What a wonderful Democratic party idea. We, the government, will decide what you need and don’t need. What we, the government, decide you need we won’t tax. What we, the government, decide you don’t need we will tax the hell out of. We know what you need. We know what you don’t need. You don’t need to think. You don’t need to decide anything. We know what you need and what you don’t need.
Feh. No wonder I hate the Democratic party. It is to puke.
Ahh… all this talk about progressive, regressive… hurting the poor… hurting the rich… it all comes down to one thing
You are paying taxes because the government can make you. Because they “need” money to do stuff… like subsidize research one mating habits of fruit flies… (actually true)
So… i have a brilliant idea how to fix the the whole tax problem. We the people let the government spend money on our behalf all year long… At the end of the year, the government has the General Accounting Office tally up all the spending from all the different departments (this can be done at State and City levels too…) Once it has it nice big number… (i believe this years budget was like $2,245,876,465,123.12 (ok… fine… i made up everything after the first 2) but its close… so then we have that number. Then the government divides that by the population, and sends everyone a bill. Then everyone will pay the EXACT same thing for the wonderfull services the government provides us. It would be great. There would be no problems. No one would complain, becuase everything would be exactly eqaul.
There… no more regressive, progressive mumble jumble… We’d all pay for the same for the government that give us soooo much!
Minnesota has no state sales tax on food or clothing. Just FYI.
This is called a poll tax and it doesn’t transcend regressivity and progressivity. Poll taxes are regressive.
Except, of course, that not everyone gets the same services from the government.
And not everyone earns enough to pay exactly the same taxes as everyone else. Suppose there’s $2 billion and 200 million people with incomes - do you really think all 200 million of them will be able to pay $10,000 in taxes?
The problem with income taxes is that the richest individuals and corporations can often avoid them entirely by claiming extravagant losses while simultaneously spending lavishly.
So sales taxes, and even better luxury taxes, will prevent them from skipping out of their responsiblities entirely.
As opposed to the Republican party idea, where We, the government, will decide what you think and believe and hear. :rolleyes:
When they’re not busy eating babies, that is.:rolleyes:
Exactly… if someone uses more services than me, why should I pay taxes to subsidize them. The case can be made that the poor benifit more than the rich from government services, so why should the “rich” pay more? Just because they have more money? Because they actually work instead of sitting on welfare letting the rest of the populace support them? Why should I pay into medicar, or SS, or anything else if I dont use it?
Like you said… everyone wouldnt be able to pay $10,000 or whatever… so that means they are getting more than they could pay for… someone else is paying their share.
Unfortunately everyone thinks its ok to steal money from those who make it. The top 50% of wager earners pay over 96% of the income taxes (IRS figures) And we have Democrats and Republicans that pander to the masses, getting their votes to stay in power. Democracy has become two wolves and one sheep voting on whats for dinner…
The case could also be made that the rich benefit more than the poor from government services, and in fact that government services are what allowed them to become rich. Bill Gates wouldn’t have eleventy billion dollars if not for contract law, intellectual property law, being able to form a corporation, etc.
Yup, that’s how government works. If you only want to pay for what you get, and only get what you pay for, then feel free to move to an uninhabited island.
And if you want to discuss the merits of democracy or of “stealing” money from those poor defenseless millionaires, feel free to start a thread where it’ll be relevant.
If you have been following adaher’s posts on the SDMB, I doubt you would conclude him or her to be a representative of the Democratic Party.
I think the extent to which the avoidance happens (at least in the case of individuals…leaving aside the issues of corporate taxes which is a whole different ballgame) is somewhat exagerated. The fact is that the rich pay most of their tax through the income tax whereas the poor pay most of their tax through the payroll taxes and sales taxes. [Property taxes and others taxes fit in here too somehow, but we’ll leave them out for simplicity…I think they tend to be smaller players anyway.]
Absolutely…And, this is the much stronger case in my opinion. It seems a bizarre conception to imagine that the “winners” in a game are getting less benefit out of the game than the “losers” which is what postulating that the poor are getting more out of our society than the rich is suggesting! In the absence of the trappings of a society, I don’t see how one person could amass nearly the sort of wealth that Bill Gates has. I can, however, see how one person can amass the sort of wealth that a homeless person has.
This hides a few facts under the rug:
(1) A large part of this is due to the fact that the top 50% of income earners (not necessarily all due to wages, by the way, as you imply) get an 86% share of the income, as measured by "adjusted gross income (AGI) on income tax forms. (See here.)
(2) The federal income tax is the most progressive of the all major taxes we have (besides the soon-to-be-eliminated estate tax). State income taxes are generally less so. Payroll taxes are regressive (both because the SS part cuts out after a certain income and because it applies only to wage income). And, as we’ve discussed here, state and local sales taxes tend to be very regressive. [For a comprehensive analysis of the distributional aspects of state taxes in all 50 states, see [url=]here.] As a result, the overall tax burden seen by citizens is much flatter…In fact, I believe analyses have shown it is barely if at all progressive.
These facts don’t generally make it on to the Wall Street Journal editorial page though.
They pander much more to those who provide them the money to get elected. With $200+ million to spend, you don’t need to pander to that many voters…You just need to pander to those who will bankroll your compaign and then saturate the masses with propaganda telling them what you want them to believe.
Your hatred is impressive, I must say.
It’s totally misinformed and misplaced, but besides that, it is very impressive.