|
| | 
die with honor
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:24 PM
Posts: 4,619
Visits: 16,386
|
|
There is currently a bill in committee in the US House or Reps (H.R. 25) and a companion to it in the Senate (S.R. 25) called the Fair Tax Bill. Essentially, it would eliminate the Federal Income tax (and the IRS), the alternate minimum tax, corporate taxes, the death tax, the gift tax, and Social Security and Medicare withholdings, and replace them with a flat-rate consumption tax on goods and services. I've read quite a bit about it, and can't see any downside, other than all those IRS and H&R Block workers that would be out of work. It is revenue neutral, that is, the rate (currently proposed to be 23%), would exactly replace the revenue generated under the current system. It would replace the US Federal tax regulations, which run over 54,000 pages and well over a million words, with a tax plan that could be completely described on a 3x5 note card (one side, only). The bill also calls for the repeal of the 16th ammendment to the US Constitution.
type hr 25 into the search field when the page comes up
That ought to fix it, the first item on the list that comes up is the bill, sorry
|
--
******************************
Mine honor is my life; both grow in one:
Take honor from me, and my life is done:
Da Bard ... But something tosk would say.
Americans used to roar like lions for liberty; now they bleat like sheep for security.
~ Norman Vincent Peale~
We don't have to live in the kind of America the two Major parties have in store for us.
Together, let us lay the foundations for an America worthy of our Founding Fathers.
~Ron Paul~
|  |  |
| |
| | 
televisionary.
 
Last Seen:
9/14/2007 3:08 PM
Posts: 1,543
Visits: 2,170
|
| The posted link isn't working at the moment.
You could argue this two ways: make a case from principle, or based on what the outcomes of such a change would be.
Income tax is usually seen as progressive by the left, on both counts.
A consumption tax... and abolishing income tax, corporate tax, death tax...will that effectively transfer money from the poor to the rich?
And such a radical change in tax law, is it likely to get passed? |
--
No man is an island, entire of itself; every man is a piece of the continent, a part of the main. If a clod be washed away by the sea, Europe is the less, as well as if a promontory were, as well as if a manor of thy friend's or of thine own were: any man's death diminishes me, because I am involved in mankind, and therefore never send to know for whom the bell tolls; it tolls for thee. - John Donne |  | |
| |
| | 
DG: Hopeful Wanderer
Last Seen:
10/3/2008 12:02 PM
Posts: 681
Visits: 2,435
|
| | |
| | 
Telepathic Surgeon
Last Seen:
7/26/2008 7:30 PM
Posts: 1,887
Visits: 3,536
|
| | |
| | 
Grognard fantôme
Last Seen:
Today @ 9:04 AM
Posts: 7,240
Visits: 9,603
|
| Actually, I think that this sort of thing is about as left as you get is'nt it? The idea is, it would eliminate all the loopholes and addendums that allow rich folks (and corporations) to avoid paying the full amount of income tax that they "should" according to the main parts of the code, but "don't have to" based on the "fine print."
My father-in-law, rest in peace, was a medium-sized business man, and he was rabidly opposed to the income tax structure as it currently stands. He would have loved this.
Me, I'm not sure I'm either for or against it, having not read more, but it DOES sound interesting. My only concern are the unintended consequences, namely, the first one that comes to mind are charitable sources that benefit hugely from the current code structure. One of the main "shelters" is for rich people to give money to charities. Heck, I myself get to right off about $200 per year in charity off my income tax. If you take away income tax, do you take away this right off, and if you do take away this right off, what happens to all those charities?
Asa Candler, founder of Coke essentially CREATED Emory University, the place where I got my higher education. No rich Asa Candler, no Emory, no Scipio with Ph.D.. OR potentially, even with rich Asa Candler but no charity right-off for rich Asa to save himself some income tax on, no motivation to give the endowment for Emory, still no Scipio with Ph.D.. The list of filthy rich guys who started up major societal benefiting institutions is quite long.
Phlanthropy on Wikipedia
Philanthropy is a major source of income for artistic, musical, religious, and humanitarian causes and for universities.
