Socialized healthcare

  • Thread starter Thread starter COPLAND_3
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
vern_humphrey said:
As long as he pays his share.😛
Click to expand...
You have yet to give me any reason to oppose the fair tax and keep the income tax. The income tax will always cause a dispute by one end of th eincome scale or the other. With the fair tax, each person sets his or her own potential and, if they choose to, can keep all their income, be it a little or alot.
 
goofyjim said:
You have yet to give me any reason to oppose the fair tax and keep the income tax. The income tax will always cause a dispute by one end of th eincome scale or the other. With the fair tax, each person sets his or her own potential and, if they choose to, can keep all their income, be it a little or alot.
Click to expand...
If you believe the “fair tax” will replace the income tax, you are a trusting innocent.

In European nations, we have seen the Value Added Tax (a form of sales tax, and hence akin to the “fair tax”) adopted **on top of **the income tax.
 
vern_humphrey said:
If you believe the “fair tax” will replace the income tax, you are a trusting innocent.

In European nations, we have seen the Value Added Tax (a form of sales tax, and hence akin to the “fair tax”) adopted **on top of **the income tax.
Click to expand...
Well I certainly don’t want your regressive flat amount. It would bankrupt alot of people just to pay the darn tax.
 
goofyjim said:
Well I certainly don’t want your regressive flat amount. It would bankrupt alot of people just to pay the darn tax.
Click to expand...
What’s my “regressive flat amount?”

Have I been having ideas I don’t know about?😛
 
vern_humphrey said:
What’s my “regressive flat amount?”

Have I been having ideas I don’t know about?😛
Click to expand...
A flat amount tax instead of a flat percent. Taxes should be done in percent rate of income not levied on everyone at the same amount regardless of how low their income is.
 
goofyjim said:
Scrap this insane income tax for the sales tax. The income tax is always going to cause a complaint from one side or the other. A flat amount would be decidedly regressive and too high a percentage takes out of the economy. With the sales tax people get what they pay for and if they choose to be frugal with little money they can keep the majority of their income from Uncle Sam just as easily as the rich folks. Seems fair to me. Then with that flat percentage we can really tell whether Uncle Sam is raising or lowering taxes while still providing all the basic services such as healthcare for those who can’t afford it.
Click to expand...
Absolutely right!

The Fair Tax … national retail sales tax plus “pre-bate” to all citizens to reimburse everyone up to the amount of the poverty level … is the ultimate in transparency of government.

The “other half” of the transparency issue would be for every government entity to post its budget and list of payments on the internet. Texas, Alaska and some other states have started that already.
 
Al_Masetti said:
Absolutely right!

The Fair Tax … national retail sales tax plus “pre-bate” to all citizens to reimburse everyone up to the amount of the poverty level … is the ultimate in transparency of government.

The “other half” of the transparency issue would be for every government entity to post its budget and list of payments on the internet. Texas, Alaska and some other states have started that already.
Click to expand...
Now can you persuade Vern? I have to leave for the weekend.
 
goofyjim said:
A flat amount tax instead of a flat percent. Taxes should be done in percent rate of income not levied on everyone at the same amount regardless of how low their income is.
Click to expand...
And how is that my “regressive flat amount?”

Please find and quote any post of mine where I advocated such a thing.
 
goofyjim said:
Now can you persuade Vern? I have to leave for the weekend.
Click to expand...
The first step in “persuading Vern” is to stop accusing him of things he hasn’t advocated.

Secondly, I will reiterate my position, “We cannot talk intelligently about taxes until we talk about spending. No tax can be “fair” when the government squanders the people’s money.”

Edited to add: “We cannot talk intelligently about anything until we stop making things up and accusing other people of those things.”
 
vern_humphrey said:
The first step in “persuading Vern” is to stop accusing him of things he hasn’t advocated.

Secondly, I will reiterate my position, “We cannot talk intelligently about taxes until we talk about spending. No tax can be “fair” when the government squanders the people’s money.”

Edited to add: “We cannot talk intelligently about anything until we stop making things up and accusing other people of those things.”
Click to expand...
The Fair Tax (national RETAIL sales tax plus “prebate”) is radically different from the VAT. The VAT is mostly a hidden tax imposed on all transactions and builds up layer on layer.

The differences between the Fair Tax and the VAT are discussed in detail in the two books on the Fair Tax.

The absolute beauty of the Fair Tax is with the total transparency … nothing hidden … and the total simplicity.
 
Al_Masetti said:
The Fair Tax (national RETAIL sales tax plus “prebate”) is radically different from the VAT. The VAT is mostly a hidden tax imposed on all transactions and builds up layer on layer.

