The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

[joecct]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Paying the same rate is not sharing the burden equally, because taxation is costing the janitor his kids' college fund, but it's costing the banker the mortgage on his second vacation home.

I am all for a codicil to the tax code that triples the burden on BC and Minny fans.

???
If the tax rate is a flat 10%
The janitor pays $3,000 on his $30,000 of taxable income
The rich guy pays $300,000 on his $3,000,000 taxable income (of course his gross was $5,000,000, but clever accountants and lawyers managed to deduct $2,000,000)

 

[Jimjamesak]

???
If the tax rate is a flat 10%
The janitor pays $3,000 on his $30,000 of taxable income
The rich guy pays $300,000 on his $3,000,000 taxable income (of course his gross was $5,000,000, but clever accountants and lawyers managed to deduct $2,000,000)

$3000 to somebody making $30k is 3+ months rent, 6+ months food etc. It means you've taken pretty much all of his extra income. $300k to a guy making $3 million means he has to buy a 3-series instead of a 5-series.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Roll, derp.

 

[busterman62]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

???
If the tax rate is a flat 10%
The janitor pays $3,000 on his $30,000 of taxable income
The rich guy pays $300,000 on his $3,000,000 taxable income (of course his gross was $5,000,000, but clever accountants and lawyers managed to deduct $2,000,000)

I wasn't very clear on my idea. Let me try and elaborate.

All influx of $ is to be considered income (wages, interest, gifts, gambling, stolen, SS, whatever)
Anyone with income files a return.
An acceptable amount to live on is set as a standard deduction (say 3-4x poverty level)
Net income is taxed at a flat rate
Simple and equitable.

I also believe JFK had it right when he said ask not what you country can do for you. I think our citizens need to be invested in the process and paying taxes is part of that. I would take this policy one step further in requiring those who do not pay any taxes to provide community service. Nothing big. 1-2 days/fiscal year. Opt not to do it, that's fine, you just lose your franchise for that year. I'm sure some will feel that this somehow makes me a bigot or a fascist but maybe if we required a little responsibility, we might get a little better Gov't. (Yea, who am I trying to kid?)

It'll never happen but I can dream

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I wasn't very clear on my idea. Let me try and elaborate.

All influx of $ is to be considered income (wages, interest, gifts, gambling, stolen, SS, whatever)
Anyone with income files a return.
An acceptable amount to live on is set as a standard deduction (say 3-4x poverty level)
Net income is taxed at a flat rate
Simple and equitable.

I also believe JFK had it right when he said ask not what you country can do for you. I think our citizens need to be invested in the process and paying taxes is part of that. I would take this policy one step further in requiring those who do not pay any taxes to provide community service. Nothing big. 1-2 days/fiscal year. Opt not to do it, that's fine, you just lose your franchise for that year. I'm sure some will feel that this somehow makes me a bigot or a fascist but maybe if we required a little responsibility, we might get a little better Gov't. (Yea, who am I trying to kid?)

It'll never happen but I can dream

Forcing people to "volunteer" some portion of their time when they're not paying taxes wouldn't fly, it will play too much like slavery in political debates.

If you're going to setup what is essentially a two-bracket tax code, then that bottom bracket should have some skin in the game so that it gives people more of a cause to pay attention to how our government operates, and therefore a taxation rate of 2-5% would be apropos.

 

[unofan]

Forcing people to "volunteer" some portion of their time when they're not paying taxes wouldn't fly, it will play too much like slavery in political debates.

If you're going to setup what is essentially a two-bracket tax code, then that bottom bracket should have some skin in the game so that it gives people more of a cause to pay attention to how our government operates, and therefore a taxation rate of 2-5% would be apropos.

They already pay 7.5 percent, give or take, in payroll taxes.

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

They already pay 7.5 percent, give or take, in payroll taxes.

Only if they're in a waged job. busterman was expanding and changing the income tax to all types of income, not just waged income.

 

[ScoobyDoo]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

They already pay 7.5 percent, give or take, in payroll taxes.

Actually it's 6.2% higher than that. Everyone removes the employer costs (or self employed costs) from the number and that's not correct.

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I wasn't very clear on my idea. Let me try and elaborate.

