[Truth]

I tend to agree with nky.

[TidesHoss32]

The flat tax has merit. However, your flat tax isn't particularly flat. It is a progressive tax just as is the income tax.

I would prefer a true flat tax with the same rate applying to everyone. The "haves" still pay more than do the "have nots". In addition, I would add a federal sales tax of 1 or 2 percent. That would be a consumption tax on those who consume goods. The latter would also apply to most services other than true medical bills (no botox or enhancement exemptions).

While I do agree with you on everything youve posted in this thread, I am very intrigued by your idea (which I also agree with. I think its a phenomenal idea). I DO have one question though, and you may have mentioned it and I may have skipped over it, so forgive me if I have. But what about those that exhaust their unemployment? Just curious...

[More Cowbell]

So what LWC, It Doesn't Matter. As Long as we poor folk are fighting and dyeing, there will only be educated voters. :ChairHit:

Come on, man. You know as well as I do that no one is saying that. This isn't some class warfare, it's just an idea to take this country back from all the deadbeats out there that would rather sit on their butt all day and watch Springer than actually go out and earn a living.

Obviously, an idea like this would never pass in this country. Too many bleeding-heart liberals would scream and holler about how it's evil, and racist, and discriminatory, and blah blah blah.

How about this? If you have income taxes withheld from an actual JOB, even if you get all of it back in a refund when you do your taxes, you still get to vote. That way, even those people trying to make ends meet on a minimum wage job still get to vote. Those who are nothing more than government moochers, do not.

[More Cowbell]

Really, the entire tax code needs to be revamped. But I have no problem with the millions of people who end up paying no taxes, who at least are working. For those folks working 40 hours a week at a low-paying job and pulling in $20-30 K per year, I say great. We'll help you out and refund all your withheld tax back to you. Even help you out with medical care, child care, food, and other expenses. I have all the respect in the world for anyone who is out there trying to provide for themselves and their family, be it as a doctor, a businessman, a coal miner, or a housekeeper.

But those deadbeats who won't work and just wait on that 1st of the month check so they can party the rest of the month? No way should they be getting any money back in the form of an Earned Income Credit. That's bull. You should never be able to get any more money back in a refund than what was withheld in the first place. If nothing was withheld because you won't work, then no refund.

[Deathstar 80]

Truth, I personally don't think adding a "vote tax" would help our country.

One thing to consider is if we enter a bad economic time - such as today where we have a 9.1% unemployment rate - this could prevent people from voting. If more people don't have jobs, then they wouldn't be able to pay an income tax. And you can't blame those who are truly searching for a job just because the economy is simply bad. It wouldn't be their fault. And it would be very difficult to separate the "freeloaders" from the people who are truly looking for a job.

If the above paragraph is true, then this would cause class warfare. As you see today in the United Kingdom, they're going through tough economic times. Here's a link that shows how the rioters are rioting because of the "evil rich people". If you prevent the unemployed from voting and allow those who make money to vote (including the rich people), it would cause even more class warfare, especially if the people who are unemployed and collecting a government check are truly looking for a job.

And in my opinion, I really think this would be a step away from democracy. I don't think preventing people from voting is the answer to get rid of those who wrongly stay home and collect a government check.

[Hoot Gibson]

I would fully support a constitutional amendment that would deny the right to vote to American citizens who are not net-federal taxpayers but that is never going to happen. People who are net consumers of federal goods and services should not be allowed to vote to expand the benefits that they are receiving.

The federal government has replaced private charities in many ways and those who depend on charity should have no say in how much their benefactors are giving them. (Those who have paid into Social Security or had careers in the military are not charity cases, but they should also not be in position to increase their own benefits beyond their contributions to their retirement.)

Think about how much smaller, efficient, and less expensive to support that our federal government would become if it shrank to include only constitutionally mandated functions and those programs that actual taxpayers were willing to support financially. No more buying votes by dangling "free" money under the noses of society's moochers.

I would gladly give up my right to vote in federal elections after retirement to live under a federal government that would be able to live within its means in a country where citizens understood that freedom comes with responsibilities and the basic responsibility is to support yourself and your family unless you are absolutely unable to do so. Think about how competitive our economy would be in such a country. The US would once again become a model for countries around the world to emulate, instead of the laughingstock economic basket case that we have become.

