Distribution of Wealth

[Sailka]

Don’t know if anyone’s addressed this… I’ve read the two Fair Tax books and I really like what I’ve read. This idea’s time has come. I think enough people are fed up with our current tax system.

amazon.com/s/ref=nb_ss_b?url=search-alias%3Dstripbooks&field-keywords=fair+tax+neal+boortz&x=15&y=14

In a nutshell the Fair Tax is a national sales tax. Everyone pays tax on all purchases of new goods and services. Retailers are required to collect taxes. No other taxes at all. No income tax. No payroll taxes. No capital gains tax. No inheritance tax. No IRS!

Now, to prevent this tax from being a burden on the poor the proposal includes a “prebate”. Every taxpayer receives a monthly check. (Something like $1,000–proportianately more for married and families.) Basically it is the cost of the tax on basic expenses for that taxpayer for that month. So the tax is applied to all purchases by everyone, but if you only make 15K and all you can afford is food, lodging and gas for your used car, the prebate returns all taxes that you’ve paid and then some. If you make 150K and you eat out every night and buy lots of toys and electronics and cars and new homes, you also receive the prebate, but it doesn’t come close to covering the taxes you’ve paid.

So, the tax rate is set by the government budget. (The bottom line of the budget would read something like: "We will spend $ x billion and this equates to x % tax rate on x taxpayers who will receive $ x prebate each month.) The prebate is set by calculating the taxes on basic necessities for the taxpayer–whether they’re single, married, with or without dependents, etc.

The only tax filing is to declare yourself single or married, and the number of dependents you have. No more deductions, no more loopholes, no more congressional lobbying for favoritism for certain groups. No more government social engineering by taxing “undesired actions” or providing breaks for those who toe the line.

States prove that the sales tax is doable. They would just piggyback their tax onto the national tax.

I like the fair tax because we would know exactly how much we are paying in taxes with every purchase we make. Also, if we don’t want to pay taxes, we don’t have to. Keep spending at or below subsistance, and you pay zero taxes. If you buy used cars, per-owned homes, goodwill clothing, you can continue to pay zero tax indefinitely.

I could say a lot more, but it is off topic. However, this whole topic is nothing but partisan politics. Money is not evil. People who have it are not evil. People who do not have it are not evil. Good people can differ on how they see the plight of the poor and the best way to address it. Big government is one way–although in my opinion very inefficient. More efficient are small, community based programs funded locally–like, oh, I don’t know, the neighborhood church? My two cents–which reveal my politics.

You and the 2 authors forget a few key details: Local and state taxes. The feds don’t pay Police, school board, etc, etc. City, County, State income would be from the US Government? How many days will that work? A week?
And the Vastly higher Cost of everything. Really want to pay Double price on Basics? The idea is a poor one, and unworkable. A Proper Progressive Tax system is the only way, and Stopping subsidizing the richest Oil and Drug manufacturing Industries. They are the Most Profitable ones in USA. Why on God’s green earth Subsidize them with Major Federal Tax money? Is what globalization is all about. The poor and middle class get poorer, the VERY few Richest get Vastly richer.
An important side note: The Highest standard of Living (satisfied, happy public) are Northern Europe and Iceland, the highest Taxes of the advanced world, but Services like Health virtually free. The USA is The Most Bankrupt Country in world history, Because Big Finace Deregulation, the ‘globalization’ Transfer Up Tax policies, record deficits of the current “Pro-Life” (only while not yet born) administration of 2000-2008. :hey_bud:

 

[Sailka]

So maybe we should talk about what it means to be a good steward?
Does this mean that we need a McMansion? That each of our children need their own room? Their own tv, computer, ipod etc?
Does this mean our child is entitled to a car when they turn 16?
Does this mean its ok to drive a Porsche rather than a Ford?
Does this mean we are good stewards when we buy an $80 perfume/cologn instead of a $10 one?
What about eating out at very fancy and expensive restaurants–is that being a good stewart and using what God has given us in a worthy manner?
Is that $1,200 suit really that much better than the $400 suit Is it a wise use of our money? Will God be pleased with that choice?

