| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#1
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
|
|
#3
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
Canuck57 wrote:
On 23/01/2010 10:20 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 22/01/2010 11:54 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:40:09 -0500, wrote: The top brackets ought to be paying 49%, and there should be no cap on earnings subject to social security and medicare taxes. As long as the top 1% controls 50% of the campaign contributions and 100% of the media you won't see that. They may pass that as the published top rate but there will be enough tax shelters and loopholes so they won't actually pay that. The government has a long rich history of using the tax code to drive social policy. If you do politically correct things you get tax breaks, big ones. Is why there will never be a flat tax. Taxation is the ultimate control. A flat tax is regressive. You know squat about economics. Flat tax is linear and proportional. I am trying to figure out how 10% for guy A is different then 10% for guy B? I have a feeling that those who hold the belief that a flat tax is regressive look at what guy A and guy B have left after being taxed at a flat rate and that is where they see the "regressiveness." One is left with $90K, the other with $9K, so? $9K earner didn't work as hard, or as smart or didn't provide enough value in the services provided. Surely didn't invest in themselves. Yet they pay as a fixed percentage as they still needed government roads, education etc. for what they did get. Thus a flat tax is fair to society. Fortunately, what gives you assholes a hard-on is never going to come to pass. Tax rates for the wealthy are far too low in this country. A rate of 49% would be acceptable for those in the highest brackets. |
|
#4
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
Harry wrote:
Canuck57 wrote: On 23/01/2010 10:20 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 22/01/2010 11:54 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:40:09 -0500, wrote: The top brackets ought to be paying 49%, and there should be no cap on earnings subject to social security and medicare taxes. As long as the top 1% controls 50% of the campaign contributions and 100% of the media you won't see that. They may pass that as the published top rate but there will be enough tax shelters and loopholes so they won't actually pay that. The government has a long rich history of using the tax code to drive social policy. If you do politically correct things you get tax breaks, big ones. Is why there will never be a flat tax. Taxation is the ultimate control. A flat tax is regressive. You know squat about economics. Flat tax is linear and proportional. I am trying to figure out how 10% for guy A is different then 10% for guy B? I have a feeling that those who hold the belief that a flat tax is regressive look at what guy A and guy B have left after being taxed at a flat rate and that is where they see the "regressiveness." One is left with $90K, the other with $9K, so? $9K earner didn't work as hard, or as smart or didn't provide enough value in the services provided. Surely didn't invest in themselves. Yet they pay as a fixed percentage as they still needed government roads, education etc. for what they did get. Thus a flat tax is fair to society. Fortunately, what gives you assholes a hard-on is never going to come to pass. Tax rates for the wealthy are far too low in this country. A rate of 49% would be acceptable for those in the highest brackets. Acceptable to whom, maggot? The little Krause maggot says Tax him Tax him. Leave me alone. |
|
#5
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
In article ,
says... On 23/01/2010 10:20 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 22/01/2010 11:54 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:40:09 -0500, wrote: The top brackets ought to be paying 49%, and there should be no cap on earnings subject to social security and medicare taxes. As long as the top 1% controls 50% of the campaign contributions and 100% of the media you won't see that. They may pass that as the published top rate but there will be enough tax shelters and loopholes so they won't actually pay that. The government has a long rich history of using the tax code to drive social policy. If you do politically correct things you get tax breaks, big ones. Is why there will never be a flat tax. Taxation is the ultimate control. A flat tax is regressive. You know squat about economics. Flat tax is linear and proportional. I am trying to figure out how 10% for guy A is different then 10% for guy B? I have a feeling that those who hold the belief that a flat tax is regressive look at what guy A and guy B have left after being taxed at a flat rate and that is where they see the "regressiveness." One is left with $90K, the other with $9K, so? $9K earner didn't