Jeff Bezos claims child tax credit.

[Cameramonkey]

Nah. It's a series of fixes to fix the things that don't work about the original idea. A flat tax that only pays for the constitutionally legitimate functions of government. No "welfare" state. That should bump a flat tax to less than 5%. And then for all the other stuff people want government to do, add a voluntary tax. I call that the put-your-money-where-your-mouth-is tax plan. And it must be accompanied by a balanced budge requirement.

which reminds me of the Libertarian open borders ideas. Great idea, except it isnt practical in the welfare state that exists.

That border policy makes as much sense as removing the supervision from a business driven by memberships. Suddenly when anyone can walk in off the street and consume the product without paying, the business wont last.

Get rid of all welfare for non citizens and tax based on consumption and it could work. Otherwise the country would collapse in on itself financially. (like we are now, just much faster)

 

[Cameramonkey]

I like the idea of a 10% flat tax. The revenue generated by that tax sets the budget for the following fiscal year. The president and congress have to work together on a zero based budget with that money.

Want to increase tax revenue? Implement policies that generate higher incomes.

ETA: while I'm dreaming of things that will never happen, I also think the president should be required to hold an earnings call at least twice a year, similar to corporations.

Show us where our tax dollars were "invested" and the return we got on that investment. If the public was shown just how much money we waste on nonsense compared to tax revenue, we'd be having a different discussion.

except flat taxes hurt the poor disproportionately. You losing 10% of your $80,000 paycheck isnt a killer. But when you are living below the poverty line, you really NEED that extra 10%. Its like having a $8 in ones in your wallet, and you go to buy a coke and find the bottle now costs $1.10. But the poor guy with just a single $1 is now priced out and doesnt have enough money.

The fair tax includes a prebate every month to cover the taxes you would pay for purchases up to the poverty line. So the poor effectively pay no tax unless they spent above the theoretical NEEDS in life. So groceries? No tax. New Playstation, they'd pay the tax because that Playstation's cost would exceed what would be required for necessities.

 

[churchmouse]

which reminds me of the Libertarian open borders ideas. Great idea, except it isnt practical in the welfare state that exists.

That border policy makes as much sense as removing the supervision from a business driven by memberships. Suddenly when anyone can walk in off the street and consume the product without paying, the business wont last.

Get rid of all welfare for non citizens and tax based on consumption and it could work. Otherwise the country would collapse in on itself financially. (like we are now, just much faster)

How many people do you all know that never paid a dime on SS tax or just a very small amount over their lifetimes. Worked cash under the table or just hustled the streets. I know of sooooooo many. And to the man they are all drawing or attempting to draw SS disability (for any number of imagined ailments)or just the post 623.5 years old benefits they never ever contributed to.

And guess what......they are getting it.

Fix the system. Fix it.

 

[Jaybird1980]

except flat taxes hurt the poor disproportionately. You losing 10% of your $80,000 paycheck isnt a killer. But when you are living below the poverty line, you really NEED that extra 10%. Its like having a $8 in ones in your wallet, and you go to buy a coke and find the bottle now costs $1.10. But the poor guy with just a single $1 is now priced out and doesnt have enough money.

The fair tax includes a prebate every month to cover the taxes you would pay for purchases up to the poverty line. So the poor effectively pay no tax unless they spent above the theoretical NEEDS in life. So groceries? No tax. New Playstation, they'd pay the tax because that Playstation's cost would exceed what would be required for necessities.

I disagree that it hurts the poor disproportionately, but I would be fine with the tax stopping at a certain level. Like 5k or something. Low enough that it doesn't encourage people to remain there.

 

[Jaybird1980]

How many people do you all know that never paid a dime on SS tax or just a very small amount over their lifetimes. Worked cash under the table or just hustled the streets. I know of sooooooo many. And to the man they are all drawing or attempting to draw SS disability (for any number of imagined ailments)or just the post 623.5 years old benefits they never ever contributed to.

And guess what......they are getting it.

Fix the system. Fix it.

I know quite a few, some never entered the workforce. Played the anxiety game and filed at 18

 

[churchmouse]

I know quite a few, some never entered the workforce. Played the anxiety game and filed at 18

We all know a few of these leaches. Grew up with a handful of them and met a few along life's road.
CKW's sister was a for cash waitress/bartender most of her life. Party animal just skimming the surface of reality most days.
She is a year older than CKW and is just now seeing the reality of her life's choices. For reasons all centered on her life style she could not work if she wanted to. She applied for and received SS diss. with no hurdles to jump......WTAF peoples.

We have far to many safety nets.

 

[Ingomike]

Watching CNBC this morning while working. Cramer (a multimillionaire) is calling for a wealth tax over the revelations of the pro publica piece.

this isn’t going away, the rich will pay.

Cramer Calls for Billionaire Surtax But Doesn't Support Warren's Wealth Tax

"Why not put a surtax on billionaires?" Cramer asked. "I think that Lincoln would be aghast that these people are paying nothing."

www.newsweek.com

Plenty of communists, like you, have been indoctrinated in our school systems.

We just have a great post showing you that if all the wealth were confiscated it would not make a drop in a bucket yet you persist.

 

[Jaybird1980]

We will be speaking Chinese by 2030 if that happens

 

[BugI02]

this isn’t going away, the rich will pay.

What odds are you giving?

 

[BugI02]

Oh. It not going away isn't evidence of its justice. The mob didn't go away in the past either. The proletariat must exact their revenge with pitchforks, and eventually it won't be the rich. Wealth envy doesn't ends peacefully if carried to it's logical conclusion.

Correct. It ends like the homestead steel strike. If it isn't supported by the general population, then the proletariat gets shot down by the better armed, better organized mercenaries hired by the wealthy

Been that way since the days of kings and barons or shoguns and samurai

 

[Jaybird1980]

this isn’t going away, the rich will pay.

