DakotaT
14 years ago

Sales and VAT taxes are not progressive, they act somewhat regressively! Do not think that rich people spend more, it is the reverse! A greater proportion of a lower income family's income is spent on consumption compared to a wealthy family, who may spend a lower proportion of their household income on consumption goods, where the rest of the money is invested, hoarded, wasted etc. Sales and VAT taxes do not work in isolation because it worsens the economic balance between the rich and the poor.

"TheEngineer" wrote:



Sales taxes are regressive. They hurt poorer people more. A national sales will also have an adverse effect on the economy, because what they don't tell you is that everything is going to be taxable, even services. What they also don't tell you is the fiscal note of replacing the current income tax rate. The national sales tax rate is going to be a lot higher than what we are paying at our local rates.

National sales is being pushed by the Republican Party because the wealthy Republicans are tired of being overtaxed with the current system. I don't really have a problem with that line of thinking exept for the moral obligation to humanity that many wealthy seem to be willing to set aside for the perceived fairness.

I don't like the fact that there is a free lunch out there for those that choose to live that way, but I've come to the realization in life that if that is how a person wants to constrict himself to a lifestyle, then the system is in place for abuse. Initiative is not inherited trait, it is a learned behavior. I have more of a problem with the upper 10 percent continuing a lifestyle of a king, when a great percentage of them had it all handed to them on a silver platter.

There is not going to be a great equalizer tax system, it's just not possible. What I have witnessed in life is that a balanced tax system is what works best, but having lower rates in all. The problem is politics because PACs talk Legislators into allowing self serving exemptions and credits.
UserPostedImage
Formo
14 years ago

Sales and VAT taxes are not progressive, they act somewhat regressively! Do not think that rich people spend more, it is the reverse! A greater proportion of a lower income family's income is spent on consumption compared to a wealthy family, who may spend a lower proportion of their household income on consumption goods, where the rest of the money is invested, hoarded, wasted etc. Sales and VAT taxes do not work in isolation because it worsens the economic balance between the rich and the poor.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Sales taxes are regressive. They hurt poorer people more. A national sales will also have an adverse effect on the economy, because what they don't tell you is that everything is going to be taxable, even services. What they also don't tell you is the fiscal note of replacing the current income tax rate. The national sales tax rate is going to be a lot higher than what we are paying at our local rates.

National sales is being pushed by the Republican Party because the wealthy Republicans are tired of being overtaxed with the current system. I don't really have a problem with that line of thinking exept for the moral obligation to humanity that many wealthy seem to be willing to set aside for the perceived fairness.

I don't like the fact that there is a free lunch out there for those that choose to live that way, but I've come to the realization in life that if that is how a person wants to constrict himself to a lifestyle, then the system is in place for abuse. Initiative is not inherited trait, it is a learned behavior. I have more of a problem with the upper 10 percent continuing a lifestyle of a king, when a great percentage of them had it all handed to them on a silver platter.

There is not going to be a great equalizer tax system, it's just not possible. What I have witnessed in life is that a balanced tax system is what works best, but having lower rates in all. The problem is politics because PACs talk Legislators into allowing self serving exemptions and credits.

"TheEngineer" wrote:



You do realize the bolded is a very wrong statement, right? I'll have to go find my numbers, but the percentage of the wealthy that inherited their wealth is really low. You just have a problem with people making more money than you.. Which is fine, but taking their money away doesn't help anything. Here's a novel idea.. Figure out a way to make more than them! -=gasp!=- I know it's a groundbreaking thought. :thumbright:

BTW, there is NO free lunch out there. Ever. There is no proof you can display that can support that there is. Nothing is ever free.

The point of a sales/VAT tax is to have a flat rate on everything. Yes.. EVERYTHING. You can't tell me it'll tax the poor people more, because they buy less. The $2,000 I spend on a monthly amount is WAAAAAAY less than any person that makes $100k a year spends. I want to know where in the hell you guys come up with the idea that the poor will be taxed more with this tax system.