Just what does it mean to use our money well? To be good stewards of it? When we save it and hoard it - is that trusting God to provide for us? Or are we trusting ourselves?
This is probably for a different thread --but the idea of it’s ok to make a lot as long as we are good stewards comes up a lot – so I am currious as to what people out there consider “being a good steward”. This is a question that plagues me and I’d be interested in seeing what others think.
Thank you

Amen! And current USA administration Enriching the Richest few percent is opposite of Christ’s, Church, All religion teaching. A small percent of the Richest (4%) get vastly Richer, at Poor and Middle Class expense? Christian? Fair? Justifiable? Since when? :tsktsk: :whacky: :nope: :dts:

 

[thomfra]

And if there weren’t a minimum wage at the time, you would have been getting far less, and wouldn’t have had the energy or time to look for a better job.

This is good advice for anyone who wants to better themselves. But why should someone doing anything full time (40 hours +) not be able to afford health insurance, at least for themselves, enough to eat, and rent on a 1 bedroom flat?

“Kick in the pants” reasoning can be used to justify very low wages and conditions, all the things employers would like to see, if it weren’t for these pesky socialist labour laws… er tell me, do you employ people?

Cynic, I must say I admire the fact that you are still taking the time to post on this thread. I gave up long ago. the attitude that “I did it hard so everybody else should too” just leaves me totally exasperated.

Even more exasperating is the sycophantic dribble about “poor people that refused to take a dime”.

As far as I am concerned any parent who refuses means (government hand-out or otherwise) to give their children a better life due to personal pride is either a bad parent, or has a mental acumen well below par.

 

[royal_archer]

And if there weren’t a minimum wage at the time, you would have been getting far less, and wouldn’t have had the energy or time to look for a better job.

I am fortunate that Minimum wage was not higher so potential employers could afford to hire me.

This is good advice for anyone who wants to better themselves. But why should someone doing anything full time (40 hours +) not be able to afford health insurance, at least for themselves, enough to eat, and rent on a 1 bedroom flat?.

It would depend on what they were doing. and how important the job was. I once had a job working at an arcade on the boardwalk. It was not enough to live on but the other “bennefits” more than made up for it. I had to take another job to make ends meet. Some people want the easy enjoyable jobs and then want the pay that goes with the hard jobs.

“Kick in the pants” reasoning can be used to justify very low wages and conditions, all the things employers would like to see, if it weren’t for these pesky socialist labour laws… er tell me, do you employ people?

Yep, I employee people everytime I spend money.

 

[royal_archer]

So maybe we should talk about what it means to be a good steward?
Does this mean that we need a McMansion? That each of our children need their own room? Their own tv, computer, ipod etc?
Does this mean our child is entitled to a car when they turn 16?
Does this mean its ok to drive a Porsche rather than a Ford?
Does this mean we are good stewards when we buy an $80 perfume/cologn instead of a $10 one?
What about eating out at very fancy and expensive restaurants–is that being a good stewart and using what God has given us in a worthy manner?
Is that $1,200 suit really that much better than the $400 suit Is it a wise use of our money? Will God be pleased with that choice?

Just what does it mean to use our money well? To be good stewards of it? When we save it and hoard it - is that trusting God to provide for us? Or are we trusting ourselves?
This is probably for a different thread --but the idea of it’s ok to make a lot as long as we are good stewards comes up a lot – so I am currious as to what people out there consider “being a good steward”. This is a question that plagues me and I’d be interested in seeing what others think.
Thank you

Define Mansion Anything bigger than 1600 seemed like a mansion till I had two active boys. Now 2500 seems way to small.
It is amazing how many on public assistance can still afford to buy their kids ipods, computers, and other luxurary items.
It is never OK to buy a porsche over a Ford.
When it comes to perfume I would prefer those around me to go for qality over quantity.
$400 suit? you can get them for a lot less you know. I consider anything over $200 a waste of money and anything over $100 too expensive.
Fancy meals? The fancy places and the cheep places pay the same price for raw ingredients. The difference is in the quality of the employees. I have no problem with sharing my money with people who put out a good product. Buying an overpriced meal is probably one of the fastest ways for money to move from those with excess to those with need.
Being a good steward does not mean avoiding luxuries or the finer things in life, it means partaking of those things in moderation and using your money in a way that will bennefit the most people overall. For instance Bill Gates’ billions will be more benneficial to society in his hands than if a bunch of politicians took it and sqandered it on attempts to buy votes.