The Fair Tax, for better or worse?

[tager]

Of course we will always disagree, it is simple human irrationality to harbor egotistical bias. I would feel comfortable taking 99 percent from someone like Paul Allen, he makes more in a day than most of us will in our lifetimes. Why should I feel uncomfortable about it? In Norway, the whole country operates in a similar fashion to that which I have proposed... yet they still have driven and successful professionals! A much higher marginal tax would not take away "all" of the incentive to succeed, the rich would still have more than the poor, but at least we could ensure that there would be gainful employment even for fruit pickers. Then we wouldn't have to give them money. Look, I know I am barking up the wrong tree saying that the marginal tax rate for the super rich is too low. So let me provide an example. During the 60s, a family could be supported on the minimum wage of one working parent. Today, that would be impossible. Marginal tax rate for super rich in 1963: 93 percent Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003 (TruthAndPolitics.org)

[rdstanley]

Originally Posted by tager

Of course we will always disagree, it is simple human irrationality to harbor egotistical bias. I would feel comfortable taking 99 percent from someone like Paul Allen, he makes more in a day than most of us will in our lifetimes. Why should I feel uncomfortable about it? In Norway, the whole country operates in a similar fashion to that which I have proposed... yet they still have driven and successful professionals! A much higher marginal tax would not take away "all" of the incentive to succeed, the rich would still have more than the poor, but at least we could ensure that there would be gainful employment even for fruit pickers. Then we wouldn't have to give them money. Look, I know I am barking up the wrong tree saying that the marginal tax rate for the super rich is too low. So let me provide an example. During the 60s, a family could be supported on the minimum wage of one working parent. Today, that would be impossible. Marginal tax rate for super rich in 1963: 93 percent Top US Marginal Income Tax Rates, 1913--2003 (TruthAndPolitics.org)

What rate would Michael Moore pay? How about Nancy Pelosi? Al Gore? The Kennedy's?

For that matter anyone wanting to see others pay more in taxes should volunteer to pay extra themselves. The IRS will gladly accept "donations" from all who wish to dig deep and give a little extra. You may make more than I, maybe you should pay 90%+.

[Stillraining]

How would you feel if all the Paul Allen , Bill Gates and Steve Job types took all their toys undid human knowledge and went home...No Computers,,No Cell phones , No MP3 players..NO Oil no Gas no Electricity?

Profit has always and will always be the motivation for great things to be accomplished..Great accomplishments are chased for great returns..

Philanthropy buy human nature without material backing is rare and only one walked the earth who did it wholeheartedly..

Not very old Non Chinese saying...
" Don't cut the legs off your horses to get on their backs and eat from..you need them to plow the fields in the morning that produce the fruit." / Stillraining

[krozet]

Originally Posted by rdstanley

Here's some tax facts...
top 1% pay 39% of federal income taxes(in 1980 the top 1% only paid 19%)
top 50% pay 97% of federal income taxes

simple math shows the bottom 50% only pay 3% of federal taxes.

The poor in our country aren't paying their fair share

Do you have a link to that fact?

[krozet]

Originally Posted by Stillraining

How would you feel if all the Paul Allen , Bill Gates and Steve Job types took all their toys undid human knowledge and went home...No Computers,,No Cell phones , No MP3 players..NO Oil no Gas no Electricity?

Profit has always and will always be the motivation for great things to be accomplished..Great accomplishments are chased for great returns..

Philanthropy buy human nature without material backing is rare and only one walked the earth who did it wholeheartedly..

Not very old Non Chinese saying...
" Don't cut the legs off your horses to get on their backs and eat from..you need them to plow the fields in the morning that produce the fruit." / Stillraining

Profit is Not always the motivation for great things unless you can show me where the profit was for NASA to send people to the moon, or for the team that invented insulin or the eradication of the Polio Virus or the vast majority of Nobel Prize winners...

Computers were invented not for profit but for the betterment of education. Oil, and Electricity were not invented, they were discovered and the people that discovered how electricity works were academics, not profit seeking companies...

The IPod is far from a "Great Accomplishment"... I understand your argument but the vast majority of human achievements were designed to better all of humanity, not in pursuit of the all mighty dollar.

[ssneade]

Originally Posted by krozet

Do you have a link to that fact?

here's one:.......

