It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

May I suggest a weighted voting scheme?

page: 4
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 10:59 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Flat rate tax, as in a flat percentage, as in X amount of pennies off of every dollar earned. That is a proportional tax system compared to the arrogant SJW system we have today.




posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: Shamrock6
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

It's amusing that you two are pooping all over "equality" and snickering at socialists for thinking equality is possible...

And then turn around and talk about how it would "be fair" if your suggestions happened.

Inequality works both ways, folks. Don't whine about how the lower and middle classss can't expect fairness and equality and then turn around and whine about how it would be fair if this or that happened for the upper class.

Then again you both seem to think this is a good idea so what can one expect from you


Just because you think your opinion is in the majority doesn't make it right. Go make a picket sign, socialist.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:09 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Sweden is a monarchy on paper only, the king is "head of state", but has no power.... Info

And the voting is a little bit of both... ie both voting for a party (the candidates are listed in numerical order on the ballots) and you can also vote for a candidate (tick box).


edit on 412017 by BobbyRock because: + image



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:10 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

There would be a middle class if the federal government and its socialist cronies would remove themselves from the free market. Its the government binding up the prosperity, not the wealthy.

Who do you think employs the 80%ers, genius??? Unless you're free loading off the tax payers, chances are you're employed by wealthy businessmen. Their money pays your wages, and you contribut to the economy as part of the 80%. If you kill the rich man, you starve. Its not a difficult concept. No wealthy class, no economy.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:13 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Still would be a problem and basically for the same reason. At a certain bracket it weighs too much on those that have the least.

If the rate is 25% and you make $10,000 a year a $2500 tax impacts your life much more than someone making $100,000. Sure they are paying out $25,000 instead of $2500 which is obviously a lot more. But that still leaves them $75,000.

The way things are there is pretty much a base amount of money required to simply scrape out a living. So taking 25% from 100,000 might mean a smaller house or one less car and no vacation or whatever. But 25% out of $10,000 might mean no house at all.

The only way I can see that working would be to have Taxes start with people who make well above a certain amount and below that nobody pay. But people won't agree to that.

Plus what would be considered a base level of living standard???



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:19 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

First, 25% is ridiculously high, 5-10% is more reasonable. Secondly, you're imposing a flat rate tax system on todays over inflated cost of living. A flat rate system can't happen over night. It must be titrated.
edit on 1-4-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:20 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Some of them sure. I agree that Government is a problem but so is Big Corporations who take their money out of the system. The Government has the same problem.

Everyone wants to say it's the welfare and food stamps going to those damn poor people. But that isn't correct. All that money goes right back in our economy. It's a closed system and is simply wealth redistribution but it flows back through again.

I made a post about this a while back. One of my only Positive Trump Posts too actually. Trump (allegedly) wants to "Buy American and Hire American". I Support that. However the Republicans in office do not feel the same way. When Trump wanted to start spending Government Tax Money here in America they said no because they're already spending almost 900 Billion. Yes Billion. Mandated on foreign Contractors for our own Infrastructure spending.

That's almost a Trillion dollars being sent out of our economy. That's where the leak is going. Not welfare. It's sending our money out of our economy and it's the Republicans that are keeping it that way.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:29 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Its the crony corporations and the regulators that protect them by stomping out any emerging competition. Money going out is fine as long as it comes back in. Nothing wrong with international trade. Its orgs like the FDA determining what is food/medicine and what isnt.

Welfare is a problem too, but not nearly as big as federalized cronyism.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:31 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

I just used 25% because it was easy.

It might work but you'd need to have no deductions and loopholes also. Plus you'd still have a problem at the lower end of it.

I realize that the Rich are the ones paying employees and spending money. Well, actually the middle class businesses and the big corps too, but it's the big guys who are getting the breaks. Once again it's always the middle who get screwed. But that isn't the fault of the poor and I don't know why everyone in the middle gets pissed at them instead of the rich.

But it's because they middle sees their money getting taken away and given to the poor. But what they don't seem to see is that it's the people above them that are getting the breaks, not paying their fair share or even skimming off the middle before handing down the illusion of money to the poor. Even when actual money goes to the poor it just goes right back to where it came from.

