The 2017 General Political discussion thread, Part 2!

[printcraft]

How appropriate. You do know Trump Trumpted the FACT that this publication generally gets things right when others don’t? I think it’s so admirable that our President gets his alien updates daily from one of the best in the business. LOL

You still haven't answered the question. I know it's a bitter pill but your argument might go further if you admit it did happen on some level.

 

[Dddrees]

You still haven't answered the question. I know it's a bitter pill but your argument might go further if you admit it did happen on some level.

Because he got caught by virtue of talking to someone else being under surveillance which was ordered by a Judge? What exactly was your point again?

 

[Birds Away]

Got caught doing what exactly?

 

[printcraft]

Because he got caught by virtue of talking to someone else being under surveillance which was ordered by a Judge? What exactly was your point again?

Washington (CNN)US investigators wiretapped former Trump campaign chairman Paul Manafort under secret court orders before and after the election, sources tell CNN, an extraordinary step involving a high-ranking campaign official now at the center of the Russia meddling probe.

Were Trump associates wiretapped?

 

[hoosierdoc]

Got caught doing what exactly?

got "caught" doing nothing illegal.

 

[Birds Away]

got "caught" doing nothing illegal.

Trump said Obama had Trump Tower wiretapped. The media fell all other themselves saying that was false and had never happened. Of course, it did happen. Several Trump associates, using FISA court warrants, were wiretapped in Trump Tower. But, again, it never happened.

 

[PaulF]

Never took an Econ class. I thought you meant it affected the poor more. Here's the definition I found:



the sales tax is identical on ALL new items purchased. Even the poor pay the tax on food. But everyone gets a prebate of that tax money spent. The tax paid doesn't change based on anything related to price. So where is the spin?

A $500,000 used car would have zero tax on it. A $10,000 new one would. A $500,000 new car would Have the tax, a $10,000 used one would not. Cost of an item has nothing to do with the tax rate on it. How does this make it regressive?

Example:

A wealth man buys $1000 worth of food for the month (big family/easy math...lol) from the same store and at the same time as a working-class man who also buys the same $1000 worth of food. Both men pay $250 in sales tax.

For a man that makes $2500/month that $250 imposes a much greater burden against the money available for living expenses...it is regressive because it effects the poor more immediately, thoroughly, and deeply than a man bringing home $10,000/month.

At higher income levels consumption taxes draw from funds that would otherwise be saved, invested, or spent on non-essential purchases. At lower income levels those taxes eat into the funds people need to survive day-to day at a basic level.

Also, sales tax is collected against used car purchases when registered with the state. All sales are supposed to be taxed, if not at the point of sale, then when filing an end of year return. In your example both cars would be taxed.

I see the problem as two-fold: 1) the federal government is already too expensive to be sustainable, and 2) the people that benefit the most from federal largess (the wealthy/"ruling" class) have an exaggerated ability to avoid paying their full share (whatever is actually appropriate).

Make the government smaller and we all pay less, no matter how we pay.

 

[PaulF]

Trump said Obama had Trump Tower wiretapped. The media fell all other themselves saying that was false and had never happened. Of course, it did happen. Several Trump associates, using FISA court warrants, were wiretapped in Trump Tower. But, again, it never happened.

I don't understand.

If a court authorized the wiretapps, they are legal...part of an investigation the government is authorized to pursue (as evidenced by the FISA warrants.

Is it more upsetting to you that Obama lied, or that a court found cause to repeatedly sign off on an investigation into our current sitting president and his regime?

I am used to obama's lies...I am far more concerned that a court repeatedly found cause to wiretap Trump and his associates.

 

[Woobie]

Disproportionately affects those with lower income that must spend most of their income to survive. They would be taxed on almost 100% of their total worth, while the rich can save most of their money and be taxed at a relatively extremely low rate.

The tax rate is not 100%. It's just that nearly 100% of their income becomes subjected to taxation at the going rate. The rich would pay more in taxes as they buy more things and more expensive things. So while they might save, which is not a bad thing, they still have a pretty high portion of their considerable expenses taxed. Is this disproportional? Not nearly to the extent that you say, and with a larger paycheck, they can afford it.

And consider that 100% of a poor man's check is already being taxed at whatever his rate is. So you've basically objected to something that is already happening.

 

[Woobie]

It is a regressive tax, by definition. Saying that it is not, does not make it change to some other form of taxation.

Ultimately, regressive taxation results in redistribution of wealth. It just happens to be the one you prefer.

How is it redistribution if someone is keeping more of his own money?

 

[Dddrees]

I don't understand.

If a court authorized the wiretapps, they are legal...part of an investigation the government is authorized to pursue (as evidenced by the FISA warrants.

Is it more upsetting to you that Obama lied, or that a court found cause to repeatedly sign off on an investigation into our current sitting president and his regime?