Who Pays Income Taxes? See Who Pays What

i didn't want to start a thread about who pays what, but here we are. what i wanted to get from you other fine sailors, is your opinion of what is truly fair. our president keeps touting fairness, when all the time this thing is looking him in the face. you can't get no more than this amount of fair. i mean wow, i pay x amount of tax for every thing i buy just like a multi millionaire would. the more successful individual will naturally make higher end purchases than i. therefore he will pay tax on that amount.....

let's say i buy a fifteen thousand dollar car and the tax rate is say, twenty percent. real simple, three thousand dollars in tax owed for my purchase, right? ok, a more successful person can afford a nicer, more expensive car.
good for him. so he buys an automobile for the price of one hundred fifty thousand. what happens? he has to pay thirty thousand dollars in tax for his purchase. am i making sense so far? the more successful person who makes ten times my salary in theory will pay ten times the taxes i do. it all evens out in the end, folks. maybe the more successful will wind up paying even more taxes than they currently do, because tax breaks and loopholes will have been eliminated......

hey, i even get to bring home my whole paycheck. i know how to spend my money a helluva better than our government does.....

[US27inKS]

The fair tax is the only tax plan I've seen that's fair to everyone, and too transparent for crooked politicians to hide behind. These are both reasons why it will never come to pass.

For those of you who think we should "tax the rich" at rates of 80 or 90 percent or more, you need to stop and think for a moment. Rich people are rich for a reason. It's hard to be stupid and rich at the same time, unless you're paris hilton and you inherit your money. Since many rich people are also smart, they know where to invest their money. If you invest in having politicians make loopholes for you, then you don't pay 90%. If you invest in exploiting all the loopholes available, you may not have to pay tax at all. This is why when the highest tax rates were very high, rich people paid less of the overall taxes than they do now. There was quite an incentive to find legal ways to not pay taxes. With a lower tax rate, there is less incentive to find ways to get out of paying, so the govt collects more taxes.

[MikeinLA]

As to the OP's point about the Fair Tax, it will never pass. Tax laws are used by government to steer behavior. Want people to own homes? Tax deduction. Want them to stop smoking? Raise the taxes on cigarettes. It is not in the nature of government to give away their own power.

As to the subsequent discussion of tax rates, I have never been hired by a poor person. America is a capitalistic country. It's been in all the papers and is quite well known. Norway is a Socialist country. You have the choice of where to live, there are flights to Norway daily. I like America. No, actually I LOVE America. Nowhere else in the world do you get the freedom and opportunity to be all that you can be. The fact that many squander this incredible opportunity is no reason to change the system, it should be a reason to change THEMSELVES.

Mike

[rdstanley]

ssneade

thanks for putting the link out there. Given the choice between our current tax system and the fair tax I would take the fair tax. The problem is that every time the fair tax is talked about we start having to make exceptions for certain purchases, usually food, housing, etc. Pretty soon we give so many exceptions that half of the country wouldn't be paying any taxes at all. I would support a fair tax that would charge the same tax rate to ALL purchases, for EVERYBODY. Short of that it becomes very diluted and ineffective.

The purpose of our tax system should be to provide the NECESSARY funds to operate our govt, not as a means for income redistibution.

[Stillraining]

Originally Posted by ssneade

here's one:.......

Who Pays Income Taxes? See Who Pays What

i didn't want to start a thread about who pays what, but here we are. what i wanted to get from you other fine sailors, is your opinion of what is truly fair. our president keeps touting fairness, when all the time this thing is looking him in the face. you can't get no more than this amount of fair. i mean wow, i pay x amount of tax for every thing i buy just like a multi millionaire would. the more successful individual will naturally make higher end purchases than i. therefore he will pay tax on that amount.....

let's say i buy a fifteen thousand dollar car and the tax rate is say, twenty percent. real simple, three thousand dollars in tax owed for my purchase, right? ok, a more successful person can afford a nicer, more expensive car.
good for him. so he buys an automobile for the price of one hundred fifty thousand. what happens? he has to pay thirty thousand dollars in tax for his purchase. am i making sense so far? the more successful person who makes ten times my salary in theory will pay ten times the taxes i do. it all evens out in the end, folks. maybe the more successful will wind up paying even more taxes than they currently do, because tax breaks and loopholes will have been eliminated......

hey, i even get to bring home my whole paycheck. i know how to spend my money a helluva better than our government does.....

The plan is not a new concept and it has always made sense...What doesnt it no way does it cost that much to run this country..and if it currently does we need to fix that first or we will all be signing up to pay 90% of our earnings...That's the point I'm trying to make.

And in answer to the great achiever chasing great returns..I will stand by my claim...yes philanthropy exists..but USUALLY only by those engaged elsewhere producing and chasing the almighty dollar...Malinda Gates fund as an example didn't come form poor monks in monastery somewhere..Of course you can find flaws in my chosen examples ..that was not the end all be all list of examples.. But I bet if you did some research you will find high powered wealthy philantrpist behind most R&D money in most every quarter of discovery not solely funded by government...like your NASA moon shot example...which was a pet project of John F Kennedys and a rally cry for America as a whole in the 60's.