List of Corporate Leaders and Phlanthropists
Reading List on the History of Phlanthropy in the US
Okay, so the idea here is that, by giving people the benefit of getting filthy rich, and then avoiding giving their money to the government by instead giving it to charities, society benefits. This is not some kind of capitalist scheme, as Marx might have tried to argue, or as ignorate leftists might argue. In fact, redistribution from a elite few to the rest, at the discretion of the elite few, but with various social structures to encourage and regulate it, is an extremely ancient custom. In Botswana, it was called Mfisa, and in Europe prior to the Industrial revolution it was called patronage.
If this new tax code eliminates the motivation for rich folks to give away their money, because otherwise they'll lose it as income tax, then I am definitely opposed to it. |
--
"'The front' is wherever you stop running away. Get used to it. This is what modern warfare looks like." K T Cat | | | |
| |
| | 
huff huff
Last Seen:
Today @ 8:16 AM
Posts: 1,662
Visits: 3,895
|
| | |
| |
die with honor
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:24 PM
Posts: 4,619
Visits: 16,386
|
| A consumption tax... and abolishing income tax, corporate tax, death tax...will that effectively transfer money from the poor to the rich?
The more you spend the more tax you pay, so I would say no.
There is also a provision in there that would send household's under a certain income a monthly check from the government. Another provision would send every taxpayer a certain amount to offset the national mean for non taxable items. Seems rather odd to me ... why not just have the non taxable items not be taxed?
..will it pass..
Not A chance! If it even gets close the Dems are going to start a massive lie on how the "poor" will get the short end of the stick, and how it cuts out SS and medicare.
It only cuts the withholding tax for these two items but they will make it sound like the items themselves will be cut.
Then there will be the, "YOU'LL LOOSE ALL YOUR MORTGAGE DEDUCTIONS ... PANIC NOW", what won't be emphasized it that you no longer have anything deducted from your paycheck.
Not to mention they dare not allow a republican administration to pass anything that would be good for every citizen. No doubt we will see a huge FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt) campaign if it looks like it will pass.
... are charitable sources that benefit hugely ...
I would disagree with that statement completely, as with the rest of your example. That does not mean that you may not be right, just that I disagree. The very wealthy give away money because they can ... and they have more than they can ever use to begin with.
Right here in Taos an anonymous donor gave 2.2 million to rebuild the public swimming pool facilities.
So he got to give uncle Sammy $836,000 less in income tax, do you for a single minute believe that the tax break was the reason they gave the money ... in a pigs eye ... It was given because it would benefit the community, and because they could afford it, and thank you to America for allowing them to be achievers.
I am not in the least saying that every wealthy person feels this way, but I'll bet far more than 90% do.
What is failed to be understood by the average working man is that the vast majority of the very wealthy do not mind giving and sharing ... the thing they rebel against is being told they "have to give" and who they have to give it to, by those who did not do the work involved to earn it.
|
--
******************************
Mine honor is my life; both grow in one:
Take honor from me, and my life is done:
Da Bard ... But something tosk would say.
Americans used to roar like lions for liberty; now they bleat like sheep for security.
~ Norman Vincent Peale~
We don't have to live in the kind of America the two Major parties have in store for us.
Together, let us lay the foundations for an America worthy of our Founding Fathers.
~Ron Paul~
| | | |
| |
| | 
Second Lieutenant
Last Seen:
11/17/2008 8:17 AM
Posts: 1,433
Visits: 3,707
|
| | |
| |
die with honor
Last Seen:
Today @ 12:24 PM
Posts: 4,619
Visits: 16,386
|
| Well, I do not know a whole lot about the way Canadian higher education (I am assuming that you meant higher education) works so I really can't comment on that.
I have said before that I have little praise for the U.S. system ... and some strange ideas on how to fix it. 
Being a high school dropout and having only two years of junior college ... I do believe that being taught how to learn is far more important than being indoctrinated with a teachers idea of what one should learn. |
--
******************************
Mine honor is my life; both grow in one:
Take honor from me, and my life is done:
Da Bard ... But something tosk would say.
Americans used to roar like lions for liberty; now they bleat like sheep for security.
~ Norman Vincent Peale~
We don't have to live in the kind of America the two Major parties have in store for us.
Together, let us lay the foundations for an America worthy of our Founding Fathers.
~Ron Paul~
| |
|
|
|