All influx of $ is to be considered income (wages, interest, gifts, gambling, stolen, SS, whatever)
Anyone with income files a return.
An acceptable amount to live on is set as a standard deduction (say 3-4x poverty level)
Net income is taxed at a flat rate
Simple and equitable.

I also believe JFK had it right when he said ask not what you country can do for you. I think our citizens need to be invested in the process and paying taxes is part of that. I would take this policy one step further in requiring those who do not pay any taxes to provide community service. Nothing big. 1-2 days/fiscal year. Opt not to do it, that's fine, you just lose your franchise for that year. I'm sure some will feel that this somehow makes me a bigot or a fascist but maybe if we required a little responsibility, we might get a little better Gov't. (Yea, who am I trying to kid?)

It'll never happen but I can dream

Simplifying the tax code is a good thing, because it will save on enforcement costs. Of course, the accountants will throw a fit because htey'll have to find other employment.

Actually, instead of community service, put a price on the welfare stuff. If you are physically able to work, you earn a certain percentage of your expenses in revenue for you and up to two dependents (baby factories don't get to game the system), and the government can subsidize the rest. No play, no pay. The left wingers can get their feel-good on by "giving to the poor", and the right wingers can take solace in knowing that these people are actually contributing to society.

I recall posting a proposal here on this, although I'm sure most tl;dr'd it.

 

[Handyman]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I still say it is high time to tax the religious institutions...

 

[FlagDUDE08]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I still say it is high time to tax the religious institutions...

First Amendment's in the way. If those people that call into the 700 Club telethons want to **** away five large a year and it's tax deductible, that's their prerogative.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I still say it is high time to tax the religious institutions...

Ma and Pa Kettle wouldn't like it. Give it 50 years.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

Ma and Pa Kettle wouldn't like it. Give it 50 years.

You're right. The assault on religious freedom will take awhile to play out, though 50 years is optimistic from my perspective.

 

[Kepler]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

You're right. The assault on religious freedom will take awhile to play out, though 50 years is optimistic from my perspective.

We're doing the best we can, Bob.

 

[Bob Gray]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

We're doing the best we can, Bob.

That's one thing liberals do well.

 

[unofan]

Only if they're in a waged job. busterman was expanding and changing the income tax to all types of income, not just waged income.

It's a fair assumption that most people at the bottom are in waged jobs.

I don't know many people living on interest or dividends in the bottom quintiles, do you?

 

[St. Clown]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

It's a fair assumption that most people at the bottom are in waged jobs.

I don't know many people living on interest or dividends in the bottom quintiles, do you?

Social Security income is non-waged income, which the good doctor included in his taxation list.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

I also believe JFK had it right when he said ask not what you country can do for you. I think our citizens need to be invested in the process and paying taxes is part of that.

Were our taxes then spent in a reasonable and responsible manner, lots of people would agree with you. It is not the taxation per se that bothers me, it is how the money is squandered on so many pork barrel projects, like the John Murtha Airport that has three flights per week, and on and on and on. We do not get the value we deserve from the spending, too much of it goes to prop up legislators' re-election campaigns or to fund duplicate services (there are 48 different jobs programs, for example. 15 Cabinet departments. So much redundancy across the board. )

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

It's a <strike>fair</strike> [superficial] assumption that most people at the bottom are in waged jobs.

I don't know many people living on interest or dividends in the bottom quintiles, do you?

Yes, my mother, my aunts and uncles, just about every relative over age 75, all their friends and neighbors, quite a few people are in that position. For most retired people, if I am not mistaken, 85% of Social Security is not taxable, so that puts a real lot of people in the lowest bracket once you factor in the standard deduction and the personal exemption (taxable income ~ $25,000 or less), especially with interest rates as low as they are today.

 

[FreshFish]

Re: The Power of the SCOTUS Part VI - Roberts rules disorder

If you're going to setup what is essentially a two-bracket tax code, then that bottom bracket should have some skin in the game so that it gives people more of a cause to pay attention to how our government operates, and therefore a taxation rate of 2-5% would be apropos.

I like to frame the concept as "citizenship dues." You belong to an organization, you typically pay dues; you are a citizen, you also pay dues. Even if it is a "token" amount, everyone who is a citizen pays something.



[of course, if this idea ever were implemented, lobbyists would pretty quickly start to advance the money to people to pay the dues on their behalf in exchange for their vote... ... sort of like AARP on steroids. ]