
12-01-2006, 01:31 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North of mexico and south of Canada
Posts: 9,389
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ViRedd Want to increase the savings rate of Americans, Med? Honestly, do you? Well, all we have to do is to convert from a tax on income to a tax on consumption. That's it ... its that simple. Our tax system has turned Americans into non-savers, not the Bush administration. As an added bonus, we would vastly increase our economic liberty. And ... as economic liberty is increased, political liberty will be increased as well. Vi | That is strictly an opinion. What the Bush tax cuts did was to give more money to the wealthiest 10%, get over it, you'll never see the repeal of income tax in your lifetime. The reason there are no savers is the economy. spin it anyway you want, but it's that simple. Average income people pay more for everything and make no more than 5-10 years ago, health care, college, housing, transportation, etc. all more than 10 years ago while real wages have actually gone down! Does your consumtion tax include housing, would it turn people into non-spenders, how would that affect the economy?
__________________ "I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist. | 
12-02-2006, 04:40 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Socialist Republic of Kalifornia
Posts: 9,002
| | "Does your consumtion tax include housing, would it turn people into non-spenders, how would that affect the economy?" Hmmm ... by housing, do you mean a federal sales tax on a house when you buy it? If so, I don't believe there would be a federal tax when you buy a house, food, clothing or medicine. Not on the essensials, Med. People would still spend money. A wealthy person would buy a Mercedes, for example, and a person of more modest means would by a Ugo. One of the major benefits would be that the tax would be competely up front and not hidden. For example, a loaf of bread has something like 127 hidden taxes in it by the time it reaches the consumer. Just one tax is all that's necessary, Med. Look how simple it would be: When you pump gas into your car, you are paying local, state and federal sales taxes, right? Once the tank is full, you replace the nozzle and drive off. No forms to fill out, no worries about audits, no fines, no levies, no confiscation of propety either. A consumption (excise) tax is the tax of free men. A tax on income (labor) is the tax of slaves. Vi
__________________ Damned right I'm an equal opportunity offender, I'm a Conservative! | 
12-02-2006, 08:55 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North of mexico and south of Canada
Posts: 9,389
| | a person of more modest means would by a Ugo. I believe they were called Yugos and only a person in dire straights would ever have bought one of those, I think they're out of business in the good old USA, and not a moment too soon. Since I pretty much own everything I'll probably ever need for the rest of my life, (maybe the odd appliance or two), I'd vote for that, even though I pay no income tax. My wife on the other hand would benefit from that since she just bought a new car and will be good for at least ten years. But I think it should be progressive, If you buy a million dollar yacht you pay 100% tax, If you buy a 35,000 car you pay 20%, I could see this as beneficial. I just don't see it as being sufficient to run the government, We'd have to lay off 95% of govt and couldn't afford a standing army or be able to wage wars, wait, thats good, sign me up. LOL.
__________________ "I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist. | 
12-03-2006, 04:53 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Socialist Republic of Kalifornia
Posts: 9,002
| | Well, first of all, a consumption tax would be progressive in most cases. For example if a person buys a $250,000 Ferrari, and the federal tax is 26%, he would pay $65,000 in federal tax. If another person bought a new Ford sedan for $22,000, then that person would pay $5720. in federal tax. Your suggesstion of charging the purchaser a 100% tax just because he/she buys a more expensive car is nothing more then an envy tax. You ARE for equality under the law, aren't you? The tax WOULD be sufficient to run the government, Med. Just sock it to us one time, with one up-front tax where it can be seen by all. If Americans deem the tax to be way too onerous, then perhaps we have way too much government. Vi
__________________ Damned right I'm an equal opportunity offender, I'm a Conservative! | 
12-03-2006, 05:02 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North of mexico and south of Canada
Posts: 9,389
| | The tax WOULD be sufficient to run the government, Med. How can you be sure, what if the rich stopped buying because they had plenty and didn't like the tax? There is no regulation here. People can't stop earning, but a lot of rich people could sure stop spending for a while!
__________________ "I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist. | 
12-03-2006, 05:42 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Socialist Republic of Kalifornia
Posts: 9,002
| | Why would they stop spending? I mean, what's the point of making money if not to spend it and/or invest it? I agree that people would consider the tax before they bought ... and that's one of the major points; to get people to at least CONSIDER the tax. Now then, if spending really did slow down as you suggest, all government has to do is just raise the tax some more. Well, that's what the liberals would suggest. In reality, to increase governemnt revenues, the tax should be lowered to encourage more spending. Hmmm ... where have we heard that debate before? *lol* Vi
__________________ Damned right I'm an equal opportunity offender, I'm a Conservative! | 
12-03-2006, 06:31 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North of mexico and south of Canada
Posts: 9,389
| | this is ridiculous, how low can you go. Zero tax is your goal. A country or society can not operate without revenue, so you're proposing Anarchy. I hope you've got lots of guns and a bullet proof car and a few bodyguards, because the masses are coming for your money..... when the government stops operating for lack of funds, It won't be the poor people that will be stressed out, they already know what it's like, but the rich bastards will have no police protection, it's bye-bye Vi!
__________________ "I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist. | 
12-03-2006, 06:41 PM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Socialist Republic of Kalifornia
Posts: 9,002
| | OK, now point out where I've ever said, in any of my posts, that I want a zero tax, or where I'm proposing anarchy. Search as you might ... you will never find it. And by the way ... police, firemen, mayors and housing inspectors are all funded at the local level. Vi
__________________ Damned right I'm an equal opportunity offender, I'm a Conservative!
Last edited by ViRedd; 12-03-2006 at 06:50 PM.
| 
12-04-2006, 10:07 AM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: North of mexico and south of Canada
Posts: 9,389
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by ViRedd OK, now point out where I've ever said, in any of my posts, that I want a zero tax, or where I'm proposing anarchy. Search as you might ... you will never find it. And by the way ... police, firemen, mayors and housing inspectors are all funded at the local level. Vi | still by taxation! So just lay it out for me, how will your tax plan liberate all of us from poverty and make it possible for everyone to make a good living, provide for the "general welfare", "insure domestic tranquility", And refurbish the decaying infrastructure?
__________________ "I suppose I always knew America would eventually break the planet, like some ghastly, hyperactive toddler that gets hold of a mobile phone and then smashes it repeatedly against the edge of a table". Quote from british journalist.
Last edited by medicineman; 12-04-2006 at 10:14 AM.
| 
12-04-2006, 11:50 AM
|  | Super Stoner Mr. Ganja | | Join Date: Sep 2006 Location: Socialist Republic of Kalifornia
Posts: 9,002
| | Quote:
Originally Posted by medicineman still by taxation! So just lay it out for me, how will your tax plan liberate all of us from poverty and make it possible for everyone to make a good living, provide for the "general welfare", "insure domestic tranquility", And refurbish the decaying infrastructure? | My tax plan WON'T do any of that Med ... and "Tax Plans" should NEVER be intended for such use. You want to create Eden from money taken from "A" by giving it to "B." The only society that would create is one where everyone is subserviant to the state. Your plan certainly wouldn't "Insure domestic tranquility." Your plan would do nothing but pit one class against another. No thanks! Vi PS: And there you go again with the PROVIDE for the general welfare thingie. Sheesh!
__________________ Damned right I'm an equal opportunity offender, I'm a Conservative! | | Thread Tools | | | | Display Modes | Linear Mode |
Posting Rules
| You may not post new threads You may not post replies You may not post attachments You may not edit your posts HTML code is Off | | | Come Check out a new Poker Forum for the online poker community All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:23 PM.
Page generated in 16.44542 seconds with 12 queries |