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.

 

Get a load of this...unfair taxes top ten states....

page: 1
1

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
If this is in the wrong place, Mods, feel free to move it. Here is an article about the very thing most people say is untrue. Here's the proof, it IS true!!!!!

"According to Gardner's findings, the 10 states where "regressive" taxation most significantly tilts in favor of the rich are Washington, Florida, South Dakota, Tennessee, Texas, Illinois, Arizona, Nevada, Pennsylvania and Alabama. "

source:
www.sphere.com...


[edit on 20-11-2009 by ldyserenity]

[edit on 20-11-2009 by ldyserenity]




posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:22 AM
link   
When people speak of regressive taxation, they're usually speaking of income taxes. This includes all state level taxes, and I don't think *anyone* would deny that sales taxes and property taxes are highly regressive. They are.

Still, I think this is a case of lies, damn lies and statistics. Take Tennessee as an example. Forget the percentages and look at absolutes.

Here's what the average person in each bracket pays:

Bottom 20%: $1,194
Second 20%: $2,495
Third 20%: $3,535
Fourth 20%: $4,351

Next 15%: $6,289
Next 4%: $10,291
Top 1: $45,071
(The average of the top 20% is $9,029)

This means that the top 20% is paying 43.8% of all the state taxes. The top 1% is actually paying about 11% of the total taxes. The bottom 20%? 5.7%.

Although the writer wants to use the study to justify more taxes on the rich, in reality, what this study proves is that the rich aren't the problem. No, the problem is that as structured, property taxes and sales taxes are inherently regressive, and that has nothing to do with rich vs poor or class warfare. The way you solve this isn't by raising taxes on the rich. The way to solve it is by eliminating these taxes for the poor entirely, as it really doesn't make a huge dent in tax receipts to do so.

Not to turn this into a political discussion, but this is why I hate the Democratic party's class warfare bullcrap. They attack the rich incessantly, but doing so does not help the poor. If they actually wanted to help the poor, they would forgo that tiny 5.7% that the poor contribute to the coffers in a state like Tennessee (its actually less at the federal level) and eliminate taxation of the bottom 20% entirely. But of course, that's never going to happen.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:44 AM
link   
Actually, I sort of agree with you on this. The challenge has always been that all taxes hurt unless you have more money than you can spend (top 1%). So who suffers most?

Some would say that a flat tax is fair... x% from everyone. But then when you think about it, it you are living off of $10 per hour, taking ANY of that money is hard on the wage earner.

The genuinely rich have more expendable cash to pay in taxes, but there is a valid point in saying that that money would be better spent in the private sector.

I still think Sales Tax is probably the best route to take, but it would need to be updated to apply to certain classes of items. For example, stop taking anything edible. Tax luxury items but not staples.

I dunno.. I have never figured out details that really work. The best solution is to trim governments down to bare bones so that less taxes are needed overall.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:47 AM
link   
reply to post by vor78
 


Thank you for that information and your breakdown of the figures. I can now say I learned something today



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:49 AM
link   
P.S. I give this thread roughly 2 hours before it becomes a pissing-match based on political ideals. Some folks are unable to think for themselves it seems and when faced with facts and truths, resort to affiliated-mantras..



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 09:52 AM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 


The flat tax would work extremely well, if modified just a bit. All one would need to do is exempt the first $20,000 or so of income and then apply a flat rate to each dollar earned after that amount.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 11:02 AM
link   
Those who choose to live off grid in a self sustained manner, and the other 20% of the poor saps still in the system should live tax free. Property tax alone FORCES everyone to make money to LIVE, needed or not. Where is the government afforded this power?

Originally our government taxed imports, instead of its own people.

If the fed needs money, tax china's crap that they sell here.



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Reply to post by LordBaskettIV
 


Yes yes a thousand times yes.

I can't express how happy I am to see somebody else gets it. For once a tax thread I don't have to copy and paste the same "what about the ultimate enslaving evil that is property taxtion don't you people seem to get?" I always do.

Simply to live you are forced to pay property tax. To pay that tax you need an income. Once you earn an income you are forced to pay taxes on that income. To live is to be taxed at gun point. To be taxed is to be a slave.

How people can waste their efforts planning how to make their enslavement easier to manage or more "fair" just boggles my mind. It's like asking the cop to loosen the cuffs. For one thing he isn't going to do it and for another loose or not you're still in cuffs.


 
Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com
 



posted on Nov, 20 2009 @ 11:44 AM
link   

Originally posted by LordBaskettIV
Those who choose to live off grid in a self sustained manner, and the other 20% of the poor saps still in the system should live tax free. Property tax alone FORCES everyone to make money to LIVE, needed or not. Where is the government afforded this power?

Originally our government taxed imports, instead of its own people.

If the fed needs money, tax china's crap that they sell here.


I have never really given a lot of thought on this particular angle, but after reading this I have to say 100% yes, I agree. Specifically because I believe that the government of the US should NOT have right of first claim to land (which, in a sense, they do, since they can foreclose at anytime on anyone by clever manipulation of laws and books).

I think there may be something here, thoug, as far as taxing foreign goods. Levy a sales tax on all goods that are sourced outside of US territory. Specifically, if you have to import it to put it on a store shelf, it gets a sales tax. If you are simply importing parts, but all assembly and packaging is done on US territory, then is is not taxed. Manufacturers and Distributors would have to prove tax exemption on all products, much like vendors currently have to do when buying items for resale.

Very clever idea. Helps return jobs to the US and it is buffered from foreign retaliation, since if they try to protest by not sending goods at all, they are cutting themselves from the US Market.



new topics

top topics



 
1

log in

join