[nky]

Really, the entire tax code needs to be revamped. But I have no problem with the millions of people who end up paying no taxes, who at least are working. For those folks working 40 hours a week at a low-paying job and pulling in $20-30 K per year, I say great. We'll help you out and refund all your withheld tax back to you. Even help you out with medical care, child care, food, and other expenses. I have all the respect in the world for anyone who is out there trying to provide for themselves and their family, be it as a doctor, a businessman, a coal miner, or a housekeeper.

But those deadbeats who won't work and just wait on that 1st of the month check so they can party the rest of the month? No way should they be getting any money back in the form of an Earned Income Credit. That's bull. You should never be able to get any more money back in a refund than what was withheld in the first place. If nothing was withheld because you won't work, then no refund.

But how many of them "value" what they are given? Flat tax ensures everyone pays something back to the government. If all you do is take and take, you'll always want more of your fair share. When you pay something back to Uncle Sam maybe you'll start to get the idea that it's not free money.

[Wildcatk23]

Come on, man. You know as well as I do that no one is saying that. This isn't some class warfare, it's just an idea to take this country back from all the deadbeats out there that would rather sit on their butt all day and watch Springer than actually go out and earn a living.

Obviously, an idea like this would never pass in this country. Too many bleeding-heart liberals would scream and holler about how it's evil, and racist, and discriminatory, and blah blah blah.

How about this? If you have income taxes withheld from an actual JOB, even if you get all of it back in a refund when you do your taxes, you still get to vote. That way, even those people trying to make ends meet on a minimum wage job still get to vote. Those who are nothing more than government moochers, do not.

Like i said, i think that you shouldn't get back more than you pay in. There is no point of paying taxes if you get it all back. Every job you work u should have to pay federal taxes and not get it back.

A flat tax would be great i think. With our without levels.

You think only bleeding-heart liberals would oppose of that? Really? You guys go on about how poor people vote for the poor. When did rich people start voting for every ones well being than there own????? When did they become so nice to other people? Was that before or after all the tax cuts and loop holes they get? Id say most middle class pay more taxes then your elite folk. Lawyers find a way around it and we pay for it.

Lets see, I have heard and heard that people that don't benefit the country should have no say in who runs the country and may benefit them. SO rich people shouldn't have a say in which congressman or president is going to give them tax cuts? But we know they vote on different basis.

Everyone should pay income tax, noone should get back more than they pay in.

Another issue we should address is paying for Former presidents salary, or other office members if we do.

An ex-president gets a nice yearly salary of more than $180,000 and that's just the beginning because he doesn't have to pay for anything.

For instance, a former President gets $96,000 to pay an office staff. He gets government-paid travel. His phone bill is paid, as are postage and office supplies. ?


Really? you cant go out and find another job or draw a Regular old person salary? We have to pay for you until u die?

[LWC]

Think about how much smaller, efficient, and less expensive to support that our federal government would become if it shrank to include only constitutionally mandated functions and those programs that actual taxpayers were willing to support financially. No more buying votes by dangling "free" money under the noses of society's moochers.

I respect your opinions but you have to be kidding. I would bet (no statistics because it is a guess) that over 90% of people would pay NOTHING in taxes to the government if they didn't have to. You see the examples of companies given bail-outs that pad their own salaries, or people that create their own silly charities and donate to them (cockroach research foundation or save the gophers, etc... BTW, I made those up, I hope, lol.)

How about this? If you have income taxes withheld from an actual JOB, even if you get all of it back in a refund when you do your taxes, you still get to vote. That way, even those people trying to make ends meet on a minimum wage job still get to vote. Those who are nothing more than government moochers, do not.

I think Wildcat proposed something like that but they said that wasn't enough. It can only be people that make enough to HAVE to pay in to taxes. I know a man that owns two restaurants and has 1 child, he makes at least 60,000 per year as the GM of his own stores (he has to make more just in what he clears for owning), and he paid NOTHING in taxes. I know he gives a lot to church and other charities, and maybe that is how he gets out of it but still. He works his tail off but he pays nothing in taxes. Does he get a vote in truth and Hoot's system, NO!