The differences between the Fair Tax and the VAT are discussed in detail in the two books on the Fair Tax.

The absolute beauty of the Fair Tax is with the total transparency … nothing hidden … and the total simplicity.
Click to expand...
I agree that the Fair Tax is different in some respects from the VAT. But the point stands – the nations that adopted the VAT did not use it to replace the income tax. They now have both the VAT and the income tax.

So I have two questions:
  1. What assurance do we have the Fair Tax will replace the Income Tax. As long as the 16th Amendment is not repealed, we will have the income tax, Fair Tax or no Fair Tax.
  2. What measures will be taken to keep spending from going up and up and up without limit?
 
vern_humphrey said:
I agree that the Fair Tax is different in some respects from the VAT. But the point stands – the nations that adopted the VAT did not use it to replace the income tax. They now have both the VAT and the income tax.

So I have two questions:
  1. What assurance do we have the Fair Tax will replace the Income Tax. As long as the 16th Amendment is not repealed, we will have the income tax, Fair Tax or no Fair Tax.
  2. What measures will be taken to keep spending from going up and up and up without limit?
Click to expand...
Good questions.
  1. The issues of the 16th Amendment and replacement not an additional tax are reasonable concerns. The text of H.R. 25 is quite comprehensive, but the legislative process needs to assure everyone that the Fair Tax is what it is stated to be.
One way is for other countries to engage in this first. And maybe some individual states. After a while, the pressure becomes overwhelming. And Boortz has said that other countries ARE interested in implementing the Fair Tax first … beating out the United States.
  1. Spending is a fair concern. Transparency is the best way of getting spending under control.
Of course, the laws on revenue bills still must originate in the House of Representatives. As they must now. The only way we have to protect ourselves from increases in spending are the ways we have now.

However, with ONE tax, everyone will know immediately if spending is increased … [assuming they don’t borrow money to cover the increased spending … as they do now.]

But transparency is the key.

If all expenditures, budgets, check ledgers, and other spending events are published on the internet, … as they say … sunlight is the best disinfectant … everyone will know what our legislators are spending.
 
Al_Masetti said:
Good questions.
  1. The issues of the 16th Amendment and replacement not an additional tax are reasonable concerns. The text of H.R. 25 is quite comprehensive, but the legislative process needs to assure everyone that the Fair Tax is what it is stated to be.
One way is for other countries to engage in this first. And maybe some individual states. After a while, the pressure becomes overwhelming. And Boortz has said that other countries ARE interested in implementing the Fair Tax first … beating out the United States.
  1. Spending is a fair concern. Transparency is the best way of getting spending under control.
Of course, the laws on revenue bills still must originate in the House of Representatives. As they must now. The only way we have to protect ourselves from increases in spending are the ways we have now.

However, with ONE tax, everyone will know immediately if spending is increased … [assuming they don’t borrow money to cover the increased spending … as they do now.]

But transparency is the key.

If all expenditures, budgets, check ledgers, and other spending events are published on the internet, … as they say … sunlight is the best disinfectant … everyone will know what our legislators are spending.
Click to expand...
Let me suggest several ways to control spending:


  1. *]A line-item veto – let us make one man, the President responsible for controlling spending.

    *]An original intent amendment – requiring the courts to interpret the Constitution based on original intent (the debates) only. This will keep future courts from vitiating other amemdments.

    *]A requirement that every bill state the Constitutional authority permitting the bill.

    *]Zero-based budgeting, with an out-of-kilter system to manage it.

    *]An amendment that sequesters a portion of congress’ salary if the debt increases.
 
vern_humphrey said:
Let me suggest several ways to control spending:


  1. *]A line-item veto – let us make one man, the President responsible for controlling spending.

    *]An original intent amendment – requiring the courts to interpret the Constitution based on original intent (the debates) only. This will keep future courts from vitiating other amemdments.

    *]A requirement that every bill state the Constitutional authority permitting the bill.

    *]Zero-based budgeting, with an out-of-kilter system to manage it.

    *]An amendment that sequesters a portion of congress’ salary if the debt increases.
Click to expand...

  1. Good stuff here:

    atr.org/
 
vern_humphrey said:
And how is that my “regressive flat amount?”

Please find and quote any post of mine where I advocated such a thing.
Click to expand...
Your memory must be failing. In past threads on taxes you repeatedly said a flat tax should be a flat amount which would be the most regressive tax around. Taxes are done in percentages of income.
 
goofyjim said:
Your memory must be failing. In past threads on taxes you repeatedly said a flat tax should be a flat amount which would be the most regressive tax around. Taxes are done in percentages of income.
Click to expand...
Then it should be easy for you to find a quote of mine where I actually said that.😉
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top