I am used to obama's lies...I am far more concerned that a court repeatedly found cause to wiretap Trump and his associates.

Watch it logic, reason, and truth amongst many other things are no longer a consideration now that Trump has come on the scene

 

[Woobie]

So do you believe Ted Cruz’s father was involved in the conspiracy to kill Kennedy? I mean Trump said that too. Besides I guess today is the day we should be able to find out.

Link?

 

[indiucky]

Link?

Sorry Woobie...I can't help myself...

 

[hoosierdoc]

Example:

A wealth man buys $1000 worth of food for the month (big family/easy math...lol) from the same store and at the same time as a working-class man who also buys the same $1000 worth of food. Both men pay $250 in sales tax.

For a man that makes $2500/month that $250 imposes a much greater burden against the money available for living expenses...it is regressive because it effects the poor more immediately, thoroughly, and deeply than a man bringing home $10,000/month.

At higher income levels consumption taxes draw from funds that would otherwise be saved, invested, or spent on non-essential purchases. At lower income levels those taxes eat into the funds people need to survive day-to day at a basic level.

Also, sales tax is collected against used car purchases when registered with the state. All sales are supposed to be taxed, if not at the point of sale, then when filing an end of year return. In your example both cars would be taxed.

I see the problem as two-fold: 1) the federal government is already too expensive to be sustainable, and 2) the people that benefit the most from federal largess (the wealthy/"ruling" class) have an exaggerated ability to avoid paying their full share (whatever is actually appropriate).

Make the government smaller and we all pay less, no matter how we pay.

No, you're looking at it incorrectly. For simplicity we'll only look at federal taxes. Currently both people lose their paycheck to the .gov. Let's say the poor guy makes $2000/month. (that's actually average family income in America if both adults work). So we'll put him in the 15% tax bracket (I used 12% to average his tax in the 10% and 15% bracket). Plus 13% for FICA and 6% for medicare (employer expenses come out of his check). So of his $2000 he earns, he'll keep $1,560 (I only subtracted employee half of FICA and medicare).

With that $1,560 he goes and buys $1000 worth of food and now has food and $560.

Under the fairtax plan, he makes $2000 and keeps $2000. The food he wants to buy costs $1000, so he still has $1000 after buying food. AND he gets a prebate check for $250 for the poverty-level sales tax an average American would pay. So now he has $1,250 AND food.

That is $690 more than he would have had under the current system. AND, his employer would likely increase his salary because now the employer is not paying the FICA and medicare taxes on the employee's behalf and this will push wages higher.

Again.... to complain about it is simply class warfare, and incorrectly applied at that.

Let's look at spending. High income earners buy yachts, nice cars, second homes, fancy suits/clothes, etc. They will pay 23% tax on all of that. It is estimated the IRS loses out on nearly $200 BILLION on taxes in the black market. With a sales tax the black market will suddenly start paying taxes because they still buy Escalades and such. Also, visitors from Europe will come here and pay the sales tax, paying into our SS and medicare system.

If you manufacture an item in the US, it has ZERO corporate tax on it, and gets 20-25% cheaper at the loading dock than it is now. When it's exported, it is now 20-25% cheaper overseas than it is currently for sale. That will MASSIVELY increase domestic manufacturing and export.

Also, it's estimated the US economy loses $400 BILLION a year due to tax compliance. Can you imagine if you could start a company and not worry about the US tax code? Or withholding? Or depreciation? You could just go out and run your business? We spent 8.9 BILLION hours on tax compliance in this country. That is 100% wasted effort. The sales tax eliminates IRS audits because the IRS goes away. 100% of tax compliance is now paid by businesses, not people. We don't have to worry about it. Tens of billions a year are wasted in outright fraud with the IRS rebate checks.

The current system is broken, is stifling our economy, and destroying lives while centralizing power in DC. It has to be completely wiped. The sales tax is the best replacement possible.

finally, you can't mention state sales taxes on used cars. That's a state thing. We're talking federal taxes.

paul, the lowest income folks get the most federal largess. Smaller government would be awesome, but let's end the disaster if the income tax.

 

[Woobie]

Sorry Woobie...I can't help myself...

Apology not accepted. At this point I know I'm not getting one from him, so I just do it to see what you'll come up with next. I'm hoping you'll have a Salma or Eva Mendez link for me.

 

[Alpo]

How is it redistribution if someone is keeping more of his own money?

A tax is either regressive, neutral or progressive....generally. Those at the wealthier end of the spectrum like regressive taxes...everyone pays the same amount or the same rate. They believe that is "fair".

If wealth is held in the hands of a few, is that how things started out? If not, isn't that some form of redistribution? Some would argue that it's fair. A meritocracy. And yes, I'd agree if you were the person who rose from nothing to great heights. But, that isn't true of the children. What merit is it to be born into the upper class? What has the newborn accomplished other than finding the correct womb?

