"Jim," wrote in message
...
wrote:
The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.

This is why I asked you to read the article before commenting. The VAT
would be partially refunded based on income, and there would be an
income tax on those earning in excess of 100k/yr

Please read the article!

That's fair? And the politico's get more money, without the people
realizing how bad they is screwed. How much is the rebate? What if the
poor person is mostly buying food, which will be exempt, as political
suicide to tax basic groceries. Oh, now we have a national sales tax. We
just raise it anytime more money is wanted. California had a 3% sales tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.

"Short Wave Sportfishing" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:32:25 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
link.net...
The thing I HATE about a VAT tax is it is a hidden tax. Taxes should
be
up
front and visable. I would prefer that the income taxes collected go
into
a
special account that you have to write a check on to the government for
your
yearly income tax payment. Then these who say 'Oh, I got a refund this
year'. Would realize they just overpaid, and then maybe we would have
revolt at the ballot box on all the tax and spend politicians.
Bill


Come on up to Canada. We got rid of the old hidden Federal Sales Tax
back in 1993. We call our new national tax GST...(goods & services tax)
at
7%.
Here in my corner of the world...3 of the four Atlantic provinces went a
step further. We blended the 7% GST and the old 11% PST (provincial
sales
tax) into one 15% HST. Originally it was called BST (blended sales tax)
but everyone started calling it the bull **** tax...so the gov't actually
changed the name to Harmonized Sales Tax....H.S.T.
HST is added at the cash register and clearly shown on any receipt or
invoice.

So they changed it from the Bull **** Tax to the Horse **** Tax?

BRILLIANT!!

Later,

Tom

LMAO! But goes to show what happens with sales taxes, a % here and a %
there, pretty soon we are talking real %%%%'s.

Calif Bill wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

wrote:

The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.


This is why I asked you to read the article before commenting. The VAT
would be partially refunded based on income, and there would be an
income tax on those earning in excess of 100k/yr

Please read the article!


That's fair? And the politico's get more money, without the people
realizing how bad they is screwed. How much is the rebate? What if the
poor person is mostly buying food, which will be exempt, as political
suicide to tax basic groceries. Oh, now we have a national sales tax. We
just raise it anytime more money is wanted. California had a 3% sales tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.


Dunno that any tax is "fair"; but maybe at least we could understand it.
Why should it co$t me $80 just to have someone help me figure out how
much the government is going to take away from me?

Gotta be a better way than what we have now -- and I see this as a good
place to start discussing things.

"Jim," wrote in message
...
Calif Bill wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

wrote:

The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.


This is why I asked you to read the article before commenting. The VAT
would be partially refunded based on income, and there would be an
income tax on those earning in excess of 100k/yr

Please read the article!


That's fair? And the politico's get more money, without the people
realizing how bad they is screwed. How much is the rebate? What if the
poor person is mostly buying food, which will be exempt, as political
suicide to tax basic groceries. Oh, now we have a national sales tax.
We
just raise it anytime more money is wanted. California had a 3% sales
tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising
it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.


Dunno that any tax is "fair"; but maybe at least we could understand it.
Why should it co$t me $80 just to have someone help me figure out how
much the government is going to take away from me?

Gotta be a better way than what we have now -- and I see this as a good
place to start discussing things.


Vat is not the way. And $80 is really cheap. There are lots of ways to
simplify the tax code. But with the government targeting different groups
for special treatment all the time, the tax code is horrific. A flat tax is
my preferred method, with a minimum income to have to pay taxes and only
medical and medical insurance costs as deductions. I give this as a
deduction, as if you are covered by a company heath paid insurance, there is
a tax write off for it, but those like me who have to pay our own insurance
want the same treatment.

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:27:31 +0000, Calif Bill wrote:


California had a 3% sales tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.

You are hitting on one of the major problems. Surprisingly, as a percent
of GDP, the federal tax burden has been rather constant, @ 18% give or
take. What hasn't been constant, has been the growth in state taxes.
I've heard many at the state level complain about the federal government
mandating programs, but not funding those programs. I don't know how true
that is, but it does seem the major growth in taxes has been at the state
level.

http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/TaxFa...e.cfm?Docid=14

On Fri, 25 Mar 2005 03:32:11 GMT, "Jim," wrote:

Calif Bill wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

wrote:

The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.


This is why I asked you to read the article before commenting. The VAT
would be partially refunded based on income, and there would be an
income tax on those earning in excess of 100k/yr

Please read the article!


That's fair? And the politico's get more money, without the people
realizing how bad they is screwed. How much is the rebate? What if the
poor person is mostly buying food, which will be exempt, as political
suicide to tax basic groceries. Oh, now we have a national sales tax. We
just raise it anytime more money is wanted. California had a 3% sales tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.


Dunno that any tax is "fair"; but maybe at least we could understand it.
Why should it co$t me $80 just to have someone help me figure out how
much the government is going to take away from me?

