Will an economic stimulus package help us during recession?

[goofyjim]

Why has a discussion on a stimulus package turned into one on the tax code?

 

[vern_humphrey]

Of course not. But it must be on all income. It can’t give some permission to deduct things while someone else isn’t allowed to. Otherwise some might end up paying a lower percentage tax and then it wouldn’t be a flat tax.

Okay – we’ve solved the tax side of the equation. Now, how do we stop the government from over-spending?

 

[goofyjim]

Okay – we’ve solved the tax side of the equation. Now, how do we stop the government from over-spending?

That depends on what you consider necessary spending. Food stamps for the poor are necessary and health care for the poor and disabled is necessary. During a recession this may exceed revenue but that will happen. When an individual loses his job he doesn’t stop spending completely just because there is no income. He cuts back on the luxuries but if he has to he borrows to pay the necessities.

 

[vern_humphrey]

Why has a discussion on a stimulus package turned into one on the tax code?

Because taxes are a major drain on the economy, of course!!

 

[goofyjim]

Because taxes are a major drain on the economy, of course!!

I agree but they need some revenue to cover expenses. A fair tax undisputably would be a sales tax. The higher price you pay for say, a car, the higher tax you pay. If you want to live a luxurious lifestyle you will pay more. If you save you reap the benefits, because you keep what you work hard for.

 

[Al_Masetti]

And under your proposal it would be so convoluted that the corporation or firm could write off things against income to possibly reduce his taxable income to nothing while the w2 earner doesn’t have that opportunity. So why are you opposed to a flat percentage? It would be the only fair way to tax income. Bob, did you ever think that maybe those 48% are just getting by on what they earn that to force them to pay a tax just to pay tax would be an undue burden?

See … we’re running into yet another issue involving a “defined term”.

What is a “corporation” or a “firm”?

These entities are businesses that provide goods and services to the public and provide jobs. They are economic engines. They do not consume. They turn labor and materials into products and services.

If we tax these entities, then we reduce the productive capability of the national economy.

Countries in Europe and Asia have come to recognize the importance of producing products and services and, as a result, have reduced tax rates on corporations and firms, in the hopes of stimulating more jobs (and goods and services). Those hopes have been fulfilled where ever they have been tried.

 

[vern_humphrey]

I agree but they need some revenue to cover expenses.

We take in far more than we need to cover necessary expenses.

Our problem is mis-management and waste. You say we need to feed the poor. If we had educated the poor, most of them could feed themselves.

A fair tax undisputably would be a sales tax. The higher price you pay for say, a car, the higher tax you pay. If you want to live a luxurious lifestyle you will pay more. If you save you reap the benefits, because you keep what you work hard for.

No tax is fair when the government squanders the people’s money.

 

[goofyjim]

See … we’re running into yet another issue involving a “defined term”.

What is a “corporation” or a “firm”?

These entities are businesses that provide goods and services to the public and provide jobs. They are economic engines. They do not consume. They turn labor and materials into products and services.

If we tax these entities, then we reduce the productive capability of the national economy.

Countries in Europe and Asia have come to recognize the importance of producing products and services and, as a result, have reduced tax rates on corporations and firms, in the hopes of stimulating more jobs (and goods and services). Those hopes have been fulfilled where ever they have been tried.

But none of this could be done without the contribution of the employee so why is it fair to let the corporation go and tax the individual to death? No, a flat tax or no tax. Let’s try the sales tax and there will be no dispute over income.

 

[goofyjim]

We take in far more than we need to cover necessary expenses.

Our problem is mis-management and waste. You say we need to feed the poor. If we had educated the poor, most of them could feed themselves.

No tax is fair when the government squanders the people’s money.

You forget the disabled poor. No amount of education prevents a mental illness or other disability. The government has a responsibility here and should not let them fall to the wayside just for the sake of saving the taxpayers money.

 

[estesbob]

I agree but they need some revenue to cover expenses. A fair tax undisputably would be a sales tax. The higher price you pay for say, a car, the higher tax you pay. If you want to live a luxurious lifestyle you will pay more. If you save you reap the benefits, because you keep what you work hard for.

