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.

 

Eliminate Income Tax... Instate 25% National Sales Tax. Problem Solved!

page: 2
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:34 AM
link   
reply to post by spav5
 


That is a good point... but as the black market grows, by law of averages, the amount of stings/arrests would grow as well, so it would become more of a "grey market," and I believe there would be much more attention paid to the regulation and monitoring of this type of thing... something we need i think.

Also, people don't want to be criminals, you know? People don't want to risk their lives and freedom to avoid taxes.

Let me ask you this: IS there more income tax which is unpaid over the years, or is there more sales tax which is unpaid?

(the answer should be obvious.) Now... remove the "avoidable" income tax, while doubling the "daily" tax which is surely paid, and you have a much more secure... nearly equivalent impact on society.

Right or wrong?




posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


So the idea is to get low income earners to stop buying non essential items because they cant afford to pay the sales tax?


Not at all. The low income earners can buy whatever they like, they can still accrue debt. Low income earners are already buying things outside their means... and others already aren't, you know? A 10 dollar movie ticket would only cost 12.50. a 1000 dollar computer would only add up to 1,250. You see what I'm saying?

Imagine how much bigger those peoples checks would be every week with no income tax taken out? And none due at the end of the year.
edit on 3-3-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: .



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 01:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


Problem Solved!? Or new problems we will get into?

I used to think that getting rid of the IRS would be as easy as deleting Title 26 from the US Code. But it's not that simple mate. You have got 100,000+ Treasury employees, some unionized with great benefits. And next you have the literal armyof IRS trained and certified tax preparers to deal with. And even they have professional organizations which can cohere at a moments notice. They are very well organized.

And don't forget the probably army of some 100,000 corporate tax lawyers (I fudge that figure but oh well) who make themselves rich by manipulating the tax code for the very well connected and powerful interests. That's the real reason why Title 26 grows and every year it get's bigger.

The outcome of striking Title 26 is that you have 1,000,000 white collar and professionals becoming unemployed and unemployable! Because there will be no tax jobs to support them. Maybe more than 1 million. I'm just guessing.

I'm thinking that there is a better solution available. But I still haven't heard it yet.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 02:00 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


All absolutely correct. Note: I did not specify how simple this would be to implement. We all understand that government is a self serving establishment. I have a comment above which relates to this point.

These people you've mentioned... they need a problem to exist, or else they're out of a job! I understand this as well as the next man. However, if there is any hope for us... I believe it has to be through simplifying our goals (as a people) so that if we are ever actually in the position to decide for ourselves again, we won't be subject to the typical in-fighting which has allowed us to be so duped and confounded as we are.

It is not so simple, to be sure... but isn't that our problem?


edit on 3-3-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 02:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


I simply used those numbers to make the my point easier. Should i have based it on buying a lattee? a 25% sales tax would a person making less who buys a $2 latte will pay in sales tax as a portion of their oncome than a person who makes more and also buys the same $2 latte.

By your logic, people should stop buying lattes so they wont be adversely affected by a sales tax, effectively placing the tax burden on higher income earners which brings us to a situation you are trying to avoid.

A latee is still a bad example, if you compare percent of income you then start comparing incomes, then want to equalize incomes, and propose as good ideas concepts from Marx/Lenin/Stalin.

People are compensated by how much they contribute. Economically you would not pay anyone more than you had to. If you suddenly have a few million more qualified Doctors, then the compensation goes down.

The problem with the sales tax (and I HATE income tax) is that I would put money into savings and not buy much. I would buy what i needed but why pay another 25%? That's huge! A $400 Costco bill would have a $100 tax added on. A $40 dinner becomes a $50 dinner.

The problem is that the cost of living goes up, and those who have disposable incomes save more. Then you have the same 'rich get richer' problem that the non-rich complain about.

What if government just spent less, and cut 25% of their redundant bureaucracies?



edit on 3-3-2012 by Dbriefed because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 02:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Dbriefed
 


It sounds huge, but what percentage is taken out of each persons check each month? That's the most relevant question. If its anywhere near 25%, then the taxpayer has 25% of their income back in their hands.