Also, last thought.. Why do the rich have to help the poor? The best way they could help the poor is to teach them how to get rich, right? (the old give a man a fish-he eats for a day, teach a man to fish-he eats for the rest of his life thing) How does giving the poor a bigger tax break help them to get rich (or how to handle the money they got)?

I guess I'm not in the camp that says to feel sorry or pity the poor and give them money. You want more money? Here's a job, work your way up like the rest of the wealthy have!
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago
ah...Formo gets an A in econ class. 🙂
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Formo
14 years ago

ah...Formo gets an A in econ class. :)

"Wade" wrote:



I don't know if you are joking.. But I laughed.

Mostly because my econ teacher in high school tried to fail me my senior year (econ was a required credit to graduate). He didn't teach anything, just gave us lecture after lecture after lecture, and graded us on how many notes we took and how many newspaper articles we read/took notes on/tested.

I find out later his agenda was to fail as many kids as possible. LOL

I deserved the F, but passed because my uncle would refuse to let me fail that class and told my teacher to give me the fair amount of papers to write to make up for my idiocy. Final verdict? 18 papers (front and back) on 18 different newspaper articles. It was a record he told me.

The only thing I learned in that class? What the BBB was.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
DakotaT
14 years ago
The reason my dear Formo that sales tax is regressive: you tax monthly consumables and lets say the person that makes $5,000 a month spends $200 a week on groceries and so does the person making $2,000 a month. You think they pay the same taxes right, well that same tax kicks the guy making $2,000 in the nuts a lot harder than the guy making $5,000. That's the definition ofo regressive taxes. It really is that simple.

And by the way, I can think whatever I want about silver spoon pricks that never had to earn anything in their life. I'm quite certain I've earned everything I have. You do realize I'm talking about those panty waistes that go from Daddy's mansion to the frat house to Wall Street, basically the dip shits that have been running our country for the last 100 years, convincing middle class America in the process that their enemy is the welfare case.

It's a little bit amusing to me that this country, that's been blessed with so much, cries like a bunch of pussies when it comes to paying their taxes. It's the same dipshits that cry piss and moan about taxes that also want their street cleared first, every pot hole fixed immediately, and their tax refund in a week.

A national sales tax is an OK idea to get us out of this debt, but as for a replacement for the Individual Income Tax; well let's just say your going to be paying around 25% on everything you buy. Real smart. How's that effect your economics Wade?
UserPostedImage
Formo
14 years ago

The reason my dear Formo that sales tax is regressive: you tax monthly consumables and lets say the person that makes $5,000 a month spends $200 a week on groceries and so does the person making $2,000 a month. You think they pay the same taxes right, well that same tax kicks the guy making $2,000 in the nuts a lot harder than the guy making $5,000. That's the definition ofo regressive taxes. It really is that simple.

"DakotaT" wrote:



Here's a question then.. Why buy so much groceries? Seriously.. It's not that hard of an issue. Besides, that's just groceries. I'm willing to bet the guy making $5k/month spends more on entertainment and other things than the guy making $2k/month. It balances out.

And by the way, I can think whatever I want about silver spoon pricks that never had to earn anything in their life. I'm quite certain I've earned everything I have. You do realize I'm talking about those panty waistes that go from Daddy's mansion to the frat house to Wall Street, basically the dip shits that have been running our country for the last 100 years, convincing middle class America in the process that their enemy is the welfare case.

It's a little bit amusing to me that this country, that's been blessed with so much, cries like a bunch of pussies when it comes to paying their taxes. It's the same dipshits that cry piss and moan about taxes that also want their street cleared first, every pot hole fixed immediately, and their tax refund in a week.

A national sales tax is an OK idea to get us out of this debt, but as for a replacement for the Individual Income Tax; well let's just say your going to be paying around 25% on everything you buy. Real smart. How's that effect your economics Wade?

"DakotaT" wrote:



Then stop buying so much. =)

What it does is forces people to think about their purchases (you know, the same group of people that have the microwave mentality of I want such-and-such, and I want it NOW!). Hey, I'm with you on the rich that get their wealth handed to them.. Only 5% of those types of people ever expand their wealth (that number probably has changed since I last heard it). But the percentage of wealth that gets handed down isn't as much as you think.
UserPostedImage
Thanks to TheViking88 for the sig!!
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago

ah...Formo gets an A in econ class. :)

"Formo" wrote:



I don't know if you are joking.. But I laughed.

Mostly because my econ teacher in high school tried to fail me my senior year (econ was a required credit to graduate). He didn't teach anything, just gave us lecture after lecture after lecture, and graded us on how many notes we took and how many newspaper articles we read/took notes on/tested.

I find out later his agenda was to fail as many kids as possible. LOL

I deserved the F, but passed because my uncle would refuse to let me fail that class and told my teacher to give me the fair amount of papers to write to make up for my idiocy. Final verdict? 18 papers (front and back) on 18 different newspaper articles. It was a record he told me.

The only thing I learned in that class? What the BBB was.

"Wade" wrote:



ah...no, I was serious. I agreed with you.

(oh yes, and the "regressive" argument is a red herring. Technically, a regressive tax is one where the tax _rate_ gets smaller.

Oh yes, and you could impose a 100 % tax on the _wealth_ of the top 5 percent (or the income of the top 15-20 percent), and the USA government would still be grossly bankrupt.

(most econ teachers suck, alas.)
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago

The reason my dear Formo that sales tax is regressive: you tax monthly consumables and lets say the person that makes $5,000 a month spends $200 a week on groceries and so does the person making $2,000 a month. You think they pay the same taxes right, well that same tax kicks the guy making $2,000 in the nuts a lot harder than the guy making $5,000. That's the definition ofo regressive taxes. It really is that simple.

And by the way, I can think whatever I want about silver spoon pricks that never had to earn anything in their life. I'm quite certain I've earned everything I have. You do realize I'm talking about those panty waistes that go from Daddy's mansion to the frat house to Wall Street, basically the dip shits that have been running our country for the last 100 years, convincing middle class America in the process that their enemy is the welfare case.

It's a little bit amusing to me that this country, that's been blessed with so much, cries like a bunch of pussies when it comes to paying their taxes. It's the same dipshits that cry piss and moan about taxes that also want their street cleared first, every pot hole fixed immediately, and their tax refund in a week.

A national sales tax is an OK idea to get us out of this debt, but as for a replacement for the Individual Income Tax; well let's just say your going to be paying around 25% on everything you buy. Real smart. How's that effect your economics Wade?

"DakotaT" wrote:



I think I said this above, Dakota, but I'll say it again.

All a tax does is re-distribute wealth from one pocket to another. That is the same whether it is a income tax, a sales tax, a VAT, or a sumptuary tax on lutefisk.

If you want to solve this country's economic problems, NO TAX PLAN, NONE, NADA, is going to do it. You need to find a way to figure out how to ratchet up the growth engine. FInd ways to create more wealth from which to pay the accumulating interest and, eventually, the principal.

Any politician, any economist, any journalist, any think tank who says otherwise is not worth listening to. Because they all are fulla shit.
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
DakotaT
14 years ago



I think I said this above, Dakota, but I'll say it again.

All a tax does is re-distribute wealth from one pocket to another. That is the same whether it is a income tax, a sales tax, a VAT, or a sumptuary tax on lutefisk.

If you want to solve this country's economic problems, NO TAX PLAN, NONE, NADA, is going to do it. You need to find a way to figure out how to ratchet up the growth engine. FInd ways to create more wealth from which to pay the accumulating interest and, eventually, the principal.

"Wade" wrote:




Are we living some kind of fairy tale vacuum here? Who's paying the hard corp bills in this country without taxation. Are we relying people's good nature to donate the cabbage needed to fund schools, infrastruture, defense and everything else taxes are currently paying for?

Now in this discussion about point of taxation, I will always stand up for the poor man and want to tear down the rich. Throughout the centuries the wealthy have become that on the backs of the poor, they've held power, made the laws, and always were fighting against a one legged man in an ass kicking contest. My question is, do we ever evolve to a world without classes? If this country keeps on having an ever expanding gap between the wealthy and poor, we will fully understand what happened to Marie Antionette, because we will be seeing it.
UserPostedImage
Wade
  • Wade
  • Veteran Member
14 years ago
The Ancien Regime in France was corrupt to the core, yes.