They already are, I don't know why that's so hard for you to understand. You just want more.

 

[phylodog]

this isn’t going away, the rich will pay.

Disgusting and pathetic

 

[BugI02]

They already are, I don't know why that's so hard for you to understand. You just want more.

He wants them to pay more as a percentage of their income because he perceives that they pay 'less' than him currently and (incorrectly) thinks that he would pay less if they paid more

He seems unable to realize that the way to reduce his tax percentage is to make more. It seems analogous to the entry level job people who want that job to pay for the lifestyle they want. The system needs to change, not them.

No one seems to remember that Amazon struggled for years and went bankrupt once and that Bezos had initial investors that he had to answer to. Like 'overnight sensations' in music, they don't see the struggle just the eventual results. They don't see the risks taken to get to the point where things take off and the several hundred ideas that don't make it for every one that does

 

[rooster]

Correct. It ends like the homestead steel strike

With the Pinkertons and union busters catching a whole lotta lead and tycoons then Calling in favors to get the army to disband the union?

public support only fell away after the army brought martial law to the community because how dare those workers not agree to a 22% wage cut?

is that how this ends? I’m trying to draw the parallels but coming up blank......

 

[BugI02]

3 Pinkertons killed versus 7 workers, and the Pinkertons were coming ashore from barges under fire

If they had retaken the plant, it would have been left at that. The failure of the raid provided the pretext to call in the requisite amount of force. The outcome was the same

Though the Homestead workers initially enjoyed widespread public support, this changed after their brutal treatment of the Pinkertons, as well as an attempt made on Frick’s life in late July by the anarchist Alexander Berkman, who had no connection with the union. Homestead resumed operations in full by mid-August 1892, thanks to some 1,700 strikebreakers, including some of the state’s first Black steelworkers.

Many of the striking workers had returned to work by mid-October, and the union admitted defeat the following month. The strike’s leaders were charged with murder, and others with lesser crimes. None were convicted, but the damage to unionized labor at Homestead had been done. With Amalgamated out of the way, Carnegie slashed wages across the board, implemented a 12-hour workday and cut hundreds of jobs in the years to come.

Considering everything eventually brought about by the events at Little Bighorn, who really was defeated - the Army or the Indians

 

[Jaybird1980]

He wants them to pay more as a percentage of their income because he perceives that they pay 'less' than him currently and (incorrectly) thinks that he would pay less if they paid more

He seems unable to realize that the way to reduce his tax percentage is to make more. It seems analogous to the entry level job people who want that job to pay for the lifestyle they want. The system needs to change, not them.

No one seems to remember that Amazon struggled for years and went bankrupt once and that Bezos had initial investors that he had to answer to. Like 'overnight sensations' in music, they don't see the struggle just the eventual results. They don't see the risks taken to get to the point where things take off and the several hundred ideas that don't make it for every one that does

He doesn't seem to understand that finding a way to to take more money from the people and give it to the Gov't is not the effin answer. They will it away as fast as it comes in and then expect more.
He sounds like every other lefty that tries to sell the same bag of s**t to me. They have what we need, let's find a way to take it. You can't win with them

I agree the system needs fixed. The answer is not let keep flogging the people already carrying the load, the answer is let's get everyone to share the load after we get the effin spending under control. Start at the bottom and get everyone being an asset, stop the immigrant free ride.etc etc. Do not encourage poor lifestyles where they get the bs new phones and name brand clothes and steak effin dinners. Jeezus it's freaking really simple.

Billions of dollars being wasted and thrown to Country's that effin hate us and crazy needless Gov't waste, and some people's answer is to give them more. WTF

Whatever like I said

 

[Jaybird1980]

Oh yeah and stop pilfering every damn program in place to pay for bs somewhere else. Hold people accountable.

I guess I wasn't quite done.

Now.

 

[BigRed]

Watching CNBC this morning while working. Cramer (a multimillionaire) is calling for a wealth tax over the revelations of the pro publica piece.

this isn’t going away, the rich will pay.

Cramer Calls for Billionaire Surtax But Doesn't Support Warren's Wealth Tax

"Why not put a surtax on billionaires?" Cramer asked. "I think that Lincoln would be aghast that these people are paying nothing."

www.newsweek.com

Plunder the rich for all they are worth!

 

[Cameramonkey]

I disagree that it hurts the poor disproportionately, but I would be fine with the tax stopping at a certain level. Like 5k or something. Low enough that it doesn't encourage people to remain there.

Still disproportional. the person making $6k is still impacted harder than the guy making 60k. Using my coke analogy, the poor person can now buy 1 coke paying no tax, the lowest bracket having a couple bucks in his pocket might be able to buy one or two, yet the guy with $8 bucks can still afford lots of cokes. So he is still better off than the guys below him.

Granted your argument does work when you get above a certain tax bracket. But down low it still hurts the poor more.

 

[Jaybird1980]

Still disproportional. the person making $6k is still impacted harder than the guy making 60k. Using my coke analogy, the poor person can now buy 1 coke paying no tax, the lowest bracket having a couple bucks in his pocket might be able to buy one or two, yet the guy with $8 bucks can still afford lots of cokes. So he is still better off than the guys below him.

Granted your argument does work when you get above a certain tax bracket. But down low it still hurts the poor more.

No, I feel he is impacted the exact same amount. The guy with 60k has some more room because he made better choices. I don't care if supporting your country means you have to give up a new phone. 5% of 6k is $300 that's a small price to pay to live in the good ol US. Don't like it there are plenty of other places to live. Encouraging people to live in poverty doesn't lead to better days.


Edit: I should also say that I would be fine with the fair tax also, but I will be gamed the exact same as everything else.