Everyone supposed to have skin in the game - but when will the 47% who pay no fed. income tax going to pay their share?

you are right on....a 10% tax on everyone make sense. My only problem is calling it fair, because the word "fair" is too subjective. While some think a 10% tax on everyone is fair, others believe that the rich paying more is fair. So I would say that it is an "equal" tax. "There is all the difference in the world between treating people equally and attempting to make them equal." - F.A. Hayek

luv2run wrote:

This is classic...

Yes money is withheld for entitlement programs like social security that you will get back (in theory) one day. Those are NOT income taxes, they are payroll taxes and are capped (around $105K I think for this year).

Also, government does not "invest". it spends and too often wastes that money. Libs will say it is wasted on the military and cons will say on social programs and on things like Solyndra.

Bringing property taxes into this is meaningless as is sales tax as the OP was specific in talking about fed income tax.

Here is my idea: everyone pays 10% income tax and every dollar earned. No deductions. No cap. Of course I prefer the FairTax (www.fairtax.org).

responding to hs troll wrote:

random a hole wrote:

So your idea is an overall regressive tax policy?

can you read ??

flat tax == regressive tax

take econ 101, reading 101, and get back to us please.

Um, you might be the one with the reading problem. I have explained it once before on this thread, check it out, see if you dispute it, then post again (you won't), but to put it succintly: A flat federal income tax will mean that the complete tax policy for US citizeens (including ALL other taxes) is regressive. Lower incomes will pay a higher % of their income in taxes than do higher incomes.

I have taken econ 101 (as well as many classes in the 400s) and you are correct, this is painfully basic crap.

Now get back to me please and explain my error.

let me ask you how this argument went over in the election? it is good when republicans admit that the top 2% are their only constituency. The other 98% needs to understand this and vote democrat. But don't forget that it is precisely the Republicans who under Bush dropped federal income taxes (very unequally, skewing far more to the rich) to the point that many in the bottom half of income would not pay that category of taxes any more. So, blame the republicans for that. But as this tax fight shows, if you like oligarchy, vote republican.

jjjjjjj wrote:

let me ask you how this argument went over in the election? it is good when republicans admit that the top 2% are their only constituency. The other 98% needs to understand this and vote democrat. But don't forget that it is precisely the Republicans who under Bush dropped federal income taxes (very unequally, skewing far more to the rich) to the point that many in the bottom half of income would not pay that category of taxes any more. So, blame the republicans for that. But as this tax fight shows, if you like oligarchy, vote republican.

this is an extremely naive and ignorant explanation of the bush tax cuts. those tax cuts cut taxes for EVERYONE (who was paying taxes). of course wealthy people got a bigger cut because they were paying A LOT more to begin with. using really basic numbers, if someone were making $1,000,000 and were paying 40% in taxes pre cuts ($400,000), that person would be paying 35% post cuts ($350,000). that's $50,000 less. how is someone who is making $70,000 supposed to receive > $50,000 in tax cuts when he/she wasn't paying anywhere near that to begin with. even if that $70,000 person got his/her taxes cut to $0, it wouldn't total $50,000.

also, you might want to go back and re-read your poly sci 101 textbooks and learn what the definition of oligarchy is because, based on how you attempted to use it above, you clearly do not understand what it means.

luv2run wrote:

This is classic...

Here is my idea: everyone pays 10% income tax and every dollar earned. No deductions. No cap. Of course I prefer the FairTax (www.fairtax.org).

Yes, the "fair tax". Because it is definitely "FAIR" to cut taxes on billionaires, and on people like LeBron James, Paris Hilton, the Walton family (Walmart), Warren Buffet, Bill Gates, the Kennedy's, the Bush's, the Romneys and the Obama's, etc, etc, while RAISING taxes on people who have nothing. Yes, so FAIR and brilliant!

Yes, the problem in this country is that the super-rich are over-taxed. Yes, that's "classic" all right.