I would love to see a system that had a choice: Pay a certain percentage of your income to the government or pay it to a list of 100+ charities (none of these save the whales or support gun/abortion/clockmakers/pediatricians rights) I mean charities that support people like American Red Cross, Save the Children, Susan G Comen, Feed American, etc... If we supported these efforts more, the need for these Social-programs would, hopefully, cease to exist. I know that I am clutching at air just like most on here, but I know that this idea is less of a pipe-dream than taking the voting rights away from millions of Americans.

[TheRealThing]

^ Read Stardust's History of Democracy thread starter. People ALWAYS vote for the hand that feeds them. Everyone should have to work and pay at least some income tax. There will always be a large segment of society that will take the free ride if it's offered.

[TidesHoss32]

Most people in Eastern Kentucky are poor because they choose to be. Its that simple.

[Truth]

While I do agree with you on everything youve posted in this thread, I am very intrigued by your idea (which I also agree with. I think its a phenomenal idea). I DO have one question though, and you may have mentioned it and I may have skipped over it, so forgive me if I have. But what about those that exhaust their unemployment? Just curious...

It would be good if we could conclude that those who have exhausted their unemployment have also exhausted themselves seeking employment. We, of course, know that that is very rarely the case.

I think unemployment benefits should be subject to the flat tax. If not, the national sales tax will catch these individuals. If they exhaust their benefits and get money "under the table", so to speak, at least they will get caught by the national sales tax when they buy something.

[Hoot Gibson]

I respect your opinions but you have to be kidding. I would bet (no statistics because it is a guess) that over 90% of people would pay NOTHING in taxes to the government if they didn't have to. You see the examples of companies given bail-outs that pad their own salaries, or people that create their own silly charities and donate to them (cockroach research foundation or save the gophers, etc... BTW, I made those up, I hope, lol.)

I think that you are missing the point that I am trying to make. It is much easier for politicians to get people to support tax hikes who do not pay taxes themselves. Currently, 47 percent of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Only 25 percent of America's top wage earners currently pay more than 87 percent of all federal income taxes.

As for charitable deductions, it is much cheaper to pay federal income taxes on $10,000 than it is to make a $10,000 charitable contribution - even for Americans who pay taxes at the top marginal rate. People donate to charity because it makes them feel good - not to avoid paying taxes. Granting tax exemptions only encourages larger charitable donations. (Most of us have the common decency not to claim large deductions for donations of the presidential underwear to charity.)

If only taxpayers could vote and if we had a balanced budget amendment, then voters would be very reluctant to support raising their own taxes to pay for frivolous things like NPR, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, bridges to nowhere, etc. Taxes would be spent on things that enjoy widespread support such as interstate highways and national defense.

As I said, my suggestion has no chance of ever becoming the law of the land but it would result in a quick and drastic cut in federal spending.

[Wildcatk23]

Most people in Eastern Kentucky are poor because they choose to be. Its that simple.

Most are lazy and choose not to work.

[TidesHoss32]

Most are lazy and choose not to work.

Exactly.

[TheRealVille]

It would be good if we could conclude that those who have exhausted their unemployment have also exhausted themselves seeking employment. We, of course, know that that is very rarely the case.

I think unemployment benefits should be subject to the flat tax. If not, the national sales tax will catch these individuals. If they exhaust their benefits and get money "under the table", so to speak, at least they will get caught by the national sales tax when they buy something.

Unemployment is taxed.

[TheRealVille]

I think that you are missing the point that I am trying to make. It is much easier for politicians to get people to support tax hikes who do not pay taxes themselves. Currently, 47 percent of Americans pay no federal income taxes. Only 25 percent of America's top wage earners currently pay more than 87 percent of all federal income taxes.

As for charitable deductions, it is much cheaper to pay federal income taxes on $10,000 than it is to make a $10,000 charitable contribution - even for Americans who pay taxes at the top marginal rate. People donate to charity because it makes them feel good - not to avoid paying taxes. Granting tax exemptions only encourages larger charitable donations. (Most of us have the common decency not to claim large deductions for donations of the presidential underwear to charity.)

