Story Here.

 

Yup, we need to really sock it to those "millionaires and billionaires" to "pay their fair share". 

 

If everyone is going to have to "pay their fair share" then perhaps nearly half of the American population needs to step up to the plate.

Yet they can vote. This is one of the ways the democrats control a certain portion of the population, which is sadly growing. To many would rather be given hand outs, and they vote for the politicians who will continue to do so.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

Ahh yes the "Stick it to the poor" strategy advocated by the rich who only care about themselves.  Nice to see Republicans sticking to that strategy.

That strategy is one used by the democrats. They have it down perfectly now.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

This story pops up every April 15th, along with its equally invalid counterpart suggesting that the upper crust of the upper crust pay no taxes because they hide all their income offshore. Both are horse crap, to put it politely. The truth is somewhere in the middle.

 

Here's a wild idea: switch to a consumption based tax system from which no one is exempt and eliminate the IRS entirely.

I'd be all for it.

---

TravC59, aka JacksJags. @TravC59 on Twitter
;
; "This is really good, you want a bite, Honey?"

http://www.brookings.edu/research/interv...taxes-gale

 

<b>William Gale:</b> In theory you can set up a consumption tax to have any group of households pay it. In the real world, every consumption tax out there is going to hit low and middle income households to a greater extent than the income tax does.

<b>Ray Suarez:</b> Why?

<b>William Gale:</b> For two reasons: One is that, well, the main reason is that low and middle income households consume more of their income than high income households do. Another way of saying that is high income households save more of their income than low income households do.

So if you move the tax from income to consumption, you're raising the relative burden on low savers, which are low and moderate income households, so almost any revenue neutral shift from the income tax to a consumption tax will be regressive in that manner. There are ways, there are conceptual ways to do it that doesn't add burdens to low and middle income households, but I don't think that they would actually happen.


 

---

<b>Ray Suarez:</b> Well, right now a lot of low income people pay no federal income tax, but they do buy things. Does that mean that they're almost inevitably going to pay a consumption tax?

<b>William Gale:</b> That's a very good example. A family of four doesn't pay any federal income tax until their income is in the 20s or 30s, something like that. If you go to a national sales tax or value added tax, they'd be paying that tax on the very first dollar that they buy.

Now, again, there's a way to insulate them from that by giving each household cash payments, but no country in the world actually does that. So in the real world, consumption taxes end up being more regressive than income taxes, although Len and I or anyone else could design a consumption tax on paper that wasn't like that.

---

Ray Suarez: Well, right now a lot of low income people pay no federal income tax, but they do buy things. Does that mean that they're almost inevitably going to pay a consumption tax?


William Gale: That's a very good example. <span style="font-size:24px;"><span>A family of four doesn't pay any federal income tax until their income is in the 20s or 30s, something like that. If you go to a national sales tax or value added tax, they'd be paying that tax on the very first dollar that they buy.
</span></span>

Now, again, there's a way to insulate them from that by giving each household cash payments, but no country in the world actually does that. So in the real world, consumption taxes end up being more regressive than income taxes, although Len and I or anyone else could design a consumption tax on paper that wasn't like that.

A family of four under 20k a year? They're on every form of assitiance or at least should be, their not buying much of anything.

---

<b>Ray Suarez:</b> Well, right now a lot of low income people pay no federal income tax, but they do buy things. Does that mean that they're almost inevitably going to pay a consumption tax?

<b>William Gale:</b> That's a very good example. A family of four doesn't pay any federal income tax until their income is in the 20s or 30s, something like that. If you go to a national sales tax or value added tax, they'd be paying that tax on the very first dollar that they buy.

Now, again, there's a way to insulate them from that by giving each household cash payments, but no country in the world actually does that. So in the real world, consumption taxes end up being more regressive than income taxes, although Len and I or anyone else could design a consumption tax on paper that wasn't like that.

 

The Fair Tax proposal addresses this issue with direct monthly rebates for means tested households.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

A family of four under 20k a year? They're on every form of assitiance or at least should be, their not buying much of anything.

Yeah, I don't think you get it...

First off, 20-30k a year for a family of four I'd poverty level living. So the fact that 45 percent of Americans aren't paying income taxes because their income is at this subsistence level is an indictment of this economy.


Of course some may wish to blame the workers for their low wages. But the fact that jobs have been flying overseas, the h1-b visas and other factors have depressed wages may be to much critical thinking to expect from the OP.


Secondly, the point that must economists find a consumption tax as a bad idea is because it is regressive in nature. While the working poor may not be spending alot of money, they will be spending all of it just to survive, they tend to not be able to save money... you know because the have to eat and support their family. So adding an additional tax on them really would have adverse repercussions.


Something to think about...

---

Here's an idea everyone including the poor is paying to much in taxes. This is where I disembark from conservatives, you can't preach governments to big, taxes are to high, and then moan the single mom making 20k a year doesn't pay her fair share of income tax. What the hell do you want to tax her food stamps?


