Complexity of United States tax code (1 Viewer)

[Insane_ai]

Thales750, again you project your own faults and prejudice on others and make assumptions instead of dealing with facts.

I am not in multi-level marketing, I am building a clientele for which I provide computer based services like networking, programming, repair and virus removal. The more my boss fails to pay what I think I'm worth, the more I look for new clients to eventually fire his cheap a$$. I don't complain about his new porsche or ask the government to tax him extra so I can get one for myself, I just work to change my situation.

"Second: it is a fallacy that the ultra rich will continue to create jobs" - Really? The Ultra Rich have the majority of their wealth in investments like corporations and banks that less rich people work for and borrow from to create jobs.

Citing a tax rate that abuses the fact that there is growth is not proof that high taxes are good for the economy.

Your arguments have been based on fallacy, half logic, left wing talking points, misdirection and personal attacks. You argue for higher taxes as though you have some right to them or that there is justification for it.

I'm calling you out on this for the last time.

If you still feel you have the right to someone else's property, provide justifaction for that position. The fact that someone has more than you doesn't count as a valid argument.

Either provide an answer or have a seat on the STFU couch. .

Oh, yeah. Not only do I intend to conceive of the amount of money the ultra rich have, I intend to obtain it. Don't worry, I'll stash it in another country so you don't have to feel guilty about being the beneficiary of it.

 

[Thales750]

Thales750, again you project your own faults and prejudice on others and make assumptions instead of dealing with facts.

I am not in multi-level marketing, I am building a clientele for which I provide computer based services like networking, programming, repair and virus removal. The more my boss fails to pay what I think I'm worth, the more I look for new clients to eventually fire his cheap a$$. I don't complain about his new porsche or ask the government to tax him extra so I can get one for myself, I just work to change my situation.

"Second: it is a fallacy that the ultra rich will continue to create jobs" - Really? The Ultra Rich have the majority of their wealth in investments like corporations and banks that less rich people work for and borrow from to create jobs.

Citing a tax rate that abuses the fact that there is growth is not proof that high taxes are good for the economy.

Your arguments have been based on fallacy, half logic, left wing talking points, misdirection and personal attacks. You argue for higher taxes as though you have some right to them or that there is justification for it.

I'm calling you out on this for the last time.

If you still feel you have the right to someone else's property, provide justifaction for that position. The fact that someone has more than you doesn't count as a valid argument.

Either provide an answer or have a seat on the STFU couch. .

Oh, yeah. Not only do I intend to conceive of the amount of money the ultra rich have, I intend to obtain it. Don't worry, I'll stash it in another country so you don't have to feel guilty about being the beneficiary of it.

You win,

Best wishes getting your new business going.
I apologize for any personal attacks.

 

[Insane_ai]

I would like to answer my own question now.

If you still feel you have the right to someone else's property, provide justification for that position. The fact that someone has more than you does not count as a valid argument. We don't.

A few basis points:

1. Our government is funded through taxes.
2. Part of our government's role is to enforce a common set of rules to live by known as laws, including rules to govern and enforce the protection of personal property.
3. Our government is made up of people from our own population elected through an expensive political process.
4. Those who have more, benefit from this structure more because more is protected and therefore should pay a higher amount commensurate with the value of their assets because they receive a greater service in scale than those who have less.
5. The votes and voices of those who have less count for less because their influence on the political process is limited. It should not be this way, but it is. This expanded influence enjoyed by those who can and do contribute to the political process (George Soros, Bill Gates, Koch Brothers, etc.) should come at a cost beyond the checks they write because the return is greater than the value of their currency.
6. When taxing income, applying a flat tax provides a mechanism to adjust for that greater protection.
7. Taxing the recipients of political contributions as income provides a mechanism to adjust for increased influence. (It’s not perfect, but it is a place to start.)
8. I do believe that having higher tax rates disincentivises a lot of growth because I have experienced it personally. I have found in my own employment history that raises can cost more because of bracketed tax rates, I had to request a pay decrease because the raise put me just barely into the next bracket which meant I was bringing home less money even though I grossed more. (Please excuse the Palinism “disincentivises”.)

I still believe a flat tax is fair. I will adjust this view in light of the logical argument that has been presented in this forum and, of all sources, what I have heard listening to debate on the subject on conservative talk radio.

1. Redefine “flat tax” to mean a flat rate, without exemptions and deductions.
2. Remove all social engineering from the tax code with exception to different rates applied at different income levels.
a. Let A = the accepted poverty level / minimum income standard.
b. Let B = everything over that.
c. Those at or below the poverty level pay taxes on consumption rather than income for example, sales taxes.
d. Anything over “A” is taxed at the same rate regardless of the source of income, wages, dividends, interest etc. For those in the “B” segment enjoy the same exemption for their initial income up to the limits of “A” as those in the “A” group and are taxed only on income that exceeds that level.
e. Taxes on ancestral inheritance are eliminated because the money was already taxed when it was earned by the ancestor.



I have a complaint to register with some of you. The arguments related to religion and morality regarding the role of government is offensive to me. This topic should be governed by logic, not morality, religion, or emotion. Introducing the concept of social engineering and allowing the government to influence personal behavior and choices is a slippery slope I want to avoid. If you allow the government to decide morality, you will eventually find that you have surrendered personal liberty. For example, the Muslims believe in either killing or punitively taxing infidels who refuse to convert. For all of you non-Muslims this is a risk. The Christian crusades killed and tortured thousands while under the control of government, for all of you non-Christians, are you willing to risk a repeat of this? Let’s not forget what Adolf Hitler did to “clean up” his little corner of the world. The examples of history are many.

We are talking about economic policy when we are talking about taxes and funding our government. Capitalism thrives on the impulse to create and accumulate. I believe the best response to greed and immoral acts in the economy is to boycott those who commit the offenses. For example, how many of you stopped filling your gas tanks at BP this year because of the oil spill? BP is huge, but not so large that a mass long term boycott could not bankrupt them or drive them out of our country. Such a response would open the door for other companies that operate in better way to grow or for new ones to be created. Other examples may be more painful and inconvenient to implement but not nearly as bas as allowing the government to assume sweeping control.

I believe the root of the problem with our tax code is that is used to control behavior by providing incentives for certain actions and penalties for others. It should be used to fund the government for the functions we have assigned to it and nothing else.

I presume the majority of you are intelligent people capable of providing worthy debate, that’s why I engaged in this exercise to begin with. My goal is to incite logical debate in order to work towards improving our country. I look forward to your logical responses.

Thales750: Thank you for wishing me well as I build my business. I truly do wish you and all others in this forum the very best. Maybe we can all join the ranks of the ultra rich and guide this country to a level of greatness higher than it has even known.