work as hard, or as smart or didn't provide enough value in the services provided. Surely didn't invest in themselves. Yet they pay as a fixed percentage as they still needed government roads, education etc. for what they did get. Thus a flat tax is fair to society. I agree that the concept is fair but, the application of a flat tax will be just as complicated as the tax system we have now in the US. What will happen is that the classifying of income will become the key issue. The only solution is a constitutional amendment that implements the flat tax and the abolishment of the IRS in its current form or any future form. The only way for the government to increase revenue from income taxes would be to grow the economy by increasing employment. |
|
#6
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
On 25/01/2010 6:50 AM, BAR wrote:
In , says... On 23/01/2010 10:20 AM, BAR wrote: In , says... On 22/01/2010 11:54 AM, nom=de=plume wrote: "Bill wrote in message ... wrote in message ... On Fri, 22 Jan 2010 08:40:09 -0500, wrote: The top brackets ought to be paying 49%, and there should be no cap on earnings subject to social security and medicare taxes. As long as the top 1% controls 50% of the campaign contributions and 100% of the media you won't see that. They may pass that as the published top rate but there will be enough tax shelters and loopholes so they won't actually pay that. The government has a long rich history of using the tax code to drive social policy. If you do politically correct things you get tax breaks, big ones. Is why there will never be a flat tax. Taxation is the ultimate control. A flat tax is regressive. You know squat about economics. Flat tax is linear and proportional. I am trying to figure out how 10% for guy A is different then 10% for guy B? I have a feeling that those who hold the belief that a flat tax is regressive look at what guy A and guy B have left after being taxed at a flat rate and that is where they see the "regressiveness." One is left with $90K, the other with $9K, so? $9K earner didn't work as hard, or as smart or didn't provide enough value in the services provided. Surely didn't invest in themselves. Yet they pay as a fixed percentage as they still needed government roads, education etc. for what they did get. Thus a flat tax is fair to society. I agree that the concept is fair but, the application of a flat tax will be just as complicated as the tax system we have now in the US. What will happen is that the classifying of income will become the key issue. The only solution is a constitutional amendment that implements the flat tax and the abolishment of the IRS in its current form or any future form. The only way for the government to increase revenue from income taxes would be to grow the economy by increasing employment. Insightful. You should run for office. Does not take much to understand you don't want to kick a shrinking middle class with more taxes. Middle class is already bruised enought. Ditto businesses. But government greed wants more money. Simple solution is to downsize government to fit revenue plus debt services. That is, live inside their means. But Obama likes to flash the cash and talk a lot. So I guess you can't be a democrat. |
|
#7
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
|
|
#8
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
|
|
#9
posted to rec.boats
|
|||
|
|||
|
BREAKING: Brown Wins in Mass. Race
Harry wrote:
BAR wrote: In article , says... I agree that the concept is fair but, the application of a flat tax will be just as complicated as the tax system we have now in the US. What will happen is that the classifying of income will become the key issue. The only solution is a constitutional amendment that implements the flat tax and the abolishment of the IRS in its current form or any future form. The only way for the government to increase revenue from income taxes would be to grow the economy by increasing employment. Insightful. You should run for office. Does not take much to understand you don't want to kick a shrinking middle class with more taxes. Middle class is already bruised enought. Ditto businesses. But government greed wants more money. Simple solution is to downsize government to fit revenue plus debt services. That is, live inside their means. But Obama likes to flash the cash and talk a lot. So I guess you can't be a democrat. I am far to the right of Attila the Hun. There's nothing but really stupid that far over. That pendulum swings both ways. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Brown Wins, Democrats bit the dust | General | |||
| River Ice Breaking 04 | Tall Ship Photos | |||
| breaking news | General | |||
| Evinrude E-TEC wins 24 hr. race in Rouen France | General | |||
| Republican Wins Ohio Congressional Race | General | |||
![BAR[_2_] is offline](https://www.boatbanter.com/images/SultanThemeVB3R/statusicon/user_offline.gif)
Hybrid Mode