And despite MAURICE's "stats", when one combines ALL taxes, the richest 1% or 10% only pay a little more in taxes (as a % of their income) than do other classes of people. This is because state and payroll and sales taxes are very regressive. So the OVERALL tax system is only slightly progressive. What a crime that it is not more "fair" and that rich can't catch a break in this country. So sad....boo f'n hoo for them.

What is funniest though is that the rich are laughing their asses off all the way to the bank at blue collar slobs like MAURICE/CHRIS MATTHEWS the moron. They can't believe that so many idiot uneducated right wingers like him fight tooth and nail so they can afford a 5th vacation house, while citing nonsense like "trickle down economics"! They say: yeah, our success will trickle down to you..... when we PISS ON YOUR GRAVES, YOU REDNECK FOOLS.

Reading this jibberish, three questions come to mind: why have we allowed Obama to make it so unpopular to achieve? Why do those who do so little expect so much from the most productive members of our society? And, why do people who pay nothing into the system have such strong opinions on how much the money should be confiscated in the name of “fairness” from the better earners and how that money is to be spent once confiscated?

Remove from the discussion the very young, very old, the infirmed and the very short-term unemployed; we are a civilized society and as such, we must take care of those who cannot care for themselves.

Now, everyone else is earning what they deserve. For the most part, wealthy people made themselves that way through good choices, sacrifice and hard work (I exclude from this group morons like Paris Hilton (and others whom inherited their wealth) and criminals).

Likewise, poor people made themselves that way. Yes, poverty is a choice. Chose not to finish high school, chose not to go to college, chose leisure over work, chose drugs, chose sitting on the sofa all day…that’s choosing poverty. In all cases (again, other than the very young, very old, infirmed, etc), poverty can be traced to a series of really bad decisions.

Redistributionist policies, like Obama’s, serve only to reward poor decision-making and grow the ranks of the poor. Why don’t people understand this very simple fact? (OK, so maybe that’s four questions).

Anyone able to grasp the big picture, who isn't easily manipulated by a liberal media and corrupt politicians knows what caused the financial crisis. It's not exactly a mystery that some assclown needs to solve for us...but thankyouverymuch for the offer, d-bag.

and if you enjoy marxist corporatism and a prez who's eerily similiar to Kim Jong, vote democrat...comrade

Actually NOBODY is supposed to have any skin in the game. This dialogue perfectly illustrates everything that's wrong with the income tax. Allegedly, the income tax and the social programs the government funds with it exist for the purpose of promoting peaceful cooperation among men. But in reality, all we're doing is fighting over each other's property. Nobody wants to pay, but everybody wants to loot. Instead of fighting, we should emancipate ourselves from each other by allowing every individual to pursue his own self-interest, neither paying income taxes nor collecting benefits funded by money taken from others. THAT is the key to peaceful cooperation.

sure T-Rex. Tax & spend socialism always works, rich people should be punished for..........being rich, taxing small business owners more has zero effect on anything anywhere (they can just go pluck some more ben franklins off the money tree in the backyard), hard data/facts/stats pale in the face of T-Rex 'logic', rich people don't know anything about economics and are almost as stupid & illiterate as you about fiscal/tax policy.

And...9 reindeer landed on the roof of your apartment Chistmas Eve..

+10.

My name is Lance wrote:

Anyone able to grasp the big picture, who isn't easily manipulated by a liberal media and corrupt politicians knows what caused the financial crisis. It's not exactly a mystery that some assclown needs to solve for us...but thankyouverymuch for the offer, d-bag.

It's fairly obvious that you don't.

The prevalence of this belief in the Republican party is why I can't bring myself to be associated with them. Incredibly ignorant to believe that rich people are rich because they worked hard and poor people are poor because they were lazy and made bad decisions, and had they only worked hard, they'd be rich too (even excluding the groups you mentioned, this is patently false). I'm not saying we can make the playing field perfectly level, but to imply that it is and that success is exclusively derived from decisions/work ethic is laughable.