Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

You'll also give a massive tax break to the wealthy, but hey, who's counting?

No I wouldn't. Their itemized deductions are currently > $40-45K. Limiting the deduction to $40-45K, would increase their taxable income. They wouldn't (shouldn't) be able to hide stuff. Oh, and I forgot to mention, tax all sources of income. And corporations follow GAAP.

The alternative is a consumption tax, figuring that the wealthy spend more than the middle / lower class.

 

[SJHovey]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

I always get a kick out of looking at charts like these.

http://taxfoundation.org/sites/taxfoundation.org/files/docs/fed_individual_rate_history_adjusted.pdf

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

No I wouldn't. Their itemized deductions are currently > $40-45K. Limiting the deduction to $40-45K, would increase their taxable income. They wouldn't (shouldn't) be able to hide stuff. Oh, and I forgot to mention, tax all sources of income. And corporations follow GAAP.

The alternative is a consumption tax, figuring that the wealthy spend more than the middle / lower class.

Your plan wouldn't be a tax break over current practice only because current practice is such an enormous tax break.

I am with you for killing all the deductions and adjusting the brackets accordingly... but after restoring real progressiveness.

 

[Rover]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

No I wouldn't. Their itemized deductions are currently > $40-45K. Limiting the deduction to $40-45K, would increase their taxable income. They wouldn't (shouldn't) be able to hide stuff. Oh, and I forgot to mention, tax all sources of income. And corporations follow GAAP.

The alternative is a consumption tax, figuring that the wealthy spend more than the middle / lower class.

I'd have to see the #'s joey. While I like the idea of all income being taxable, I'd have to be sure it generated the equivalent of current tax revenue. Recall Romney didn't even bother to try to explain how his tax plan would be revenue neutral, which forced even The Economist to call him out on it and they never met a tax cut they didn't like.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

I'd have to see the #'s joey. While I like the idea of all income being taxable, I'd have to be sure it generated the equivalent of current tax revenue. Recall Romney didn't even bother to try to explain how his tax plan would be revenue neutral, which forced even The Economist to call him out on it and they never met a tax cut they didn't like.

The Economist is a little smarter than that. They love to shelter the wealthy, but it's from a perspective that actually understands economics, albeit from an Etonian ivory tower view. For Pete Peterson and groups like Tax Foundation tax sheltering is the entire program; for The Economist, when they advocate it there's actually some thinking involved and a goal beyond serving their paymasters.

 

[joecct]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

The Economist is a little smarter than that. They love to shelter the wealthy, but it's from a perspective that actually understands economics, albeit from an Etonian ivory tower view. For Pete Peterson and groups like Tax Foundation tax sheltering is the entire program; for The Economist, when they advocate it there's actually some thinking involved and a goal beyond serving their paymasters.

Remember there are two economies - the first economy is what most of us play in. Everything gets recorded (and taxed). The second economy is sometimes called the "underground" economy. It's based on cash or barter and very little of it gets reported (or taxed). Some say that #2 is just/almost as large as #1. Do you want a slice of the underground economy? If so, the only way is to tax consumption.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Remember there are two economies - the first economy is what most of us play in. Everything gets recorded (and taxed). The second economy is sometimes called the "underground" economy. It's based on cash or barter and very little of it gets reported (or taxed). Some say that #2 is just/almost as large as #1. Do you want a slice of the underground economy? If so, the only way is to tax consumption.

I'd actually prefer to tax wealth rather than income, but in practice it's impossible to do.

Consumption taxes are highly regressive and thus counter-productive unless you exempt so much stuff that the accounting becomes a nightmare, but they'd make sense for large purchases (say, a 25% surcharge on primary residences over $1M and all secondary residences).

A Tobin tax is probably the single best source of revenue that would also be salutary.

 

[unofan]

No I wouldn't. Their itemized deductions are currently > $40-45K. Limiting the deduction to $40-45K, would increase their taxable income. They wouldn't (shouldn't) be able to hide stuff. Oh, and I forgot to mention, tax all sources of income. And corporations follow GAAP.

The alternative is a consumption tax, figuring that the wealthy spend more than the middle / lower class.

They don't as a percentage of income. Consumption taxes hit the poor the most.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Consumption taxes hit the poor the most.

Not necessarily. If you exempt food and clothing under some reasonable amount (say $50) and slide the tax scale progressively on bigger and bigger luxuries (50% on the $5M house; 100% on the $50M house, 200% on the $100M house, etc...) you're on to something.

Take it as given that the system will always be biased in favor of the rich, simply because they have more resources to bias with. Push as hard as you can in the other direction, and the practical result might leave some room for middle class growth.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Rob Portman abstains courteously. Deval Patrick alsssssssssssssnore...

