By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Flat Tax (Everyone Pays Equal %)

 

Is a Flat tax a good idea?

Yes 32 35.96%
 
No 55 61.80%
 
Haven't ever thought about it much 2 2.25%
 
Total:89
outlawauron on 20 December 2016
Mummelmann said:
SWORDF1SH said:

But how many jobs are created from something like soccer being big? I know soccer stars might not directly create a lot of jobs but indirectly they do.

Say you have two teams with lots of mega stars, Manchester City versus Real Madrid; even if I agree with you in principal, there's no way their performance is creating enough stimuliation on the job market to justify their salaries relative to societal value. Another thing that annoys me is that we tend to dote on athletes and actors and hate on entrepreneurs, for some strange reason.

Example above, quick maths; Manchester City's total wage expenses are around 2.680.000 £ weekly, that makes about 3.680.000 $, add bonuses that are quite common, and one can easily add another 5-10% on top. The yearly cost is s staggering 1.393.600.000 £, or roughly 1.910.000.000 $.

Real Madrid weekly wage expenses are around 2.173.000 £, that makes about 2.980.000 $, the same type of bonuses are just as common here, adding another 5-10% or more on top. Yearly cost is about 1.130.000.000 £, or roughly 1.780.000.000 $.

With bonues, let's say about 4.000.000.000 $ with bonuses, which is likely on the low side. Even when you factor in medical staff, training staff and facilities, maintenance on stadiums, transport, PR departments, ticket salesmen, waiting staff, cleaning staff and stadiums and all other related jobs, even the net sales of shirts and other effects and the ones working these stores (where shirts from all sorts of teams are sold), the outcome will always favor an entrepeneur, considering the relative low amount of working hours per person per team, they simply don't employ nearly enough people through their sport. Given, it's hard to put a price on entertainment, but it's still food for thought. The net gain from actors are even worse, someone like Tom Cruise, who could easily make 50-100 million $ on a big film that takes him about 1.5-2 years to take part in, in bouts separated by breaks and other projects, a similar generation of revenue across actual industry or similar positions to provide jobs would be massively advantageous over this.

I think sports is quite easily the most justiable high wage position in the world. They bring in far more money than their salary is, and have global impact. The wages of all La Liga don't match the TV dollars alone.



"We'll toss the dice however they fall,
And snuggle the girls be they short or tall,
Then follow young Mat whenever he calls,
To dance with Jak o' the Shadows."

Check out MyAnimeList and my Game Collection. Owner of the 5 millionth post.

Around the Network
sundin13 on 20 December 2016

If the tax drops to a flat 17%, how much revenue would the federal government lose? If we include the exemption to people who make under $50k, every person in the country would see a decrease in taxes. With the government unable to break even with our current tax rates, I can't imagine they would be able to handle a massive drop in revenue.



Zkuq on 20 December 2016

I'd probably be OK with a combination of basic income and a flat tax rate, assuming the basic income was high enough. In fact, I've thought for a good while that's the way to go. That's two things that simplify the system a lot, of which the first is probably a necessity in a few decades thanks to improvements in automatization and robotization, and the second one is just more fair for everyone.



SvennoJ on 20 December 2016
SkepticallyMinded said:
Income taxes are like walking up to a friend and trading $20 for a baseball glove. Then some guy walks up to each of you and demands you pay him $5 because this is his spot that you used to make the transaction. If you don't pay him, he kicks your ass and steals your stuff. Then he puts you in a cell.

More like trading $20 for fixing your car.
While the guy collecting the $5 of each of you builds the roads you used to get the car to the guy that fixes it for you.

Ofcourse you're free to live off-grid, catch your own food and barter with your neighbours. Income 0, taxes done.



numberwang on 20 December 2016

Most flat taxes include a tax free amount which covers subsistence.

However a flat tax does not make things much easier as the complexity is caused by what constitute taxable income and deductions -- that is where you have to move the papers.



Around the Network
Slarvax on 20 December 2016

On a completely unrelated and off topic note, I feel dumb reading this thread. You all seem very smart



Bet with bluedawgs: I say Switch will outsell PS4 in 2018, he says PS4 will outsell Switch. He's now permabanned, but the bet will remain in my sig.

NNID: Slarvax - Steam: Slarvax - Friend Code:  SW 7885-0552-5988

VGPolyglot on 21 December 2016
Ka-pi96 said:
Are those tax figures legit? If so... Americans pay so little tax! Lucky bastards!

Well, it makes sense considering how present the American military is globally: they just take the resources and labour of people from other countries so they can reap the rewards. While other countries are also guilty of this, the US is currently #1.



robzo100 on 21 December 2016
Slarvax said:

On a completely unrelated and off topic note, I feel dumb reading this thread. You all seem very smart

I made this thread so that we could all hopefully be a little smarter. I mean how can one be smart on something that isn't generally talked about at school, college, with friends, co-workers, not even on the news. The news might mention a story about it but it doesn't seek to educate only something like, "so-and-so propses a new tax plan"

And it's not the kind of thing one bothers to look up online or know where to begin with informing oneself. Here seemed like a nice place!