Also, "tax brackets" will be extinct. The "tax bracket" will be decided naturally as people spend. A poor family in TODAY'S economy is not buying luxuries. A poor family under this new idea will not have to give up what they have worked for. A rich family CAN buy luxuries, and in doing so will be contributing more to the country. The more extravagant the lifestyle, the more money goes back to the People. I believe this would make people actually proud to pay taxes, as it shows an investment in the country, rather than an obligation which is extra to the services you provide at your job.

Basically, the poor will be able to save more money, and the rich will HAVE to give back by buying the things they want.

This idea puts the burden of taxation in the Taxpayer's own hands.

edit on 3-3-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-3-2012 by Aqualung2012 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 02:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aqualung2012

It is not so simple, to be sure... but isn't that our problem?



That is a $50,000 dollar question dude. And I know there is some C+ history student at a think tank making $50,000 dollars a year being paid to think about this problem. Maybe the solution to the problem is more think tanks?



Seriously, If we delete the tax code, put 1,000,000 people out of a job, we should redirect them to government funded think tanks. These thinks tanks would work with new ideas and test them in the real world.

I think this would be a perfect transition for 1,000,000 tax industry employees. And then we delete the tax code. And then we go with a new raw consumption tax.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:06 AM
link   
reply to post by SayonaraJupiter
 


More thinking minds!? NO, surely not, noooo. Anything but that!

We are thinking in a tank right now, if you can believe it! haha... but enough about that


I don't know what 1,000,000 tax lawyers would do, but nobody ever argued against the Holocaust because: "What about the 8,500,000 Nazis?!"



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:07 AM
link   
In Europe we started with the same concept , now we have VAT 20-25 % AND Income Tax



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:15 AM
link   
k.i.s.s.

This nation was founded and fought for by a simple little tax we had to pay. Yes, it was not the entire argument, it was just a small part of the argument.

Problem is, if people really knew how much they really paid in taxes now, their would be a revolution tomorrow. Except of course those that are subsidized by the government. There are people that pay nothing, that actually get more than they actually work for. Problem is, the government knows that this cannot continue.

We are actually worse off now than Greece is, the only advantage we have is that the US dollar is the reserve fiat currency. When ever we deflate the value of our dollar, that deflation ripples through the world. We do bad, the world does bad. It is what is called mutually assured economic destruction.

When did it all start? When the dollar was decoupled from real assets in the Nixon era. You know, the real reason JFK was killed.

to be continued



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Romanian
 


Well, you know the American way is... "To be just like Europe, but just a bit different."



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:19 AM
link   

Originally posted by nunya13
reply to post by Aqualung2012
 


Short version...a flat national sales ax is inherantly flawed as it adversely affects consumers the less money they make.

The math:

Person A and Person B each purchase a $100 printer

Person a makes $200 a day
Person B makes $100 a day

They each pay $25 intaxes on the printer.

This is 12.5% of person A's income for that day
It is 25% of person B's income for that day

Lower income people also spend a larger portion of their income on taxble sales items, which compounds the problem.


I would argue that a printer isn't a necessity and the person who makes less money and buys the printer they don't need should be responsible for that tax. It's not like they are taxing food in this scenario so how is it not fair? It might be more of person B's income for the day but it's the same actual amount and its not for a necessity which means if they didn't want to pay the tax they didn't have to. There are always going to consequences to spending money you don't have on things you don't need. Which forces people in this scenario to be wise with what they spend money on. It would force low income homes to take better care of necessities and in so doing hopefully better their lives in such a way that they are able to get a better job. I think it makes perfect sense. Of course I've always felt like a flat tax for everything outside of food and water would be a good idea because then the rich aren't technically paying more because they're rich...they're paying more because they're spending more and the poor wouldn't get nickel and dimed to death just trying to stay afloat because they generally aren't intelligent enough to be fiscally responsible in ways that make sense because we have programs that will feed you for free if your poor? Why the hell would you want to work hard to cover your basic needs when if you don't work at all they are provide for you and then you can use any income you make.....legally or not, crap you don't need....that's the American way because god forbid we deny a handout to someone that takes advantage of the system because their too stupid or irresponsible to take control of their life and do something about a food problem.....