Can't figure out why you'd take yourself out so early.

 

[unofan]

Not necessarily. If you exempt food and clothing under some reasonable amount (say $50) and slide the tax scale progressively on bigger and bigger luxuries (50% on the $5M house; 100% on the $50M house, 200% on the $100M house, etc...) you're on to something.

Take it as given that the system will always be biased in favor of the rich, simply because they have more resources to bias with. Push as hard as you can in the other direction, and the practical result might leave some room for middle class growth.

Consumption tax is simply code for the Fair Tax, which is about as regressive as they come.

If you believe Joe was referring to anything like what you described, I've got some bridges for sale as well.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Consumption tax is simply code for the Fair Tax, which is about as regressive as they come.

If you believe Joe was referring to anything like what you described, I've got some bridges for sale as well.

I dunno what's going on in either of your heads; I was responding to pixels forming letters clustered into words arranged in sentences on an internet forum.

 

[unofan]

I dunno what's going on in either of your heads; I was responding to pixels forming letters clustered into words arranged in sentences on an internet forum.

Yeah, I can't imagine how I ever thought fishy was your alter ego in your absence...

So. I've got this bridge for sale down in Madison County. Care to make a bid?

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

They don't as a percentage of income. Consumption taxes hit the poor the most.

Yeah, sales taxes are the most regressive taxes out there.

 

[dxmnkd316]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Consumption tax is simply code for the Fair Tax, which is about as regressive as they come.

If you believe Joe was referring to anything like what you described, I've got some bridges for sale as well.

I'm still baffled how Kepler could be for the flat tax (please stop calling it the fair tax, because it's anything but).

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

I'm still baffled how Kepler could be for the flat tax (please stop calling it the fair tax, because it's anything but).

Every time someone says this they're usually completely discounting payroll taxes.

Fair tax works if you throw the payroll taxes in with it.

Grab one number for the deduction. 40,000?

Then flat tax the rest of the income at the same rate.

Works for me.

 

[joecct]

I'm still baffled how Kepler could be for the flat tax (please stop calling it the fair tax, because it's anything but).

The climate today is if I disagree with something, it must be wrong.

If you pick the good parts from A and the good parts from B and add something else that nobody thought of, you get a solution that, while not perfect, gets implemented.

But if your political stance is my way or the highway, then, by all means, blame everybody else for the world's problems.

Meanwhile, the 11th street bridge in DC has been declared surplus.

 

[jericho]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

Just checking in, and by no means do I intend to continue posting in this thread, but.....

At my 2003 graduation from RPI at was then known as Ned Harkness Field, on a beautiful mid-May day, I had a speaker who delivered one of the best speeches that I have ever heard. That man had his head on straight, and seemed to have a great ethical standard that he held himself and his co-workers to. I remember thinking to myself that if I ever make it in the business world or whatever field I choose, I hoped that I could conduct myself with the same character that he does, and that I will try. That man just completed the riskiest operation of his career, and I remember him saying that he didn't feel nervous, and that he was getting paid to not be nervous and do a job to the best of his ability. He did, and the result was the world's first successful operation of twins conjoined at the head. That man was Dr. Benjamin Carson. Granted, I haven't listened to any of his political views and the like, but if he still has the same ethical makeup as I thought he did back then, we may see a revival of this country.

Edit: I don't classify myself as democrat or republican. I'm just making an observation.

 

[Kepler]

Re: Campaign 2016 - Run-HRC? Honest Injun? Gott Mitt Himmel? RyanRubioCruzCrud?

I'm still baffled how Kepler could be for the flat tax (please stop calling it the fair tax, because it's anything but).

I am not for a flat tax. I was responding to the notion that a sales tax is by definition regressive. It isn't if it varies by the cost of the item.

I did used to be for a flat tax with a huge personal exemption, however I was gradually convinced by conservative arguments that it is not a good idea for a large segment of the population to pay no taxes at all. That ways lies silliness like Mittens' 47% comment.

Simplicity of the tax code is a noble goal, since the big driver of complexity is tax avoidance via accountancy. Something like a tax structure with marginal rates of 5% for every dollar up to $50k, 25% to $100k, 45% to $250k, 65% to $500k, 85% to $5M, and 99% above $5M would be fine by me, along with wiping out every deduction and eliminating the distinction between earned income and capital gains. Note that although the 25% up to $100k is lower that the current rate, it would actually pull in more revenue because of the end of the mortgage principal deduction, etc.

 

[unofan]

I am not for a flat tax. I was responding to the notion that a sales tax is by definition regressive. It isn't if it varies by the cost of the item.

I'm not buying a house, I'm buying 50 tons of dirt at a penny a pound and a bunch of nails and wood at a penny per gross