Gotta be a better way than what we have now -- and I see this as a good
place to start discussing things.

Get Turbo Tax.
--
John H

"All decisions are the result of binary thinking."

"Calif Bill" wrote in message
news

"Jim," wrote in message
...
wrote:
The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.

This is why I asked you to read the article before commenting. The VAT
would be partially refunded based on income, and there would be an
income tax on those earning in excess of 100k/yr

Please read the article!

That's fair? And the politico's get more money, without the people
realizing how bad they is screwed. How much is the rebate? What if the
poor person is mostly buying food, which will be exempt, as political
suicide to tax basic groceries. Oh, now we have a national sales tax. We
just raise it anytime more money is wanted. California had a 3% sales tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.


And the income tax on excess of 100k is simply more class warfare BS.

The original income tax as only on the 'very wealthy" now look at it. Same
with SS

The flat tax is the only way to get the power away from the beltway crowd.

Short Wave Sportfishing wrote:

On Thu, 24 Mar 2005 23:32:25 GMT, "Don White"
wrote:


"Calif Bill" wrote in message
hlink.net...

The thing I HATE about a VAT tax is it is a hidden tax. Taxes should be

up

front and visable. I would prefer that the income taxes collected go into

a

special account that you have to write a check on to the government for

your

yearly income tax payment. Then these who say 'Oh, I got a refund this
year'. Would realize they just overpaid, and then maybe we would have
revolt at the ballot box on all the tax and spend politicians.
Bill


Come on up to Canada. We got rid of the old hidden Federal Sales Tax
back in 1993. We call our new national tax GST...(goods & services tax) at
7%.
Here in my corner of the world...3 of the four Atlantic provinces went a
step further. We blended the 7% GST and the old 11% PST (provincial sales
tax) into one 15% HST. Originally it was called BST (blended sales tax)
but everyone started calling it the bull **** tax...so the gov't actually
changed the name to Harmonized Sales Tax....H.S.T.
HST is added at the cash register and clearly shown on any receipt or
invoice.


So they changed it from the Bull **** Tax to the Horse **** Tax?

BRILLIANT!!

Later,

Tom


Awww, Damn! You let the poop out of the bag. Now we will have to
pay 133.67 million to come up with a new name for it.

Who do you think will get the feel good ad money?

It's a value added tax, (VAT) a tax on every profitable sale. Every
profitable sale, even government sales! Once the government gets
taxes for spending money, you have achieved critical mass.

The power to tax is the power to kill.

How much do they take in? Where does it go? Audit the *******s!

Terry K

wrote:

The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.

And to counter, they offer a low income reimbursement of VAT on
life's essentials, so that lower incomes get a cheque, four times a
year, which they immediately spend. They should also rebate mother's
a tax on diapers, etc. Tax books? Tax education tuition? Tax
education loans? Why not?

So, to spur the economy, raise the tax and the rebate, watch the
money ripple through the vegetable market, the clothing market, the
dentist's market, etc.

Reins on a runaway horse which comes after the cart, or maybe rides
in the cart, galloping on a treadmill?

Estate tax is next!

Terry k

Calif Bill wrote:
"Jim," wrote in message
...

wrote:

The value added tax will greatly increase the cost of goods, thus
affecting the
poor much more than the wealthy.

**************

That's why sales taxes are usually considered regressive. The poor are
compelled to spend 100% of their income on basic needs. The wealthy
spend as little as only a few percent on basic needs and merchandise
subject to VAT or sales tax, with a higher percentage spent on services
and travel and a very high percentage on investment.

When you go to a poor person and say, "VAT is 20%, so give me 20% of
what your earn" that can hurt a lot worse, (even though it's a lot less
money), than approaching a wealthy person with "VAT is 20% and you
spend 25% of your earnings on taxable items so hand over 5%".

Flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax, flat tax. No tax on the first
$30,000 or so per family per year, then a fixed rate of 15-20% on all
earnings above that regardless of source. It's very fair, doesn't
burden the poor with any tax at all, and takes a fixed, predictable,
even percentage from everybody else without special favors or
exemptions.


This is why I asked you to read the article before commenting. The VAT
would be partially refunded based on income, and there would be an
income tax on those earning in excess of 100k/yr

Please read the article!


That's fair? And the politico's get more money, without the people
realizing how bad they is screwed. How much is the rebate? What if the
poor person is mostly buying food, which will be exempt, as political
suicide to tax basic groceries. Oh, now we have a national sales tax. We
just raise it anytime more money is wanted. California had a 3% sales tax
in my youth, about 40 years ago. Now it is 8.25% and they keep raising it
for every special desire. Was in Italy in October. VAT was 20%.


Dunno that any tax is "fair"; but maybe at least we could understand it.
Why should it co$t me $80 just to have someone help me figure out how
much the government is going to take away from me?

Gotta be a better way than what we have now -- and I see this as a good
place to start discussing things.