Ron Paul Is Secretly Taking Over The GOP — And It's Driving People Insane

[71buickfreak]

Clay, that's bullcrap. Yes, your own situation is under your control to a point. I chose to have 3 kids, wouldn't have it any other way. I live well on my income, and I love my work. The point is this- if we are going to tax the people, tax them proportionately. Sales tax-based income taxes are not fair, period. I don't mind paying taxes, but I should not have to be taxed on more of my income than some guy who makes 1 million a year. With great income comes great responsibility. Flat tax is far superior to sales tax. A flat tax taxes the dollar amount earned, not the amount spent because like one person said, it all gets spent eventually. It becomes really simple- you earn $1, you owe 10 cents to tax, no shelters, no rebates, no incentives. Just pay the tax and be done with it. You earn 1 million a year? great, pay up. You earn 20k a year, that sucks, pay up. eliminate the loopholes by making taxes fair. I am happy for you, if you can make 5 million a year, congratulations. Now pay your dues for living here. There will have to be concessions for the poor, you just can't tax the poor, it isn't right. Once you are poor, it is extremely difficult to get out of that situation. You can say all you want, but I have been there. My parents lost their business in a hostile takeover when I was 15. We were very well off, not uber-rich, but I wanted for nothing. Then, literally overnight, everything was taken from them. They never recovered. It eventually tooks it's toll on my dad and he died from the stress. I have built my business from nothing, it is extremely difficult to do it. I took a huge risk, quitting my day job and going at it on my own. I one of a handful of full-time freelance automotive journalists, that actually supports his family with it. All of this is besides the point. Obama paid less taxes both percentage and actual cash value, than the assistants that work in his office. Of course Obama is using this as a campaign point, but the real point is why would he have let his accountant use all the loopholes he says he wants to close? Because they are all hippocrits.

Fair tax is not fair. Flat tax is fair, progressive taxes can be fair as long as the rules are simple and clear.

And corporations should be paying more taxes instead of profiting from them. In 2010, GE recieved 3.2 billion (IIRC that is a close figure) in refunds from the US. They did this by funnelling all of their losses to the US branch, and their profits to the countries that have little to no tax on businesses. So the US citizens paid GE 2.3 billion to be here. Their tax department is all about finding ways to profit from filing losses. they paid no taxes. none. got a big fat refund check. Pretty sure they can afford to pay some business taxes.

 

[inactive]

You chose that job at that salary

If you truly believe in Adam Smith, invisible hand style economics, then you cannot fully say everyone can choose to train and educate themselves to work a job that pays more. That's part of the paradox of Libertarian economic policies. There will be a market for low income workers and the invisible hand moves people to fill those jobs. To say people would choose to suffer working them and choose to pay a larger percentage of their income as a consumption tax is naive.

@71buickfreak

The middle class and poor pay the lion's share of taxes?? Bwahahaha!!! I needed a good laugh. Thanks.

You do realize that 47% of people pay no taxes. I'll let you guess which class of people that is. It ain't the richest 47%. Also, 93.3% of taxes paid are by people making $50,000 or more. The top 10% of earner's paid 71% of taxes. So again, just explain to me how the poor and middle class are paying the lion's share. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your class warfare.

I won't argue that the middle and lower classes pay the lion's share of taxes (which would fall into the conservative talk radio straw man trap), but I will argue that the "middle class" pay a larger percentage of their income as taxes, as they earn straight wages instead of capital gains. They certainly would if we had a flat consumption tax as well. Remember we're not discussing just raw dollars here, we're talking rates. I wonder what that 71% of total taxes would be as a percentage of the top 10% of earner's income? I wonder if it is higher than a couple with two children earning 100k per year? I don't know for sure, but I bet the top earner taxes as percentage of income would be less than the family of 4.

 

[71buickfreak]

@71buickfreak

The middle class and poor pay the lion's share of taxes?? Bwahahaha!!! I needed a good laugh. Thanks.

You do realize that 47% of people pay no taxes. I'll let you guess which class of people that is. It ain't the richest 47%. Also, 93.3% of taxes paid are by people making $50,000 or more. The top 10% of earner's paid 71% of taxes. So again, just explain to me how the poor and middle class are paying the lion's share. But hey, don't let facts get in the way of your class warfare.

