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.
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?
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.
Originally posted by Aqualung2012
It is not so simple, to be sure... but isn't that our problem?
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.
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?
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)