If only taxpayers could vote and if we had a balanced budget amendment, then voters would be very reluctant to support raising their own taxes to pay for frivolous things like NPR, the Department of Education, the Department of Energy, bridges to nowhere, etc. Taxes would be spent on things that enjoy widespread support such as interstate highways and national defense.

As I said, my suggestion has no chance of ever becoming the law of the land but it would result in a quick and drastic cut in federal spending.

The top wage earners must be middle class then. Link please. I would also like to see where 53 percent of Americans pay no taxes also. You must not be considering the single mother scraping to make ends meet, with a mim. wage job, who claims a credit on her expenses, plus child care and a child credit, that ends up getting all her tax money back. Should she not be allowed to vote? Also, most people donate to charity to help those in need, not for a feel good feeling.

[Hoot Gibson]

The top wage earners must be middle class then. Link please. I would also like to see where 53 percent of Americans pay no taxes also. You must not be considering the single mother scraping to make ends meet, with a mim. wage job, who claims a credit on her expenses, plus child care and a child credit, that ends up getting all her tax money back. Should she not be allowed to vote? Also, most people donate to charity to help those in need, not for a feel good feeling.

If it did not feel good to help those in need, then people would not do it. My point is that people do not donate to worthy causes because of tax exemptions, although tax exemptions make it more affordable to donate.

I am not sure how I can make it any more clear. I would deprive anybody who receives more net income from the government than they pay in federal income taxes of the privilege of voting. I would make an exception for the military and probably for retirees who paid into Social Security for their entire lives. The federal government has robbed tens of millions of people through payroll taxes in a Ponzi scheme through no fault of those who thought they were paying into a trust fund.

Here is a link to the numbers that I have posted in this forum many times before. I suggest that you bookmark it and refer to it the next time that Obama, Pelosi, or Reid start blasting the "wealthiest among us" for "not paying their fair share." Notice that people who had adjusted gross incomes of at least $67,280 in 2008 paid 86.34 percent of all federal income taxes paid. Only 1 percent of taxpayers had AGIs of $380,354 or more, yet they paid 38.02 percent of all federal income taxes paid in 2008.

If you study this table, it will be very hard to defend the class warfare that Barack Obama and liberal Democrats will be waging to ride back into office in 2012. The numbers paint a very different picture than the evil rich that Obama demonizes nearly every time that he opens his big mouth. These people have no shame when it comes to stooping low to win elections to high offices.

[Hoot Gibson]

Unemployment is taxed.

Show me an example of somebody who collects unemployment benefits for a year who pays any federal income taxes. Link, please. The long term unemployed pay no federal income taxes. Do the math.

[TheRealVille]

If it did not feel good to help those in need, then people would not do it. My point is that people do not donate to worthy causes because of tax exemptions, although tax exemptions make it more affordable to donate.

I am not sure how I can make it any more clear. I would deprive anybody who receives more net income from the government than they pay in federal income taxes of the privilege of voting. I would make an exception for the military and probably for retirees who paid into Social Security for their entire lives. The federal government has robbed tens of millions of people through payroll taxes in a Ponzi scheme through no fault of those who thought they were paying into a trust fund.

Here is a link to the numbers that I have posted in this forum many times before. I suggest that you bookmark it and refer to it the next time that Obama, Pelosi, or Reid start blasting the "wealthiest among us" for "not paying their fair share." Notice that people who had adjusted gross incomes of at least $67,280 in 2008 paid 86.34 percent of all federal income taxes paid. Only 1 percent of taxpayers had AGIs of $380,354 or more, yet they paid 38.02 percent of all federal income taxes paid in 2008.

If you study this table, it will be very hard to defend the class warfare that Barack Obama and liberal Democrats will be waging to ride back into office in 2012. The numbers paint a very different picture than the evil rich that Obama demonizes nearly every time that he opens his big mouth. These people have no shame when it comes to stooping low to win elections to high offices.

Middle class.

[TheRealVille]

Show me an example of somebody who collects unemployment benefits for a year who pays any federal income taxes. Link, please. The long term unemployed pay no federal income taxes. Do the math.

I don't need a link, I've paid federal tax on my unemployment every time I've got it, out of every check. You also report it as income at the end of the year. Point two is a damn lie, as I've just stated.

[Hoot Gibson]

Middle class.

