FYI - The federal minimum wage was $5.15 from 1997 to 2007. It's now $5.85 and ramping up to $7.25 by 2009, thanks to the Democrats' "Fair Minimum Wage Act of 2007". Until this, the minimum wage had been at its lowest point in inflation-adjusted dollars since 1950. The federal minimum wage currently affects 19 states.

Assuming 10 hours a day, 6 days a week, and no days off, and no overtime (maybe illegal? but simpler math):
5.15 * 60 * 52 = 16068
5.85 * 60 * 52 = 18252
6.55 * 60 * 52 = 20436
7.25 * 60 * 52 = 22620
A king's ransom!

Republicans filibustered in the Senate to stop this from passing without tax cuts for businesses.

I have a feeling that some of you want a communist state through taxation. Tax everyone to the point where nobody takes home more money than someone else.

This is a typical strawman and slipery slope argument. That is not what I'm saying at all. I was simply showing you what a fair tax system would be. Think about what you are saying and what I am saying. You say that if there's a pie it is "fair" give most of it to one person and a small sliver to another. I am saying that fair would be to give an equal piece to everyone. Everyone uses government services, and owes the government for thier services. And every person should only pay up to what their part of the pie is and no more. If someone cannot pay their share, it is not the government's business to find some one who can and rob them to cover the deficient person's debt. That is wrong, and thats not from an opinion stand point, all forms of marxism including socialism, facism, and communism have historical proff of being fallacious theories.

I'm not saying that consideration shouldnt be made to the poor, if a situation arises that a poor person can pay their fair share of the tax, i think the person and the government need to work something out. I do not think the solution is to steal money from another, unrelated person.

Just imagine if some other entity used that kind of tactic. How pissed off would you be if your credit card company started charging you money you do not owe them because another customer was not able pay? That notion is crazy, but you are trying to preach that it is perfectly sane for the government to do. That's pretty loony, but then again you seem to love loony things like the facist democratic congress passing facist legislation like a min wage increase.

Well, look at it this way, there are people arguing that the rich should pay more in taxes, more than someone who makes less than them. What's the incentive to move up in the world to pay more in taxes? Some of these arguments (to me) points to the idea that you think people should only be allowed to take home what is required to live day to day. Everything else should be given to the government to reduce the amount of taxes taken from the "poor." On top of that, there are those that complain when the rich get a break somewhere, somehow. It's kind of like complaining when stockholders in a company get an increased dividend. They are the ones who are currently footing the bill for the country, but you are not allowed to give them any bonuses, perks, or tax cuts when the company (country) reduces it's overhead.

I'll point out a real life experience. My Mom was a bank teller and she basically turned down a raise at one point in time because it would cost her more in taxes and she would actually be bringing home less money. There was no incentive for her to achieve more than she was already doing because her next income hike would mean less income. Some of the ideas here are merely Socialist in nature. Give the poor money, while taking it from the rich. The doctors of the world are paying money (basically) out of their pocket and giving it to someone who will likely not listen to them when they suggest a healthy lifestyle change.

Some of you are arguing to keep upper income tax high, so the lower tax bracket can live better lives. This is socialism. There's little incentive to go to school and get educated because your going to be living the same life you were before.

The "Fair Tax" is called fair because it taxes everyone on the same percentage scale, unlike the current tiered scale that punishes people for making more money. It should be the goal for every US citizen to try harder, not wait for the government handout. If you want to continue working at McDonald's the rest of your life, go for it! The government can continue to float you by taking money from those that did try to be better.

Andir, it's not possible for a raise to result in less money because of taxes.  When you move into a higher tax bracket, you don't pay the new higher rate on all of your income, you only pay the higher rate on the portion of your income that exceeds the cutoff for that tax bracket.

Let me explain with a real example.  In 2007, the first tax bracket is from $0 to $7,825.  If your adjusted gross income (after deductions and credits) is less than $7,825, you pay 10% in taxes.  So if you make exactly $7,820 adjusted in one year, you pay $782 in taxes.  The next bracket is 15% and goes to $31,850.  So let's say you get a very small raise and make exactly $8,000 a year adjusted.  You pay 10% of the first $7,825, or $782.50, and then 15% of your remaining income, or 15%*(8000 - 7825) = $26.25.  So your total taxes are $808.75.   Before the raise, you made $7,038 after taxes.  After the raise, you made $7,191.25 after taxes.  There's no way for your after-taxes income to go down as a result of your before-taxes income going up.

Senseinobaka was using logic and reason to explain his point on taxes. You took his argument to an extreme that was never intended or even remotely implied whether implicitly or explicitly. Stop applying your own views to ours, as they will never mix. We believe what a former President stated so well, yet is never remembered.

"The collection of any taxes which are not absolutely required, which do not beyond reasonable doubt contribute to the public welfare, is only a species of legalized larceny. . . . The wise and correct course to follow in taxation is not to destroy those who have already secured success, but to create conditions under which everyone will have a better chance to be successful." (Calvin Coolidge inaugural address, March 4, 1925)

Senseinobaka never said such things Final. You are, as you said, "applying your stated idea of what a "fair" tax system would be and me applying it to a real-world model." Sensei never said that we should, "tax people based on how much of the government's services they use." What he said was that since everyone uses government services they should be taxed equally. He was basically saying that if you paid for something, you should have access to it whenever you want, but that doesn't mean that you are going to use it.

Socialism, fascism, and communism are all based on one philosophy, Marxism. Marx said this, "From each, according to his ability; to each, according to his need," did he not? This is what you seem to be saying as well.
Let me point to another person who said something very similar to this, Hillary Clinton. This is a quote from a speech she made to some donors in 2004, "Many of you are well enough off that the tax cuts may have helped you. We're saying that for America to get back on track, we're probably going to cut that short and not give it to you. We're going to take things away from you on behalf of the common good." Obama has said similar things as well.

Here are 10 points from Marx's Communist Manifesto:

Note point number 2 (bolded for easy recognition). That is what we are currently under. This is anti-capitalistic rhetoric, and you are supporting it.

Let me outline a brief of what Conservatives believe about "the poor and less fortunate". We believe that in every American there is exceptional greatness. They have the potential to release that greatness if they are not held back. Rush Limbaugh calls this American Exceptionalism. Every person has the chance to become something more than they currently are. Everyone has the ability within them if they can muster the determination and perseverance to see your dreams come true. We believe that anyone can achieve greatness if government will simply get out of their way.

When there is no incentive to better yourself, that is holding you back. When you create incentive to better yourself, most people will take the opportunity. Our income tax system is removing the incentive to create opportunities for yourself. The FairTax removes the disincentive of our progressive income tax system.

Further we refuse to believe that people cannot make themselves better. This is why conservatives believe in smaller government, personal opportunity through a capitalist economy, and personal responsibility. We fail to see the "down-trodden" as hapless and helpless victims. We view them in the best light, their own possibility.

I do not presume that I have or even can change your mind with this post, but I must outline my personal world view as it applies to politics and policy. I can only talk about what I believe though. I believe the FairTax will help people. I believe that people will take the opportunity afforded to them when they have incentive to do so. I believe that less government regulation of the marketplace and intrusion in personal lives will lead to greater freedom and better lives for everyone willing to take part in the opportunities America can provide.

If this thread cannot get back on track soon I will abandon it and create another FairTax thread sometime in February.

Er Credit Card Companys DO do that. EVERY buisness does. Some people defaulting on their payments Is part of the cost of everything.  Part of your interest rate is ther becausee some people don't pay their credit card.