A sales tax is the most regressive of all. The poor pay a much higher percentage of their income than anyone else.

 

[goofyjim]

A sales tax is the most regressive of all. The poor pay a much higher percentage of their income than anyone else.

How do you figure that? They only pay on what they buy and the less they buy the more they save. I would consider a lot less regressive than making those 48% in the nontax bracket now pay income tax.

 

[vern_humphrey]

You forget the disabled poor.

And what evidence do you have that I “forget the disabled poor?”

Why do you keep throwing out these unfounded accusations?

No amount of education prevents a mental illness or other disability. The government has a responsibility here and should not let them fall to the wayside just for the sake of saving the taxpayers money.

Frankly, if the government educated all those who can work, and taxed and squandered less, there would be plenty of money to take care of those who can’t work.

Unfortunately, our poor education system fails the children of the poor – so we have many more poor than we should. Our system of taxation sucks up so much money that the economy is hampered in the creation of jobs. And the money is squandered, so there is less available for the poor – who are many more than they should be in a truly just society.

 

[estesbob]

How do you figure that? They only pay on what they buy and the less they buy the more they save. I would consider a lot less regressive than making those 48% in the nontax bracket now pay income tax.

Because the poor spend almost all their money on food and shelter. The richer you are the more you put in savings.-money that is not taxed under a sales tax

 

[goofyjim]

Because the poor spend almost all their money on food and shelter. The richer you are the more you put in savings.-money that is not taxed under a sales tax

We’re not talking about food and shelter. In my state those things aren’t taxable and shouldn’t be. We’re talking about luxury items- a car, the big screen tv, etc. Until they save their money they should have to pay the tax whether they are poor or not. But if they refrain from the unnecessary things until a better time then they are not taxed at all. Isn’t this alot fairer than taking a portion of their income that they have to labor for?

 

[estesbob]

We’re not talking about food and shelter. In my state those things aren’t taxable and shouldn’t be. We’re talking about luxury items- a car, the big screen tv, etc. Until they save their money they should have to pay the tax whether they are poor or not. But if they refrain from the unnecessary things until a better time then they are not taxed at all. Isn’t this alot fairer than taking a portion of their income that they have to labor for?

ah your flat tax gets more complex the more you talk about it. Jim the truth is there is no such thing as a fair tax as fairness is in the eye of the beholder.

 

[vern_humphrey]

ah your flat tax gets more complex the more you talk about it. Jim the truth is there is no such thing as a fair tax as fairness is in the eye of the beholder.

Except, as I have said before, when the government squanders the public money, no tax is fair.

 

[goofyjim]

Except, as I have said before, when the government squanders the public money, no tax is fair.

Squandering is also in the eye of the beholder. I’m sure there are petprojects for one locale that don’t benefit anyone else that the government wastes money on but every congress person goes in trying to get perks for his own constituents.

 

[goofyjim]

ah your flat tax gets more complex the more you talk about it. Jim the truth is there is no such thing as a fair tax as fairness is in the eye of the beholder.

But the last thing we should do is throw an income tax at a family that is at or below the poverty level. If that means 48% go without paying taxes then so be it.

 

[estesbob]

But the last thing we should do is throw an income tax at a family that is at or below the poverty level. If that means 48% go without paying taxes then so be it.

No where near 48% of Amricans are under the poverty level-I bleive its around 12% and has been at around that level since the mid 60s

 

[vern_humphrey]

Squandering is also in the eye of the beholder. I’m sure there are petprojects for one locale that don’t benefit anyone else that the government wastes money on but every congress person goes in trying to get perks for his own constituents.

Actually, we have a document called “the Constitution” which establishes the limitations and duties of government. If we were to dig up that document and apply the principle of the X Amendment:

Amendment X
The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

We could cut out a lot of spending. For example, where is the United States given the power to pay someone to wrap an island in toilet paper?