Because the rich have access to tax shelters that people who don't make as much don't have access to. It is pretty simple. You are super rich, you own a G5 plane that costs around 35 million. You use it to get from place to place for business. The entire plane just became a tax deduction with depreciation that will go on reducing your tax burden for decades. It doesn't take long to reduce 15 million in income to next to nothing when everything you own can be justified as a business expense.

There are far more middle class people paying their honest taxes than the rich paying their drastically reduced versions. You can't just listen to what Forbes or Money says, because it is skewed to show that the rich pay more taxes, where the liberal media like to say that the rich pay no taxes, which is equally untrue. The fact of the matter is that the current tax system is unfair and unjust. I want you to be able to earn 5 million a year, but in order to justify that obscene amount of money, you need to pay more in taxes.

I think taxes need to be added to the politics and religion list. They just shouldn't be talked about because no one is ever going to agree.

 

[Glocktogo]

Clay, that's bullcrap. Yes, your own situation is under your control to a point. I chose to have 3 kids, wouldn't have it any other way. I live well on my income, and I love my work. The point is this- if we are going to tax the people, tax them proportionately. Sales tax-based income taxes are not fair, period. I don't mind paying taxes, but I should not have to be taxed on more of my income than some guy who makes 1 million a year. With great income comes great responsibility. Flat tax is far superior to sales tax. A flat tax taxes the dollar amount earned, not the amount spent because like one person said, it all gets spent eventually. It becomes really simple- you earn $1, you owe 10 cents to tax, no shelters, no rebates, no incentives. Just pay the tax and be done with it. You earn 1 million a year? great, pay up. You earn 20k a year, that sucks, pay up. eliminate the loopholes by making taxes fair. I am happy for you, if you can make 5 million a year, congratulations. Now pay your dues for living here. There will have to be concessions for the poor, you just can't tax the poor, it isn't right. Once you are poor, it is extremely difficult to get out of that situation. You can say all you want, but I have been there. My parents lost their business in a hostile takeover when I was 15. We were very well off, not uber-rich, but I wanted for nothing. Then, literally overnight, everything was taken from them. They never recovered. It eventually tooks it's toll on my dad and he died from the stress. I have built my business from nothing, it is extremely difficult to do it. I took a huge risk, quitting my day job and going at it on my own. I one of a handful of full-time freelance automotive journalists, that actually supports his family with it. All of this is besides the point. Obama paid less taxes both percentage and actual cash value, than the assistants that work in his office. Of course Obama is using this as a campaign point, but the real point is why would he have let his accountant use all the loopholes he says he wants to close? Because they are all hippocrits.

Fair tax is not fair. Flat tax is fair, progressive taxes can be fair as long as the rules are simple and clear.

And corporations should be paying more taxes instead of profiting from them. In 2010, GE recieved 3.2 billion (IIRC that is a close figure) in refunds from the US. They did this by funnelling all of their losses to the US branch, and their profits to the countries that have little to no tax on businesses. So the US citizens paid GE 2.3 billion to be here. Their tax department is all about finding ways to profit from filing losses. they paid no taxes. none. got a big fat refund check. Pretty sure they can afford to pay some business taxes.

To the bolded part, who says you can't tax the poor? Seriously? If you don't get taxed anything, then what stake do you have in the investment of the country? If all you do is get free stuff, where's the incentive to dig yourself out? Where is self-worth reinforced if you're just a drag on society? I'm not necessarily talking about taking 10%, but you should always pay something. Even a pittance is better than nothing. If 47% were paying something, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in. I'm sorry, but if you pay nothing, then you shouldn't be entitled to anything in return. If you make no money at all, you should expect to live of the largesse of the charitable. Not the forced charity of the government. The government isn't Robin Hood and should stop pretending they are.

As for corporate taxes, you're essentially reinforcing that we should significantly decrease the corporate tax rate so that global companies will shift their profits and by extension, their tax burdens back to the United States. Wouldn't it be better to have GE paying half of the current tax rate than getting paid 2.3 billion? Having global companies shift their burdens offshore and not allowing small national businesses an opportunity to do the same is an unlevel playing field. This isn't even fuzzy logic, it's concrete!

 

[POKE1911]

The whole "he who has more should pay a higher percentage" mentality is socialistic in nature. It is easy to feel compassion for Jill & Steve, but sympathy doesn't drive the economy.

A nice video relating taxes to GPA.

