Fairness

[ConHog]

I'd much rather invade another country like Saudi Arabia, steal all their stuff (yep, including oil) and use all their resources, give US manufacturers as much as they need/want then get the heck out and move on to the next country. No need for taxes and eventually we end up ruling the known universe!

LOL

I said in 2003 when we invaded Iraq, we should have drove up kicked down the Iraq sign at the border , hung up a HUGE neon Exxon sign, gave every Iraq a blue smock and a slurpee and put them to work producing oil for us. They would have been too busy and too tired to be insurgents.

[gabosaurus]

I prefer a national sales tax at the retail level. You buy something, you pay tax on it. You purchase something abroad and bring it here, you pay taxes on it. You are in complete control of how much tax you pay.


no deductions, no credits, no loopholes, no nothing.

You don't believe that would bring down sales?
I believe that those who make below a certain level of income shouldn't have additional burdens placed upon them. And I don't get the ideas that those above a certain income level shouldn't pay more. The "job providers" do a good job of finding way to pay fewer taxes. Taking away their loopholes would merely put them more in line with average folks who don't have access to such methods.

[Trigg]

You don't believe that would bring down sales?
I believe that those who make below a certain level of income shouldn't have additional burdens placed upon them. And I don't get the ideas that those above a certain income level shouldn't pay more. The "job providers" do a good job of finding way to pay fewer taxes. Taking away their loopholes would merely put them more in line with average folks who don't have access to such methods.

Honestly the more you post the less I believe that you work with low income children in the school system. I work in healthcare and the people who come in on welfair are the ones who smell like smoke and look like they've been on a three day bender. Guess what, smokes and booze cost money, but those people would rather spend their money on that than diapers or formula.

Almost half the damn population of this country doesn't pay ANY TAXES. These people know how to work the system and they do a great job of keeping their income just below the cut off point so they continue collecting these benefits.

The middle class is being screwed over. The rich can afford everything and the poor have everything given to them including free food, free education, free healthcare and on the radio today free tax processing.

If you do the right thing in this country and get married before having kids, go to school and only have kids you can afford you're an idiot/sucker so much for morals and a sense of responsibility

[Abbey Marie]

LOL

I said in 2003 when we invaded Iraq, we should have drove up kicked down the Iraq sign at the border , hung up a HUGE neon Exxon sign, gave every Iraq a blue smock and a slurpee and put them to work producing oil for us. They would have been too busy and too tired to be insurgents.

Racist!

[ConHog]

You don't believe that would bring down sales?
I believe that those who make below a certain level of income shouldn't have additional burdens placed upon them. And I don't get the ideas that those above a certain income level shouldn't pay more. The "job providers" do a good job of finding way to pay fewer taxes. Taking away their loopholes would merely put them more in line with average folks who don't have access to such methods.

No, I don't think it would cut down sales. not by any appreciable amount.

And a sales tax WOULD get rid of all the loopholes. It would be FAIR to everyone. YOU only seem concerned with making sure the poor don't have to pay anything.

[fj1200]

Enough is of course subjective FJ. The poor who don't pay anything probably feel they pay enough to. I disagree with them as well.

Thus your politicking for the Just Compensation Board. Government tax policy should raise revenue not determine someone's subjective definition of "fair" or social engineering.

Also, a lot of very wealthy people pay next to nothing. Due primarily to tax credits and shelters. I know this because my husband advises some of them.

I wasn't aware you supported the FairTax; good on 'ya.

[ConHog]

Thus your politicking for the Just Compensation Board. Government tax policy should raise revenue not determine someone's subjective definition of "fair" or social engineering.



I wasn't aware you supported the FairTax; good on 'ya.

Incorrect. I am not politicking for anyone to have any sorts of limits on their income. If a company feels a CEO is worth $20M a year, then pay him that, but his tax rate is going to rise relative to how much more he makes than the lowest paid employee in the company.