No one should be paying income tax that's the problem not that we don't soak the poor enough. Hell yes the rich pay to much in income tax but why the hell is the solution to further spread the misery?


These are garbage studies anyways, when you factor in sin taxes, county and local taxes, state income taxes, transportion taxes and everything else the poor are also paying a majority of their disposable income to uncle Sam, that is after they are forced to offer him an interest free loan anually.

 

Right. The big tax hit on the poor is the FICA (Social Security / Medicare) tax.


 

I'm a big advocate for the Fair Tax. It's a consumption tax that rebates the tax payed by the poverty-level income to everyone, so anyone making poverty-level or lower wages effectively pays no tax, but still has a strong incentive to earn more since the rebate does not go away as you earn more. The tax itself is large (~30%) but the rebate check compensates for basic expenses.


 

It replaces the income tax, the FICA tax, and corporate taxes. By taxing consumption it automatically evens out the taxes on American-made vs. foreign-made goods, so free trade becomes fair trade. Eliminating corporate taxes would eliminate the advantage of a corporation moving it's headquarters to a foreign country. Eliminating the IRS means no tax returns, and no use of the tax code for corporate welfare.


 

The Fair Tax creators claim that elimination of corporate taxes would cause prices to drop comparable to the tax itself for American-made goods. That's probably overly optimistic, but prices would move lower over time as competition kicks in.

---

                                                                          

"Why should I give information to you when all you want to do is find something wrong with it?"

Yeah, I don't think you get it...

First off, 20-30k a year for a family of four I'd poverty level living. So the fact that 45 percent of Americans aren't paying income taxes because their income is at this subsistence level is an indictment of this economy.


Of course some may wish to blame the workers for their low wages. But the fact that jobs have been flying overseas, the h1-b visas and other factors have depressed wages may be to much critical thinking to expect from the OP.


Secondly, the point that must economists find a consumption tax as a bad idea is because it is regressive in nature. While the working poor may not be spending alot of money, they will be spending all of it just to survive, they tend to not be able to save money... you know because the have to eat and support their family. So adding an additional tax on them really would have adverse repercussions.


Something to think about...

 

A family of 4 living on 2 minimum wage jobs have an income of 35k a year before any of the numerous types of assistance available.

 

The most popular consumption tax plan, the Fair Tax, provides front-loaded tax relief for low income families, but that doesn't matter to people who are against it.

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Louis learner.

 

Can you please learn to spell, punctuate, and proofread.   It is really aggravating trying to read your posts and figure out what you are trying to say. 

---

A family of 4 living on 2 minimum wage jobs have an income of 35k a year before any of the numerous types of assistance available.


The most popular consumption tax plan, the Fair Tax, provides front-loaded tax relief for low income families, but that doesn't matter to people who are against it.

So basically it's the same solution for the poor as we currently have with the current income tax, except that the upper classes get to pay even less taxes... which this reduces revenue, which means cuts to federal programs that are needed by the poor.


Dude, it's a suckers deal made to cut taxes for the rich, over you and me in the middle, and either hose the poor or leave then in about the same situation they are already in.


I read a Cato institute article on this concept, it's all snake oil and wishful thinking, sorry. I just don't buy it.


Provide a valid link, and I'll look into it and consider it. But from what I've read, in skeptical.

---

So basically it's the same solution for the poor as we currently have with the current income tax, except that the upper classes get to pay even less taxes... which this reduces revenue, which means cuts to federal programs that are needed by the poor.


Dude, it's a suckers deal made to cut taxes for the rich, over you and me in the middle, and either hose the poor or leave then in about the same situation they are already in.


I read a Cato institute article on this concept, it's all snake oil and wishful thinking, sorry. I just don't buy it.


Provide a valid link, and I'll look into it and consider it. But from what I've read, in skeptical.

 

Have you read the book?

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

Louis learner.

  

Can you please learn to spell, punctuate, and proofread.   It is really aggravating trying to read your posts and figure out what you are trying to say.

Louis is a teacher. Is that so difficult to understand?

---

Have you read the book?

I've read books. I'm not sure I've read THE book...

---

Can you please learn to spell, punctuate, and proofread. It is really aggravating trying to read your posts and figure out what you are trying to say.

Translation: my fetishistic idolatry of IRS agents was exposed as immateur naive and misguided. Can we please change the subject.

---

I've read books. I'm not sure I've read THE book...

 



 

http://www.amazon.com/The-Fair-Tax-Book-...0060875496

---

“An empty vessel makes the loudest sound, so they that have the least wit are the greatest babblers.”. - Plato

1.) if it replaces Fica then a consumption tax isn't an inherently regressive shift.


2.) not double taxing used items also provides relief for the bottom end of wage earners.

---

2.) not double taxing used items also provides relief for the bottom end of wage earners.

Oh, that's a good point. Now, instead of letting them eat cake, we'll let them eat cake that's already had a few bites taken out of it. Brilliant!

---

Oh, that's a good point. Now, instead of letting them eat cake, we'll let them eat cake that's already had a few bites taken out of it. Brilliant!

I think groceries are still tax exempt as well.

---