The $67,280 figure is the minimum salary of the people who pay 86+% of all federal income taxes. $380,354 is the minimum AGI of the people who earn 20 percent of all income, yet pay more than 38 percent of all federal income taxes. The wealthy are paying more than their fair share already and politicians who say otherwise are lying to an uninformed electorate. That is my point.

So, what is your point?

[Hoot Gibson]

. I don't need a link, I've paid federal tax on my unemployment every time I've got it, out of every check. You also report it as income at the end of the year. Point two is a damn lie, as I've just stated.

If you collect unemployment for a year, you will not pay a penny in federal income taxes. If you do, then your accountant is robbing you blind. Obviously, if you work most of the year in a good paying job, they you will pay federal income taxes at the end of the year. It sounds like you are confusing income taxes being withheld and income taxes that are paid.

Now, how about that link showing that there are people who are unemployed long term that pay federal income taxes?

[TheRealVille]

The $67,280 figure is the minimum salary of the people who pay 86+% of all federal income taxes. $380,354 is the minimum AGI of the people who earn 20 percent of all income, yet pay more than 38 percent of all federal income taxes. The wealthy are paying more than their fair share already and politicians who say otherwise are lying to an uninformed electorate. That is my point.

So, what is your point?

Any answer to post #51?

[Hoot Gibson]

Any answer to post #51?

Certainly. Look above.

[TheRealVille]

If you collect unemployment for a year, you will not pay a penny in federal income taxes. If you do, then your accountant is robbing you blind. Obviously, if you work most of the year in a good paying job, they you will pay federal income taxes at the end of the year. It sounds like you are confusing income taxes being withheld and income taxes that are paid.

Now, how about that link showing that there are people who are unemployed long term that pay federal income taxes?

Like I said, you are a damn liar, or don't know your ass from a block of coal. I have paid federal taxes from every check, and have been unemployed before, for more than a year. Like I said, I don't need a link, I have been there.

[Hoot Gibson]

Like I said, you are a damn liar, or don't know your ass from a block of coal. I have paid federal taxes from every check, and have been unemployed before, for more than a year.

This is why nobody takes your seriously here, RV. You insult people, demand links, and show a general inability to debate rationally.

In every state where I have lived, drawing unemployment benefits for a full year would total less than $21,000/yr. and people with an income at that level do not pay federal income taxes unless they fail to file a return to claim their refund.

BTW, when are you going to buy this web site? :lmao:

[TheRealVille]

This is why nobody takes your seriously here, RV. You insult people, demand links, and show a general inability to debate rationally.

In every state where I have lived, drawing unemployment benefits for a full year would total less than $21,000/yr. and people with an income at that level do not pay federal income taxes unless they fail to file a return to claim their refund.

BTW, when are you going to buy this web site? :lmao:

I have drawn unemployment for a full year and paid federal incomes taxes from every check.No doubt you haven't drawn from MA. I have also drawn a full year from KY, and paid federal taxes from every check. I would buy it today, if I could make a dollar from it.

[Hoot Gibson]

I have drawn unemployment for a full year and paid federal incomes taxes from every check. I would buy it today, if I could make a dollar from it.

In 2010, a person who received the maximum unemployment benefit in Kentucky for 52 weeks, married and filing jointly with no itemized deductions, would have been entitled to a refund of approximately $500.

[Hoot Gibson]

Here is a table taken from the taxfoundation.org that shows the numbers behind the lies that liberal Democrats are spreading about how much upper and upper middle income taxpayers pay in federal income taxes. The group that is not sharing the sacrifices that are being made are those who are mooching off the people who are footing most of the bill. Note that the share of the tax burden paid by the top 1 percent and the top 5 percent of wage earners increased under Bush and the tax burden of those in the bottom 50 percent decreased during the same period.

Yet, Obama would have us believe that the evil rich are getting a free ride while those at the lower end of the scale are suffering because the rich are not paying their "fair share."

Liberals are destroying this country's economy by robbing the rich and giving to the poor in exchange for votes. 2012 will be the nastiest campaign of my lifetime because Obama and the Democrats in Congress cannot win on their record. The tactics of smear and fear will be front and center every time they stand in front of a microphone.