 

[bulbboy]

Yes, they probably have worked hard to get there. They also earn ridiculous amounts of money. They should pay for it. .

I don't like this unequal thinking. I believe everyone should pay the same percentage.

 

[inactive]

I'm sorry, but if you pay nothing, then you shouldn't be entitled to anything in return. (

Hell, I'd be happy if they just paid nothing. Right now, people receive more money in taxes than they pay in. I'm not just talking welfare programs. I'm talking the refund on their 1040 return. It blows my mind that sometimes the return is even more than the taxes paid in.

I'm not often one to judge "poor" people and tell them how to conduct themselves, but I'm confident in saying giving lower income people a giant hunk of cash (on a refund anticipation loan most surely) does not responsibly better them.

I mean, my Brother in Law gets back more than he pays in due to EIC. He still doesn't understand why I would tell him to set his withholding to zero (as he has no tax liability, he can have zero withheld). Rather than get 250 bucks more each month and still get a 3000 "refund," he would rather have smaller checks and 6,000 lump sum. He like the "big check" as he calls it.

 

[Rajder]

To the bolded part, who says you can't tax the poor? Seriously? If you don't get taxed anything, then what stake do you have in the investment of the country? If all you do is get free stuff, where's the incentive to dig yourself out? Where is self-worth reinforced if you're just a drag on society? I'm not necessarily talking about taking 10%, but you should always pay something. Even a pittance is better than nothing. If 47% were paying something, we wouldn't be in the mess we're in. I'm sorry, but if you pay nothing, then you shouldn't be entitled to anything in return. If you make no money at all, you should expect to live of the largesse of the charitable. Not the forced charity of the government. The government isn't Robin Hood and should stop pretending they are.

As for corporate taxes, you're essentially reinforcing that we should significantly decrease the corporate tax rate so that global companies will shift their profits and by extension, their tax burdens back to the United States. Wouldn't it be better to have GE paying half of the current tax rate than getting paid 2.3 billion? Having global companies shift their burdens offshore and not allowing small national businesses an opportunity to do the same is an unlevel playing field. This isn't even fuzzy logic, it's concrete!

While I agree with the sentiment that everyone should have some skin in the game the truth is that taxing the poor in any amount wouldn't make one bit of difference in our budget. Poor people basically have nothing so taxing them doesn't really do any good. I saw a statistic once compared the math of taxing poor people and letting the Bush tax cuts expire. It pointed out the fallacy in the statement of some people that raising taxes on "rich" people wouldn't raise enough money to do any good but taxing poor people would be a good idea. Basically to equal the amount of money raised by letting the Bush tax cuts expire on the top 2% you would have to take 1/2 of everything that the bottom 47% own. I'm not just talking about their income tax it was talking about their income and all of their worldy possessions. Like I said, I agree with the sentiment that everyone should have some skin in the game but the math shows that it wouldn't make a difference in the world.

We all know that the corporate tax structure in this country is screwed up. It allows our super large corporations to take advantage of loop holes while punishing our small businesses.

 

[Clay]

If you truly believe in Adam Smith, invisible hand style economics, then you cannot fully say everyone can choose to train and educate themselves to work a job that pays more. That's part of the paradox of Libertarian economic policies. There will be a market for low income workers and the invisible hand moves people to fill those jobs. To say people would choose to suffer working them and choose to pay a larger percentage of their income as a consumption tax is naive.

Well i dont think I am naive so let me explain myself further. I fully understand we all take a **** job at some point in our lives to simply get by or a job thats not something we are interested in but it pays well enough to get us by until we can reach the next step in this game of life. BUT if you retire from that **** job, it was your choice to not better yourself. I worked many jobs I hated but I needed the money to get me by while I got an education. If I had chosen to stay at Hardees flipping hamburgers, then I deserve all that that brings...very little. That was 30 years ago.

 

[inactive]

Well i dont think I am naive so let me explain myself further. I fully understand we all take a **** job at some point in our lives to simply get by or a job thats not something we are interested in but it pays well enough to get us by until we can reach the next step in this game of life. BUT if you retire from that **** job, it was your choice to not better yourself. I worked many jobs I hated but I needed the money to get me by while I got an education. If I had chosen to stay at Hardees flipping hamburgers, then I deserve all that that brings...very little. That was 30 years ago.

There's a whole heck of a lot more *** jobs than there are 13 year-olds to work them.