Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Fair tax

44 posts in this topic

Posted · Report post

I think we should tax the poor at a higher rate because they use public services more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

I think we should tax the poor at a higher rate because they use public services more.

there is a lot more to this argument than just "poor get the services."

i can't find the paper right now, but the three main things I can remember in this country specifically

- Tax breaks for corporations/cuts in business taxes directly effect the poorest parts of a society/city. For example, Atlanta is one of the most "business friendly" cities in the country. Almost all of the taxes came from property, which of course isn't a good way to run things but when it was going well it has the veneer of going well. Now, there are no more than 40 cops on duty at all time inside the perimeter (terrifying), they've begun closing fire stations in poorer parts of town, and MARTA doesn't even run on fridays anymore

- Airport construction can almost never be done without government subsidy, and the airline industry as a hole can't operate successfully without extensive government assistance. these dollars specifically don't go into things like a more egalitarian rail system, or social programs, and air travel almost certainly doesn't help the poor in any way shape or form.

- war almost exclusively benefits the wealthy, and I don't think that needs to be explained.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah but maybe, and this is kinda a long shot but man if it worked, if we taxed the poor to the point that they couldn't afford to live here they would go to Canada and Mexico and we wouldn't have to worry about them anymore.

Think how awesome it would be if we could cancel the whole social safety net because we ran off those who relied on it. One that happened they could cut everyone else's taxes back to a reasonable rate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

- war almost exclusively benefits the wealthy, and I don't think that needs to be explained.

Which is why I don't have a problem with government spending lots of money on the military (although the waste is bullshit). The people who want that extra plane or submarine are, in fact, paying for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

You're also not taking into consideration how vehemently opposed the AARP would be to a Fair Tax. And if they won't go for it, you've got a giant hurdle in your way...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Which is why I don't have a problem with government spending lots of money on the military (although the waste is bullpoo). The people who want that extra plane or submarine are, in fact, paying for it.

yes but you can't look at these things in a vacuum.

[ame]

[/ame]

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Yeah but maybe, and this is kinda a long shot but man if it worked, if we taxed the poor to the point that they couldn't afford to live here they would go to Canada and Mexico and we wouldn't have to worry about them anymore.

Think how awesome it would be if we could cancel the whole social safety net because we ran off those who relied on it. One that happened they could cut everyone else's taxes back to a reasonable rate.

the thought of all those poor unwed mothers and their kids being herded across the border makes me cackle with glee.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted · Report post

Fair tax on paper is der bomb. Implementation will be like going to the moon a year after Kitty Hawk.

Progressive and consumption tax is possible.

You have to weigh out the unintended consequences of these changes and the winners and losers.

Think about this. States are saying due to the economy they don't have money. Ok. So what are most states sources of revenues? Property taxes. So you have a model that is built on someone doing well enough to buy a car or even better a home. And you get those funds once a year. Hmm. K. Sure.

Because of the mess we are in its forced some lazy freaking beauracrats to fall back in love with innovation. Resourcefulness and being practical. Hurray.

I think a hybrid approach for taxes has to happen. You also have to run pilot programs to avoid a total disruptiong of the tax revenue grid. Think the credit markets freezing up cause issues? Try to upend the system we got to make somebody feel good.

I have said this many times but start local with tax choices. Each tax paying citizen can choose to increase an allocation of funds toward big areas that typically impact the largest segment of society without any political agenda.

Health, infastructure, public protection(cops,firemen etc) and schools.

Each person, if he or she sees fit, can allocate up to X # of dollars to anyone one of those groups. This is not the MAIN source of revenue but if eliminates funding gaps from unforseen shortfalls(see foreclosures which eliminate tax revenue for counties) and builds in a buffer year after year.

Progressive tax. No more food tax for those making under 20k a year as an example. You only focus on areas where the top 1% pay the same as the bottom on basic staples of living. Very archaic and unfair.

Each state bring back yearly inspections. This takes away states making up the difference in them no longer getting this fee with you getting pulled over left and right.

Sin taxes. Again, a typical lazy govt approach and increasing revenue.

Its the easy way out for lame brain morons.

This is radical and will never happen but INsource each states big expenditures like school buses, trucking etc to folks like UPS etc. Major companies insource to UPS all the time to warehouse their products and ship them or do logistical work for them.

It saves time, money and creates jobs here still.

State govts, not all areas but most are so inept at being run it's shameful.

They spend money to do a study on saving money, they the public freaks out and out of fear of not being re elected the politician scraps the proposal of the study to show they have guts only to lose money two times over.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites