Welcome to PatsFans.com

What kind of tax system do you favor?

Discussion in 'Political Discussion' started by Patters, Feb 25, 2006.

?

What kind of tax system do you prefer? (See messsage below.)

  1. Progressive

    2 vote(s)
    18.2%
  2. Fair

    2 vote(s)
    18.2%
  3. Flat

    6 vote(s)
    54.5%
  4. Other

    1 vote(s)
    9.1%
  1. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,260
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    Choose Other only if you favor a tax concept that's not represented by the above -- e.g., a regressive tax or a volunteer tax.
  2. sdaniels7114

    sdaniels7114 Rookie

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2006
    Messages:
    5,742
    Likes Received:
    7
    Ratings:
    +7 / 0 / -0

    The fair option seemed a little too vague for me. Since I'm convinced richer people should pay more I went with progressive. That one seem's fairest to me.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2006
  3. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,519
    Likes Received:
    80
    Ratings:
    +96 / 0 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    www.fairtax.org

    Let's forment more class envy and hatred is what I read here.
  4. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,260
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    You're worried about the rich hating the middle class? Certainly, it's unlikely that the middle class and poor would hate the rich if the rich were paying more income tax, don't ya think?
  5. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,519
    Likes Received:
    80
    Ratings:
    +96 / 0 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    Maybe you're totally innumerate but it's a fact that the top 5% in income (your 'rich') pay most of the income taxes. Sorry to rain on your Marxist inspired class warfare paradigm. Plus, the 'rich' take risks with their wealth and invest money that creates jobs. You, of course, oppose the ability to make such investments. You believe that Ted Kennedy and his ilk know far better how to redestribute forcibly confiscated earnings of working families to those deemed by the desiginated elete to be in need.
    Last edited: Feb 25, 2006
  6. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,260
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    Oh, Pissah, don't exaggerate. Progressive income tax isn't Marxist, but you are making the point that the rich would wage class warfare on the poor and middle class if the tax structure isn't to their liking. Can't argue with that. I assume you're rich, hoping to get rich by sucking up to them, or afraid of the rich. Which is it? I have nothing against wealth at all; I'm more concerned about the poor than the rich. Your perverse morality has things backwards. Do you worship mammon?
  7. mikey

    mikey Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    What is a mammon??


    .
  8. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,260
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

  9. mikey

    mikey Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    2,422
    Likes Received:
    3
    Ratings:
    +3 / 0 / -0

    I am not convinced that lowering taxes is better for the rich people.

    During the early 1990's, Bill Clinton RAISED taxes on the wealthy people to pay down the budget deficit. The prospect of a reducing budget deficit triggered a reduction in bond yield, lowered mortgate rate and corporate borrowing, and boosted the stock market (this was before the dot-com mania). What the rich folks lost in paying higher taxes was more than made up with higher return on their equity investments.

    In general, taxes are bad because they cause inefficiencies in the economy and create "deadweight" losses. But the burgeoning budget deficit is also causing harm to the economy. In the end, it might be better off for the rich folks to pay more taxes to lower the budget deficit and see NASDAQ goes back up to 5,000 again.

    .
  10. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,519
    Likes Received:
    80
    Ratings:
    +96 / 0 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    A complete distortion and fabrication. YOU are trumpeting class warfare with policies targeted against the earning class.

    Since reading comprehension is obviously not your forte, I'll explain that the Marxist reference is to those elite whom you wish to have the power to decide who is or is not rich and who needs to be taxed more such that their designated favored peoples get the working peoples' money.
  11. Turd Furguson

    Turd Furguson Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2004
    Messages:
    1,245
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Flat tax. People shouldnt be "punished" for succeeding as others shouldnt be "rewarded" for failing.
  12. Patters

    Patters Moderator Staff Member PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Sep 13, 2004
    Messages:
    17,260
    Likes Received:
    21
    Ratings:
    +23 / 0 / -0

    Pissah, you are trumpeting class warfare by singling out the wealthy as a class that deserves protection from democratic and market forces which might lead to higher taxes on them. It's just that you seem to believe in an oligarchy.

    So you're a Marxist in that you want to decide how people are taxed and have wealthy people pay more into the tax system than poor people? Also, stick with the more general term Socialism, rather than throw around the word Marxism. You obviously don't know what it means. It's a technical word and hardly applies to this discussion.
  13. BlueTalon

    BlueTalon Rookie

    Joined:
    Feb 16, 2006
    Messages:
    351
    Likes Received:
    0
    Ratings:
    +0 / 0 / -0

    Unless you fall into the insanity advocated by Patters that people should all pay the same amount of money in order for the system to be fair (which you obviously don't), the rich will be paying "more" in ANY tax system. The question is, do you want them to pay disproportionally more than you? I'm guessing that you probably do. But who gets to decide who is "rich"? No matter how you answer that question, there will always be disagreement -- and since you probably make more than I do, I'd be wanting to throw you into the "rich" category and penalize you with taxes that are disproportionally higher than mine.

    Or we could eliminate the entire argument by having rich people pay proportionally more. Then, you or I could work our way up the ladder and not have to worry about getting punished for doing it.

    I've made the point elsewhere that taxes are not moved by market forces. They are decided on by people. It's far more rational to make the claim that they are influenced by democratic forces, since it is elected officials who decide what those taxes are going to be.
  14. PatsWickedPissah

    PatsWickedPissah PatsFans.com Supporter PatsFans.com Supporter

    Joined:
    Feb 10, 2005
    Messages:
    22,519
    Likes Received:
    80
    Ratings:
    +96 / 0 / -0

    Disable Jersey

    Proof that you have no reading comprehension skills whatever.
    I advocate a consumption tax. A tax that the wealthy on the average will pay FAR more than others with less financial resources. I single out NO group. Let them all vote with their own dollars as they wish. You are typically and totally disengenuous in that your graduated tax specifically singles out groups for punishment. Marxist describes your class warfare inspired graduated tax to a T. Look it up.
    Last edited: Feb 27, 2006

Share This Page