And the French Revolution was all about empowering the people. And what the Committee on Public Safety (the group otherwise known as the Reign of Terror and the consensus pick as inspiration of the term "terrorism", was formed to do was ensure that the poor were so protected. Robispierre, the head of said Committee was in fact, before he came to power and realized (a) he was in over his head and (b) he _really_ liked being in charge, was in fact a "reformer."

And it collapsed as such notions inevitably do, because people think all it takes is to redistribute the wealth is to take from the rich and give to the poor.

Now if you want to argue that "poor person A" is a more productive person than "rich person B" in a lot of cases, I won't disagree. But I dare *anyone* to find a systematic principle upon which one can decide which of the poor and which of the rich ought to switch places.

And even if you could find such a principle, you'd still be stuck with the debt. You just have different people paying the interest now.

And you'd still be stuck with the reality that the only way you're going to deal with the problem is figure out how to increase the country's wealth at a rate that even that rapacious group of capitalist bastards, the single most successful group in human history at increasing a nation's wealth and sustaining that rate of increase, couldn't manage.

Peasant revolts have NEVER worked in the sustained way that the capitalist class have managed. And neither have working-man revolts.

Never.

And *I'm* living a fairy tale?
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)
Similar Topics
Users browsing this topic
    Fan Shout
    Zero2Cool (18m) : Jaguars have hired Anthony Campanile as their DC. We lose coach
    Zero2Cool (21h) : QB coach Sean Mannion
    Zero2Cool (21h) : DL Coach DeMarcus Covington
    dfosterf (30-Jan) : from ft Belvoir, Quantico and points south. Somber reminder of this tragedy at Reagan Nat Airport
    dfosterf (30-Jan) : So eerily quiet here in Alexandria. I live in the flight path of commercial craft coming from the south and west, plus the military craft
    dfosterf (30-Jan) : So eeri
    Mucky Tundra (30-Jan) : Now that's a thought, maybe they're looking at the college ranks? Maybe not head coaches but DC/assistant DCs with league experience?
    beast (30-Jan) : College Coaches wouldn't want that publicly, as it would hurt recruiting and they might not get the job.
    beast (30-Jan) : I thought they were supposed to publicly announce them, at least the NFL ones. Hafley was from college, so I believe different rules.
    Mucky Tundra (30-Jan) : Who knows who they're interviewing? I mean, nobody knew about Hafley and then out of nowhere he was hired
    beast (30-Jan) : I wonder what's taking so long with hiring a DL coach, 2 of the 3 known to interview have already been hired elsewhere.
    Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Packers coach Matt LaFleur hires Luke Getsy as senior assistant, extends Rich Bisaccia's deal
    Zero2Cool (27-Jan) : Chiefs again huh? I guess another Super Bowl I'll be finding something else to do.
    Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : Chiefs Eagles...again...sigh
    dfosterf (27-Jan) : Happy Birthday Dave!
    Mucky Tundra (27-Jan) : happy birthday dhazer
    TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Exactly buck...Washington came up with the ball. It is just a shitty coincidence one week later
    buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : I forgot, they corrected the call a week later. Lol btw HAPPY BIRTHDAY dhazer!
    buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : That brings up the question, why wasn't Nixon down by contact? I think that was the point Kanata was making.
    buckeyepackfan (26-Jan) : Turnovers rule, win the turnover battle, win the game.
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : well, he was
    TheKanataThrilla (26-Jan) : Eagles down by contact on the fumble....fuck you NFL
    Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : I think this games over
    beast (26-Jan) : Eagles sure get a lot of fumbles on kickoffs
    Mucky Tundra (26-Jan) : This game looks too big for Washington
