What's new
By:
USCHO Fan Forum

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • The USCHO Fan Forum has migrated to a new plaform, xenForo. Most of the function of the forum should work in familiar ways. Please note that you can switch between light and dark modes by clicking on the gear icon in the upper right of the main menu bar. We are hoping that this new platform will prove to be faster and more reliable. Please feel free to explore its features.

Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

Status
Not open for further replies.
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

ScoobyDoo said:
I have no problem with a progressive flat tax.
Click to expand...

That's an oxymoron. You can't have a flat tax that's progressive. That's called a progressive tax. A flat tax is by its very nature regressive.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

dxmnkd316 said:
That's an oxymoron. You can't have a flat tax that's progressive. That's called a progressive tax. A flat tax is by its very nature regressive.
Click to expand...

May be an oxymoron but I just fixed the ****ed up tax code. Mine's as simple as a flat tax and not regressive. Your mentality sounds a lot like Washington. Can't.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

ScoobyDoo said:
I have no problem with a progressive flat tax.

Decide how much income is exempt. 40K? 50K? Whatever. Then flat tax everything earned above that. Done.
Click to expand...

That's not a progressive flat tax. That's just a flat tax with the floor shifted from the dirt poor to the lower middle class.

The problem with any flat tax is that the rate would have to be on the order of 25% minimum simply to fund things at today's level, which means a hefty hike for pretty much everyone but the wealthy.

There's no need to change from the income tax structure we have now. I'd even be for dropping the AMT, but you need to tax capital gains and dividends the same as wages. Income on capital should not be taxed less than income on labor.
 
ScoobyDoo said:
I have no problem with a progressive flat tax.

Decide how much income is exempt. 40K? 50K? Whatever. Then flat tax everything earned above that. Done.

This needs to include the removal of all payroll taxes. Roll Social Security and Medicare/Medicaid into the formula.

Oh, and money, cap gains, whatever, is equal to labor. Period.
Click to expand...

My (long standing) proposal
Everyone files as single
Count all income from all sources
Exempt the first $45,000
Tax the rest @ 15% (if you want a 20% bracket too, I'm open to negotiations)

Corporate
Use GAAP - no more tax books
Exempt the first $1 million
Tax the remainder @ 15%.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

No. **** that. A progressive tax is the only fair way to do it. I will never understand how many liberals buy into this flat tax nonsense.

I understand if it's a bit confusing if people hear me advocating a fiscally "liberal" policy, but it's only fair. The flat tax is such a kick to the face of the poor and lower middle class. There's a reason only rich Republicans advocate it.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

Our current tax brackets should all be bumped a percent or two. No more deductions either. Maybe interest on a mortgage would be one of the few left. All income is treated as income. No matter the source.

Uncap the payroll tax. Means test benefits.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

If you exempt $45,000 what % of the population is exempt from taxation?
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

Who cares? A flat tax still hurts the lowest brackets. It's bad policy.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

****ing a. We've had this discussion.

Exhibit A: only rich Republicans advocate it. This alone should set off alarms.

Exhibit B: Every person needs $X to live. They need $Y to live comfortably. If you take $50,000-X and $25,000,000-X. Who pays the higher percentage of their disposable income just to survive? What if $50,000-X< Y? It certainly isn't going to be the case for $25,000,000-X >Y.
 
dxmnkd316 said:
****ing a. We've had this discussion.

Exhibit A: only rich Republicans advocate it. This alone should set off alarms.

Exhibit B: Every person needs $X to live. They need $Y to live comfortably. If you take $50,000-X and $25,000,000-X. Who pays the higher percentage of their disposable income just to survive? What if $50,000-X<Y? It certainly isn't going to be the case for $25,000,000-X>Y.
Click to expand...
45000 is exempt. That's 0. Under current fed progressive they pay 9% just in payroll taxes.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

All a flat tax does is shift the burden to the lower tax brackets. Which isn't fair. And I say that as someone who makes a very comfortable living.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

ScoobyDoo said:
45000 is exempt. That's 0. Under current fed progressive they pay 9% just in payroll taxes.
Click to expand...

Ok...?

You're buying into this Republican bullsht that it's better for the lowest bracket whole ignoring the fact that it allows the rich to bend the middle class over the table.
 
Re: Frayed Ends: Business, Economics, and Tax Policy 3.0

Income 45,000 = Total Tax 0.
Income 75,000 = Total Tax 6,000 = 8%
Income 100,000 = Total Tax 11,000 = 11%
Income 250,000 = Total Tax 41,000 = 16.4%
Income 500,000 = Total Tax 91,000 = 18.2%
Income 1,000,000 = Total Tax 191,000 = 19.1%

Eliminated from plan. Current Regressive Payroll Tax System that takes 9% of everyone's income up to 100,000. With an additional 6% of that income paid by the employer to the Feds depressing wages.

I'd call that pretty progressive.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top