Sorry kinda got on rant there...its late.....but my point is remove some of those social programs giving hand outs to people who are too lazy to work for food and you'll have a pretty big solution in combination with the OP's idea. Obviously you couldn't completely remove these programs as there are people who actually need them but I believe that not only should the rules for these programs be more stringent but I also believe that some sort of agency should monitor those programs even to the point of assigning someone to go look in on the living situation of people receiving the money. (yes every person and perhaps even discreetly) That way people could still get help that need it and people who tried to # the system would get caught and punished in some way.

I myself had a mother who for four years received government aid while I was very young and she was putting herself through college as a single mother because she left my abusive father. She got done with school and got her life together and has always paid her taxes. She drove a crappy little chevete while she did this. My mom is an example of the system when it works....

On the other hand I was in the line at a Walmart once and I'll always remember this. A young white couple who looked a little white trash were in front of me and my mother in line. They looked a little white trash but so do so many other people in Walmart and they could have just been broke ass people. I give them the benefit of the doubt as I watch them help get their child food with food stamps. My mother and I check out and we leave the store. As we walk to the car I see the white trash couple finish loading the groceries they just got for free into what looks like a brand new mustang...Now that isn't right...that's actually really #ed up to me...If you can afford payments a new mustang and the insurance then you sure as # don't need food stamps to feed your kid that you probably shouldn't be having anyway, since your obviously a moron. Everyday I feel more and more like we're heading toward idiocracy. Yes, like the movie....
edit on 3-3-2012 by GrimReaper86 because: (no reason given)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:20 AM
link   
25% is too much. Considering there is still property tax, gas tax, etc. I am all for support the government but when they spend more than they make (out of thin air) then the problem is not with our tax system but those in control of it.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
reply to post by LIGHTvsDARK
 


Very well said. We may debate the history book/conspiracy theory versions of Americas founding in another thread, but for the sake of said principal, I will lean to the history book version...

We left because of taxes. No problem. No tax without causation. That's EXACTLY what I'm talking about. Yeah, back in those days tax molasses because its imported (and imported meant a whole hell of a lot more back then.) But don't tax my family's private income, JUST for making it!

Same applies to this idea: Tax my cigarettes, my entertainment, my non essentials, because they are not necessities. But do NOT tax me for working, for living, and for providing my family with sustenance.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aqualung2012
reply to post by spav5
 


That is a good point... but as the black market grows, by law of averages, the amount of stings/arrests would grow as well, so it would become more of a "grey market," and I believe there would be much more attention paid to the regulation and monitoring of this type of thing... something we need i think.

Also, people don't want to be criminals, you know? People don't want to risk their lives and freedom to avoid taxes.

Let me ask you this: IS there more income tax which is unpaid over the years, or is there more sales tax which is unpaid?

(the answer should be obvious.) Now... remove the "avoidable" income tax, while doubling the "daily" tax which is surely paid, and you have a much more secure... nearly equivalent impact on society.

Right or wrong?


I would guess that there is more income tax fraud than sales tax fraud. At least on the consumer side of sales tax. But for the Government to run as is..sales tax would have to be higher than 25%.

I guess there are loopholes already in the tax system..a new system would only introduce new problems..but perhaps they could be overcome. But I see the same problems that we have now will be implemented in the new system...the corporations and the rich will build loopholes in the system so they pay less (like if I buy a million dollars worth the tax is only half) to pick up the slack sales tax on cheaper or individual items would increase..forcing those will little money to do without or obtain it illegally.

But perhaps it could work..it is sound reasoning.

why don't we tax unused wealth..if you sit on unused wealth...you will be taxed greatly. They are always crying..cut taxes to the wealthy and they will create jobs..we know this is not true..they are enjoying the largest tax breaks in recent history and we are at record high unemployment rates(excluding the depression). So why don't we tax unused wealth above a certain amount..if your millions are rat-holed and not creating jobs (only greater wealth for you)..then you forfeit that money. If your million acres are not being used to create jobs then you pay out the ass or you lose that land.

Just an idea


Peace



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:22 AM
link   
To get to a true taxation system, we have to eliminate ALL specific type taxes and fees. Those licenses, fees, subsidies, tariffs, etc, etc, etc are not for the purpose of supplying the government with revenue, they are about control. It is ALWAYS about control with governments. Anything they do is about control.