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : that being said, The Ravens are the Browns
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : Browns, Dolphins have longest AFC Championship droughts
    packerfanoutwest (26-Jan) : As of today, Cowboys have longest NFC Championship drought,
    beast (26-Jan) : Someone pointed out, with Raiders hiring Carroll, the division games between Carroll and Jim Harbaugh are back on (who can whine more games)
    beast (26-Jan) : I'm confused, Pete Carroll and Brian Schottenheimer? When Todd Monken, Joe Brady, Kellen Moore, Kliff Kingsbury and Zac Robinson are availab
    Zero2Cool (25-Jan) : Any reason I'm catching a shot here about my intelligence?
    Martha Careful (25-Jan) : thank you Mucky for sticking up for me
    Martha Careful (25-Jan) : some of those people are smarter than you zero. However Pete Carroll is not
    Mucky Tundra (24-Jan) : Rude!
    beast (24-Jan) : Martha? 😋
    Zero2Cool (24-Jan) : Raiders hired someone from the elderly home.
    dfosterf (24-Jan) : I'm going with a combination of the two.
    beast (24-Jan) : Either the Cowboys have no idea what they're doing, or they're targeting their former OC, currently the Eagles OC
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Fake news. Cowboys say no
    Zero2Cool (23-Jan) : Mystery candidate in the Cowboys head coaching search believed to be Packers ST Coordinator Rich Bisaccia.
    beast (23-Jan) : Also why do both NYC teams have absolutely horrible OL for over a decade?
    beast (23-Jan) : I wonder why the Jets always hire defensive coaches to be head coach
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Still HC positions available out there. I wonder if Hafley pops up for one
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Trent Baalke is out as the Jaguars GM.
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Jeff Hafley would have been a better choice, fortunately they don't know that. Someone will figure that out next off season
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Aaron Glenn Planning To Take Jets HC Job
    dfosterf (22-Jan) : Martha- C'est mon boulot! 😁
    Zero2Cool (22-Jan) : Thank you
    wpr (22-Jan) : Z, glad you are feeling better.
    wpr (22-Jan) : My son and D-I-L work for UM. It's a way to pick on them.
    Please sign in to use Fan Shout
    2024 Packers Schedule
    Friday, Sep 6 @ 7:15 PM
    Eagles
    29 - 34
    Sunday, Sep 15 @ 12:00 PM
    COLTS
    16 - 10
    Sunday, Sep 22 @ 12:00 PM
    Titans
    30 - 14
    Sunday, Sep 29 @ 12:00 PM
    VIKINGS
    29 - 31
    Sunday, Oct 6 @ 3:25 PM
    Rams
    24 - 19
    Sunday, Oct 13 @ 12:00 PM
    CARDINALS
    34 - 13
    Sunday, Oct 20 @ 12:00 PM
    TEXANS
    24 - 22
    Sunday, Oct 27 @ 12:00 PM
    Jaguars
    30 - 27
    Sunday, Nov 3 @ 3:25 PM
    LIONS
    14 - 24
    Sunday, Nov 17 @ 12:00 PM
    Bears
    20 - 19
    Sunday, Nov 24 @ 3:25 PM
    49ERS
    38 - 10
    Thursday, Nov 28 @ 7:20 PM
    DOLPHINS
    30 - 17
    Thursday, Dec 5 @ 7:15 PM
    Lions
    31 - 34
    Sunday, Dec 15 @ 7:20 PM
    Seahawks
    30 - 13
    Monday, Dec 23 @ 7:15 PM
    SAINTS
    34 - 0
    Sunday, Dec 29 @ 3:25 PM
    Vikings
    25 - 27
    Sunday, Jan 5 @ 12:00 PM
    BEARS
    22 - 24
    Sunday, Jan 12 @ 3:30 PM
    Eagles
    10 - 22
    Recent Topics
    12h / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    22h / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    30-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    29-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Mucky Tundra

    27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / packerfanoutwest

    27-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    25-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    25-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Martha Careful

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / bboystyle

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    20-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / beast

    19-Jan / Random Babble / Martha Careful

    18-Jan / Green Bay Packers Talk / Zero2Cool

    Headlines
    Copyright © 2006 - 2025 PackersHome.com™. All Rights Reserved.