch of the countries where we have bases don't even want us there....... or, are in such political disarray, that we have trouble determining whom to write the check to. We pay 22% of the UN budget. There are 192 (at last count) members, so, why are we paying the lions share of it? (and why do we finance an organization that does little or no good, has zero credibility, and even less authority......) Why do we pay billions of dollars to countries that don't need it? Why do we give billions of dollars to support governments that we publicly decry for human rights violations? Why do we support a country whose prime export is Opium? Why do we pay our enemies bribes so we can get our military supplies thru, so that we can fight them? Why do we pay a government aid to help fight terrorism, when it is readily apparent that they SUPPORT terrorism? Why does the US government think they can buy "friends", when they know very well that it just doesn't work??? Why do we pay folks that overthrow a government that we once called allies????? I am thinkin' that ain't gonna endear us to anyone.....

 

There are a lot of things that need to happen. Too bad NONE of them ever will. Not until it all comes crashing down, again... around their ears, and the american people finally wake up from their slumber, and decide to DO something. Expecting answers from the government? Well, I hope you are really patient.......

 

I think you are missing many of the benefits of the sales tax, for one thing people who make money through illegal means will taxed (drug dealers, prostitutes, even thieves) will all have to pay taxes for a change. Rich families that live of their wealth and interest will have to pay taxes.

 

In one sentence you say that people see the taxes they currently pay and then you turn around and claim they wont notice the increase when that tax is removed. Which is it? Not to mention that everyone will see the taxes now, including the housewife who may not look at the pay stubs but votes for politicians that raise taxes.

 

How many people do you know that pay much attention to the itemization of their pay stub? Most of the folks I know just look at how much they can actually put into the bank, and that's the end of it. Granted, with no income tax taken out, that number will go up. However, there will still be taxes taken out. Social Security, and various other taxes that vary by location. (city income tax, for instance.) However, what they WILL see, is that phone, or whatever, that they bought last year, now costs 25% more, (plus whatever inflation does to the price....) and that will be apparent on every purchase they make. (and will be GREAT incentive for assorted black markets to spring up......)

 

One of my favorite solutions for drug dealers and such would be: Legalize the drugs. instead of spending billions of dollars a year trying to keep them out of the country, license, and tax production/distribution just like they do for alcohol, or tobacco products. Not only will it create jobs here in the states, but, it will also have the side benefit of dramatically reducing crime, both here, and in Mexico, our southern neighbor..... We could also release a bunch of folks from the prison system, that were in for Non-violent drug crimes. Save a boatload of money there too.

 

Doing a Flat Tax, everybody pays X percentage of their income, would let us drastically reduce the population at the IRS...... and would more evenly distribute the tax burden. This is something we could do tomorrow, and start realizing the benefits right away.

 

Just a bit of enlightenment here for ya though, to maybe get a better handle on my perspective on this...... I am on a fixed income. Social Security Disablity. (I have multiple sclerosis...... so, not just milking the system, I really AM screwed up. :D ) So, doing away with income tax wouldn't change my income at all. However, having to pay a 25% tax on everything most certainly would have a profound effect on my life, and NOT in a good way.

[marharth]

Because all those schools and roads will pay for themselves.

Because all that welfare for lazy people and the $200,000+ salaries for Californian lifeguards will pay for themselves.

Having welfare does not instantly mean your lazy.

 

That is a completely ignorant statement to make.

 

Its almost funny when people act like the lower class is bringing down the country.

[dazzerfong]

Having welfare for certain people who actually deserve it (mental issues, work injury, inability to work); no problem.

 

However, for 'dole bludgers' (if you're Australian, you might have seen a segment on Today Tonight where an entire street is composed of people applying for welfare, all of them 'attempting' to get work for at least 10 years), not excusable. There's jobs everywhere (at least, in Australia), it's just about your pickiness for your job.

 

Also, to those complaining about 25% tax: we have up to 49% tax.

 

Note: this is not meant to offend anyone; I am merely stating my opinions.

Edited May 29, 2011 by dazzerfong

[marharth]

Having welfare for certain people who actually deserve it (mental issues, work injury, inability to work); no problem.

 

However, for 'dole bludgers' (if you're Australian, you might have seen a segment on Today Tonight where an entire street is composed of people applying for welfare, all of them 'attempting' to get work for at least 10 years), not excusable. There's jobs everywhere (at least, in Australia), it's just about your pickiness for your job.

 

Also, to those complaining about 25% tax: we have up to 49% tax.

 

Note: this is not meant to offend anyone; I am merely stating my opinions.

Of course some people abuse the welfare system, that doesn't instantly mean that everyone who uses it is lazy though.

[Kuraikiba]

Remember, income tax varies. In Norway, you give 60% in taxes. Scandinavians have the highest suicide rate, depression rate, alcoholism rate, and death by alcoholism rate of any demographic in the world. Also, they live short lives.

 

Tax for income is high when healthcare is free, yet the one place without it, the US, has a fairly low tax rate.

 

Where money could be made, people will abuse that fact. Welfare means people not needing it (the ones making a decent living) can abuse the system. Some people evade taxes, some would use unlimited sick days to be paid all year for nothing, some people steal, and let's not forget the lottery winner who still gets food stamps due to legal loopholes. People can fake injury, claim disability, and the list of ways to abuse altruism goes on. The governments do a fine job, considering they put up with mostly people who whine.

[Kazakovich]

"Remember, income tax varies. In Norway, you give 60% in taxes. Scandinavians have the highest suicide rate, depression rate, alcoholism rate, and death by alcoholism rate of any demographic in the world. Also, they live short lives."

 

I'd love to see a source on this. It doesn't sound very familiar.

[ginnyfizz]

The Scandinavians score pretty well on life expectancy!

 

List of countries by life expectancy

[Kuraikiba]

I'm Scandinavian, I would know.

 

The life expectancy given is assuming the people do not pickle their liver with alcohol, kill themselves, or freeze to death at some point.

 

They have the potential to live long, but they are so miserable that long life is a curse instead of a blessing. Being Scandinavian, I'd know.

[marharth]

I'm Scandinavian, I would know.

 

The life expectancy given is assuming the people do not pickle their liver with alcohol, kill themselves, or freeze to death at some point.

 

They have the potential to live long, but they are so miserable that long life is a curse instead of a blessing. Being Scandinavian, I'd know.

No, you wouldn't know.

 

I live in the USA so I instantly know our nuke codes and military secrets, also I have perfect poling on everything because I live here!

 

If you don't have a source or a reasonable comment your argument is invalid.