To implement a true and fair taxation system, you have to realize the basic tenet of freedom, you are not a slave to the state. There is a certain percentage that EVERYONE should pay into the system to allow the system to protect you from others.

When that percentage climbs too high, the system breaks down. When controls climb too high the system breaks down. When you are not allowed to save enough to become comfortable, the system breaks down.

The center cannot hold, the system will breakdown when it becomes to complex, entropy.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:33 AM
link   
What percentage of your labor should a person be allowed to keep? That is the question.

The other day, I saw a breakdown for a couple, they made $65,000 a year. Problem is, if this couple would only make $10,000 a year, they would make the exact same amount after taxes and subsidies as the other rate. This is a problem.

We are creating a society where those that slack on purpose can prosper at the same rate as those that work 6 times as much.

We are breeding a society where you and I know that sloth will breed envy will breed spite will breed all types of problems. What to do, what to do?

We have to fundamentally re evaluate what our society has become. We have to understand the very nature of the human condition. We have to evaluate, we have to analyze and we have to make hard choices. The progressive experiment does NOT work. It never has.



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:37 AM
link   
reply to post by GrimReaper86
 


Thank you very much for the personal testimony, and I agree with you.


And, since my friend and I are creating this reform (haha) i will assert that:

Taxes will STILL benefit welfare programs, because like it or not, we sometimes need some help from each other.
HOWEVER!!! Food stamps will be STRICTLY regulated, as so:


1) Food/Welfare Stamp benefits will be dealt with on a month to month basis, and people will be granted them based on income, and dependency of children. All recipients must provide documentation of seeking employment EACH month.

2) Food/Welfare Stamp benefits will NOT include ANY item which is not of a certain nutritional value- e.g. ice cream, candy, soft drinks, and other items to be deemed "junk food."

3) Food Stamps/Welfare benefits WILL include items such as toothpaste, soap, deodorant, shampoo, etc.

4) Anyone found to be fraudulent in their use of Food Stamps/Welfare aid WILL be prosecuted under federal Law, as they are virtually robbing EVERY citizen of the US in doing so. They will be charged with a Felony.

***Aqualung and His Friend for 2012!!*** (j/k)



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:43 AM
link   

Originally posted by Aqualung2012
reply to post by GrimReaper86
 


Thank you very much for the personal testimony, and I agree with you.


And, since my friend and I are creating this reform (haha) i will assert that:

Taxes will STILL benefit welfare programs, because like it or not, we sometimes need some help from each other.
HOWEVER!!! Food stamps will be STRICTLY regulated, as so:


1) Food/Welfare Stamp benefits will be dealt with on a month to month basis, and people will be granted them based on income, and dependency of children. All recipients must provide documentation of seeking employment EACH month.

2) Food/Welfare Stamp benefits will NOT include ANY item which is not of a certain nutritional value- e.g. ice cream, candy, soft drinks, and other items to be deemed "junk food."

3) Food Stamps/Welfare benefits WILL include items such as toothpaste, soap, deodorant, shampoo, etc.

4) Anyone found to be fraudulent in their use of Food Stamps/Welfare aid WILL be prosecuted under federal Law, as they are virtually robbing EVERY citizen of the US in doing so. They will be charged with a Felony.

***Aqualung and His Friend for 2012!!*** (j/k)



I think all should be able to enjoy comfort foods every now and then. But with your regulation.. you have now gone from tax reform back to control over one's diet. sounds like more slavery to me



posted on Mar, 3 2012 @ 03:48 AM
link   
reply to post by LIGHTvsDARK
 


That as well, I find to be a well presented and very truthful comment. "Entropy" is the PERFECT word!

Makes me wonder... I'm just an idiot, you know? I don't know what on earth I'm trying to talk about, when it comes down to it.

They do. They have people who know every single angle... can predict even the most minute shift and trend... they have it all. They MUST realize what they are doing to us.

I don't feel like all of these problems are like "woops, aww man, sorry guys, we didnt know there were bad guys messing around behind the scenes."

No, to me... I feel its more of a "lets get as much dough out of these suckers as we possibly can, nail em to the cross with our laws and then split before the going gets tough."

Its a bleeding shame!




top topics



 
4
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join