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.

 

The endisnighe, if I ran for President, would you vote for me?

page: 9
16
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:01 AM
link   
reply to post by Jean Paul Zodeaux
 



I understand that your answer is the only way to reduce taxes is to cut spending, and while I don't agree with that and know for a fact that you can reduce taxes before cutting spending, but I will stress that your insistence on cutting spending is a good one, and honorable. You have outlined how you would begin cutting some of that spending and again I agree with you completely.


We as a nation are running a deficit, which means that we are spending more money than we are taking in. Logically the first step in fixing this is to reduce spending. You simply cannot reduce taxes without reducing spending first otherwise you increase the debt.


the least you could do is come to understand the current revenue laws in regard to taxation.


So, you expect me to understand laws that tax attorneys, tax accountants, and tax collectors cannot? I fear you are expecting much too much from me. I think you may need to scale that back a tad so that you aren't horribly disappointed when I don't meet your expectations. You are putting me at impossibly high standards. I can only do my best. If I fail to meet your expectations, that is only a disappointment for you and not reality.

I do agree that tax laws are too insane for anyone to fully comprehend. What do you expect? I could push for a flat tax of 15% across the board on everything. It would be simple enough, but who would go for it?




posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 11:24 AM
link   
reply to post by whatukno
 





We as a nation are running a deficit, which means that we are spending more money than we are taking in. Logically the first step in fixing this is to reduce spending. You simply cannot reduce taxes without reducing spending first otherwise you increase the debt.


If you reduce taxes under the current situation then logically Congress will have to reduce spending, but when has Congress ever been accused of acting logically?




So, you expect me to understand laws that tax attorneys, tax accountants, and tax collectors cannot? I fear you are expecting much too much from me. I think you may need to scale that back a tad so that you aren't horribly disappointed when I don't meet your expectations. You are putting me at impossibly high standards. I can only do my best. If I fail to meet your expectations, that is only a disappointment for you and not reality.


No, I don't expect you to understand that law, I expect you to be honest and admit you don't, which I guess you are doing now, and then to do what you can to repeal that law and replace it with a saner one. I don't think that is such an impossibly high standard. Ron Paul has not been able to do much of what he would like to see done, but his efforts are legendary, and even if your own efforts would differ from his, if they are efforts at reigning in Congress' outrageous legislative diarrhea, then you too will become legendary!

I have no doubt at all that you will do your best, and this is why I have such high expectations of you. You can not possibly disappoint me, since I understand completely what you would up against, and if your efforts are strong and consistent, I assure you that I will not be disappointed in you.




I do agree that tax laws are too insane for anyone to fully comprehend. What do you expect? I could push for a flat tax of 15% across the board on everything. It would be simple enough, but who would go for it?


I am not so sure I agree with a flat tax, but your number is low enough to make it a little less bitter. I will agree that under our current situation we can't just undo income taxation all together, although it would be nice to see us headed in that direction, and your suggestion of a flat tax is a step in that direction, I think. I know flat taxes on income are not so popular, but what tax is?

You are again sounding like that Wuk I've come to know and love, willing to listen and hear another view, but sticking to your guns when you think your right. If your right more times than not, this quality of yours will probably make you a damn fine legislator. Yes, perhaps you and End could debate this idea of a flat tax in comparison to his own ideas on how to tax effectively without punishing producers. However, in your real campaign, it would probably be best to avoid discussing matters of taxation and stay with lines like:




I do agree that tax laws are too insane for anyone to fully comprehend.


And then maybe rely on that tactic I suggested of insisting that because they are too insane to fully understand, you will have to study the issue further and will have an answer later, and then just do what you can to get elected, and then start pushing for a flat tax, if that is what you think will work. It will simplify the income tax laws, and that is the most important thing of this issue, to make sure the law is understandable.



posted on Apr, 9 2010 @ 05:58 PM
link   
25% tax on all sales except food, clothing and primary residence would create an income of around $3 Trillion dollars.

Hmmm, sounds like a fair amount to run all government on.

That is if you actually cut government bureaucracies.

Time to reign in out of control government.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Sure lets run Government today in 2010 as on the proportinal percent they did in 1850 with taxing. That would definately shrink Government.



posted on Apr, 10 2010 @ 03:33 PM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


That sounds like the same BS everyone spouts year after year election after election. Maybe it isn't the candidates who need overhaul, but the way people decide on whom they elect.



new topics

top topics
 
16
<< 6  7  8   >>

log in

join