By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Marks on 05 March 2012
Edit Thread
sethnintendo said:
Marks said:


Yeah I get that, people are mad about wealth being unequal and that's fine. I just don't get why people think they should get a free ride through life on other people's hard earned tax dollars. I know not everyone has a fair shake in life, but that just means you need to work harder to get where you need to be. I think all the social programs we have just make people lazy and expect handouts. I don't know when things like welfare went from emergency assistance to people going through a tough time...to what it is now where everyone expects handouts. 

And the other thing I want to say is bringing the rich down through overtaxation isn't going to make things better for the poor. Yeah it'll be more equal but things wouldn't be better. 


Yea that is why I am starting to like the consumption tax more and getting rid of the IRS.  Politicians can just use the IRS and their tax code to further fuel the "class warfare".  If we just paid tax on whatever we bought (and got reimbursed for basic necessities like food) then this would be more fair.  At first I wasn't really into the idea but then I read Fair Tax book by Neal Boortz.  While I didn't agree with everything in his book (and I actually highly dislike him and his radio show), he does make a compelling argument about setting USA up to become once again a manufacturing leader, etc... by getting rid of corp taxes, etc.. by switching to a consumption tax.

Yeah I agree with you there. Consumption taxes are probably a better way of evening things out anyways. Put higher taxes on luxury goods like cars, electronics and alcohol but keep taxes extremely low (or none at all) on things like food and medicine. I'll have to take a look at that book you mentioned.

 

What do you think about Milton Friedman's negative income tax idea? I don't know if you've heard of that or not. In a nutshell it would be a flat tax rate across the board, but the other element is that everyone in the country would be re-embured a set amount each year.

So say the flat tax rate is 20%, and the re-embursement is $10,000 (just numbers I pulled out my ass) it would work out like so:

- If you make $100,000 you would pay $20,000 in taxes but be re-embursed $10,000 so you end up with $90,000

- If you make $60,000 you would pay $12,000 in taxes but be re-embursed $10,000 and end up with $58,000

- If you only make $20,000 you pay just $4,000 in taxes and are given $10,000 so it benefits you and you wind up with a net $26,000. 

 

Of course I just pulled those numbers out my ass, so different figures would actually be used...but you should get the idea. I think it's a great idea. And the amount each person is granted (the $10,000 figure I used) would replace things like welfare, employment insurance, etc. into one set amount each year. Plus a flat tax rate that every person in the country pays is a great idea.