I don't believe that we all ought to pool our incomes and divide them equally. But I do think that we ought to enable our middle class to remain so. If you want a "fair tax" applied on an equitable basis, tax all earnings at the same rate. No capital gains. No oil depletion. No investment tax credit. No difference in a single human and a corporation (for aren't corporations "people too"?). No 501(c)3 exclusion either.

Set up a base level exclusion per "person" and be done with it.

 

[BugI02]

Am I reading correctly about possible 401k max contribution reductions? WTF???

So lets get rid of taxes on rich people's inheritance, and lets cut the ability of middle class Americans to contribute appropriately to their retirement plan.

You forgot the part about where they made it easy for corporations to terminate their pension plans so that we would have to depend more on 401ks etc in the first place (this really ramped up under Billie Jeff)

 

[PaulF]

No, you're looking at it incorrectly. For simplicity we'll only look at federal taxes. Currently both people lose their paycheck to the .gov. Let's say the poor guy makes $2000/month. (that's actually average family income in America if both adults work). So we'll put him in the 15% tax bracket (I used 12% to average his tax in the 10% and 15% bracket). Plus 13% for FICA and 6% for medicare (employer expenses come out of his check). So of his $2000 he earns, he'll keep $1,560 (I only subtracted employee half of FICA and medicare).

With that $1,560 he goes and buys $1000 worth of food and now has food and $560.

Under the fairtax plan, he makes $2000 and keeps $2000. The food he wants to buy costs $1000, so he still has $1000 after buying food. AND he gets a prebate check for $250 for the poverty-level sales tax an average American would pay. So now he has $1,250 AND food.

That is $690 more than he would have had under the current system. AND, his employer would likely increase his salary because now the employer is not paying the FICA and medicare taxes on the employee's behalf and this will push wages higher.

Again.... to complain about it is simply class warfare, and incorrectly applied at that.

Let's look at spending. High income earners buy yachts, nice cars, second homes, fancy suits/clothes, etc. They will pay 23% tax on all of that. It is estimated the IRS loses out on nearly $200 BILLION on taxes in the black market. With a sales tax the black market will suddenly start paying taxes because they still buy Escalades and such. Also, visitors from Europe will come here and pay the sales tax, paying into our SS and medicare system.

If you manufacture an item in the US, it has ZERO corporate tax on it, and gets 20-25% cheaper at the loading dock than it is now. When it's exported, it is now 20-25% cheaper overseas than it is currently for sale. That will MASSIVELY increase domestic manufacturing and export.

Also, it's estimated the US economy loses $400 BILLION a year due to tax compliance. Can you imagine if you could start a company and not worry about the US tax code? Or withholding? Or depreciation? You could just go out and run your business? We spent 8.9 BILLION hours on tax compliance in this country. That is 100% wasted effort. The sales tax eliminates IRS audits because the IRS goes away. 100% of tax compliance is now paid by businesses, not people. We don't have to worry about it. Tens of billions a year are wasted in outright fraud with the IRS rebate checks.

The current system is broken, is stifling our economy, and destroying lives while centralizing power in DC. It has to be completely wiped. The sales tax is the best replacement possible.

finally, you can't mention state sales taxes on used cars. That's a state thing. We're talking federal taxes.

Okay, I think I understand what you are suggesting: a federal consumption tax coupled with a federal tax subsidy to offset the cost to the poor. Am I correct so far?

I agree that, in theory at least, the subsidy would remove the bite from the regressive element of the tax. I also agree that it would probably be a better system than we have now.

But...

I have to admit, though, that I don't find this plan politically feasible in the least. Realistically, aren't we talking about scrapping and re-writing the entire federal tax code along with forcing substantial material changes at the state level as well? After 40 years of crony capitalism dressed up as "trickle-down" economics feeding both "sides" of our political landscape is it reasonable to think all those suckling at the teat of federal largess are going to vote to enact a systemic weaning?

I mean, I really don't...not with our current political status quo. I can't help but think "tax reform" is nothing more than the "ruling class" dressing upward income redistribution up in populist clothing.

I am in total agreement with your hoped result, but I don't think "fairtax" has a snowball's chance in hell when facing the current political reality in the US.

Also, I don't think there is any practical way to separate federal and state taxation in this discussion, the two are deeply intertwined...I don't think addressing one in absence of the other will produce implementable results.

 

[Alpo]

What he said.

 

[hoosierdoc]

Yes, the sales tax is proposed to include a prebate to all households equal to poverty level spending to reimburse the taxes paid. This is to avoid any exclusion of new items from the tax or people from being required to pay. Once you start making carve outs you get back to where you are now.

But even without prebate he comes out ahead

It also requires repeal of the 16th amendment.

it's a huge paradigm shift that will empower the states and liberate the citizens. It will be hard to do, but should be done.

seriously, check out The FairTax book from the library. Neal Boortz (libertarian former radio host) and John Linder (former congressman)