For example why are we subsidizing Big Oil, Big Ag., Big Pharma when they are already profiting in the 100'S of billions??? How does that make sense???

Why is Walmart allowed to pay so little that their employees still qualify for Gov. aid. while working full time and they are profiting probably in the trillions over all???

For every one of their employees that gets Gov. Aid because they don't make enough that is just taking our tax dollars when that extra amount should be coming out of Walmarts profits first. That's a private business. Tax payers shouldn't be paying part of it's wages. That's on them to do.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:38 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Why should any company be allowed to receive government aid? If it cant survive without it, it should fail and let smaller businesses take it's place. Like a canopy tree falling in the rainforest. The undergrowth rushes to fill its place.
edit on 1-4-2017 by BELIEVERpriest because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:41 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

You're right. It's the crony corporate monopoly of power and money working together.

Trade I also think is fine too. Like you said it depends on what goes out and comes in. Right now, there are way bigger leaks than injections happening though. We're basically slowly bleeding out. Like a wound that needs to be closed up or else it will just keep bleeding.

That's only one area too. There are others. Like interest payments to banks who create our own money and then charge us for borrowing it.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:44 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

Exactly!! That's the problem of the business not the populace. The Gov. is a Public Service system. Paid for by us to serve us. Private business is private and it's on them to pay for themselves but also profit for themselves.

But they got in with the Law makers and found a tricky little way for tax payers to pitch in on paying their wages for them. They can pay their employees less than they should and tax payers make up the rest. Meanwhile all that extra money they aren't paying goes right into their own pockets!! But they could totally pay that extra and still be filthy rich, but they don't.

There are some occasions when public funds can go to private business however. But it has to be for reasons that make sense. It makes no sense when the reason is simply to make those businesses more profits for it's owners though.
edit on 1-4-2017 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)


I think we're off topic now though, BTW.
edit on 1-4-2017 by mOjOm because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:49 PM
link   
Am I the only one that is reading this and thinking of the reasoning behind the 3/5 clause?



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:50 PM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

Two things must happen for positive change to take place:

1) People will need to stop needing the federal government and become self sufficient. That involves rejecting welfare.

2) The federal government must be starved like a cancer under autophagy.

But the government keeps ticking our ears with the delusion of economic equality, and we like it. They say "vox populi, vox dei"..."the voice of the people is the voice of God", but its not, its the voice of vanity...a fading vapor trail in the wind.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: allsee4eye

Um... No.

There are more than enough folks who seem to think they're some form of nobility already, don't need to make it easier for them to do so.

Bad idea.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:51 PM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Nope. You weren't.



posted on Apr, 1 2017 @ 11:59 PM
link   
a reply to: BELIEVERpriest

It doesn't have to be that much of a change though. The federal Government just needs to be made efficient and it's interests directed toward the nation instead.

What they spend they need to spend here first and what they spend outside here has to come back.

We need to stop paying for our own damn money too. Borrowing from the fed at interest when all they do is have our own treasury print the money for us anyway is just dumb. We're basically just printing our own money, giving it to the fed who then lends it to us at interest. That makes no sense. We can print our own money for ourselves and not owe interest to a third party. It's ridiculous doing it that way. It just makes us slaves to that bank and they aren't doing anything. We aren't really borrowing real money. It's just make believe at that level but it's real wealth when we pay it back.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 12:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Ahabstar
Am I the only one that is reading this and thinking of the reasoning behind the 3/5 clause?


*drop mic*



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 12:03 AM
link   
a reply to: mOjOm

I lost my faith in America's sense of humanity a long time ago. We aren't civilized anymore. We have become self serving cattle. There will be no change until we have exhausted our resources and start suffering as a result.



posted on Apr, 2 2017 @ 12:08 AM
link   
a reply to: Ahabstar

Are you actually going to support the idea that some people are actually only 3/5 of a person???

Based on what criteria do you use to reduce a person to something less than a person in that way???




top topics



 
1
<< 1  2  3    5  6 >>

log in

join