Pay No Taxes for 6-Months!!!

Asheth · 02-10-2009, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semtex

Well, let's not forget that Nissan had to be bought/bailed out by Renault many years ago! But yes, I agree, America isn't truly capitalist anymore, and it hasn't been for decades. For the record, I have no objection to the wealthy helping out the less fortunate via taxes. It's not like I'm against taxation or anything like that. What irks me (and has irked me long before Obama came onto the scene), is progressive taxation, where the more you make, the greater percentage you pay. I would prefer a system where everyone pays a flat percentage of their income as income tax. So it doesn't matter if you make $10k per year or $500k, you're always going to pay the same percentage to income tax. The wealthy are still going to end up contributing more to the public treasury than lower income individuals, as n% of $500k is going to be a lot more than n% of $10k. Point being, one doesn't have to make the wealthy pay a higher percentage in order for the lower income folks to benefit from their wealth.

I totally agree flat tax would be a great idea! I would be all for that but what about inflation and the cost of living rising do you think a flat would still be effective? Would a flat tax be able to offset the rising costs?

semtex · 02-10-2009, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Asheth

I totally agree flat tax would be a great idea! I would be all for that but what about inflation and the cost of living rising do you think a flat would still be effective? Would a flat tax be able to offset the rising costs?

Depends. The question is -- would wages rise in pace with inflation? They're supposed to, right? It's what they call 'indexing'. If wages keep pace with inflation, then it should be a wash. Let's say cost of living goes up 5%. Well, if wages also go up by 5% to match, then the dollar amount the government gets from income tax will also automatically go up by 5% without having to actually increase the tax rate. And voila, you have your offset of rising costs.

Where things get muddy is when cost of living goes up but wages don't keep pace. If everyone's cost of living goes up by 5% but their wages stay the same (wage stagnation), then everyone is effectively taking a 5% pay decrease. At that point, the revenue generated by the flat tax will not be keeping pace with inflation. But that's when one has to wonder -- why should it keep pace with inflation in such a scenario? If everyone else has to take an effective 5% wage cut, why shouldn't the government also take an effective 5% cut in revenue? What's good for the goose is good for the gander, right? If the government raises the flat tax rate by 5% to offset inflation in this scenario, then tax payers will be taking a double-hit. First their cost of living increases by 5% and they have no matching wage increase. Then the government comes and jacks up the tax rate on top of that. Talk about adding insult to injury!

This hypothetical scenario of the double-hit would make me laugh were it not so close to the truth. People are losing their jobs en masse, some people are taking pay cuts, and most people who are lucky enough to keep their jobs don't dare dream of getting actual raises. But what do politicians do? They vote themselves pay increases and raise taxes to pay for the machine known as the modern state, which keeps getting bigger and bigger.

dad · 02-10-2009, 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by semtex

. But what do politicians do? They vote themselves pay increases and raise taxes to pay for the machine known as the modern state, which keeps getting bigger and bigger.

Must be nice to be your own boss and vote yourself a raise!
That is so wrong! I could go all day bitching about those sob's!