FJ you can't possibly convince me that you truly think it is a good thing when the CEO of a company is raking in millions while hundreds if not thousands of their employees are on government assistance because THEY don't get paid enough to make it without it. Why shouldn't said CEO have to pay a little more in taxes to help offset that assistance? And if in the process the CEO decides he'd rather decrease his own taxes and give the money directly to his employees himself all the better.

Is that using taxes to do a bit of social justice? Probably, but who gives a shit, we use government rules and regulations to push a little social justice all the time, and as long as people are involved straight capitalism will always need a little tempering.

[shockwave]

Is that what I said at all?

Nope. I just think that IF a CEO is making $20M a year while he has employees of his are on welfare b/c of their low wages then that welfare should be paid by HIM, in the form of higher taxes. Said CEO can make $80M a year for a all I care, as long as he's willing to pay the higher tax rate if he's using lower paid employees.

I don't make 100X what any employees make so why should I have to subsidize his greed?

I could fix social security as well. Anyone who in the last 5 years of their earning career averaged $1M in salary. Thanks for the donations, you're ineligible to receive social security benefits.

Apparently you lack even a basic understanding of economics. But from whay I have read nobody ever said you did.

[jimnyc]

Apparently you lack even a basic understanding of economics. But from whay I have read nobody ever said you did.

Do "we" know you from somewhere, or do you know ConHog from elsewhere? Just an odd first post is why I ask...

[ConHog]

Do "we" know you from somewhere, or do you know ConHog from elsewhere? Just an odd first post is why I ask...

Was an odd post, I thought it was FJ at first.

[fj1200]

Incorrect. I am not politicking for anyone to have any sorts of limits on their income. If a company feels a CEO is worth $20M a year, then pay him that, but his tax rate is going to rise relative to how much more he makes than the lowest paid employee in the company.

His tax rate is already higher but it should have nothing to do with whatever his "lower paid employees" get paid.

Oh, and I'll take you off the shortlist.

FJ you can't possibly convince me that you truly think it is a good thing when the CEO of a company is raking in millions while hundreds if not thousands of their employees are on government assistance because THEY don't get paid enough to make it without it. Why shouldn't said CEO have to pay a little more in taxes to help offset that assistance? And if in the process the CEO decides he'd rather decrease his own taxes and give the money directly to his employees himself all the better.

Is that using taxes to do a bit of social justice? Probably, but who gives a shit, we use government rules and regulations to push a little social justice all the time, and as long as people are involved straight capitalism will always need a little tempering.

I don't think one has anything to do with the other. Your pal Bill decided he should rein in CEO compensation back in '93 by limiting the deductability of executive compensation over $1mm. Do you know what happened? CEO salary now rarely rises above 1mm but is packed with options that increase their overall package. That worked out well didn't it?

Pushing social justice by government fiat creates outcomes that are opposite of their intended effects. Social Security? It's no longer about security, it's become a retirement program. By providing people a SS retirement means that they aren't going to invest for themselves and are no longer encouraged to build an asset base that they can live off of or pass on to the next generation. Is it any wonder that the poor are permanently poor? If you want to make sure old people don't eat dog food and live out of cardboard boxes create a program that helps those that need it. Don't create a program that supports every old person over 65 including those who don't need it.

[fj1200]

Was an odd post, I thought it was FJ at first.

Seems like something I would say.

[shockwave]

Do "we" know you from somewhere, or do you know ConHog from elsewhere? Just an odd first post is why I ask...

Actually you dont know me from somewhere. I have been reading over this thread and I see odds and ends about people saying the rich dont pay enough tax and all of that nonsense. I simply chose to reply to his post. It could have been anyone.

[jimnyc]

Actually you dont know me from somewhere. I have been reading over this thread and I see odds and ends about people saying the rich dont pay enough tax and all of that nonsense. I simply chose to reply to his post. It could have been anyone.

Good enough for me, was just curious.

And welcome to DP!!

[Abbey Marie]

Welcome, shockwave