Help ATS with a contribution via PayPal:
learn more

House GOP Looks To Abolish IRS, Replace Income Tax With Consumption Tax

page: 3
41
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:21 PM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


"Our politicians will never allow it to pass. "


the military complex wont allow it to pass thats for sure.




posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:26 PM
link   
We need a flat tax. That way everytime these people raise the taxes people understand what they are paying. The biggest problem with our tax code (besides the loopholes) is the fact that people do not realize the taxes they are paying. For example your gasoline reciept does not show the tax. Many people dont even realize the tax they pay on just gas alone. During every campaign all they talk about is how they wont raise the tax on middle class. They are only talkin about the federal tax. The other taxes are never mentioned! If we did a flat tax and abolished ALL taxes then when the government wanted to go from say 15% tax to 20% tax, the american people would not allow it.



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:29 PM
link   

Originally posted by jimmyx

so...if a person makes 10 million a year, but only spends 1 million a year...he is taxed on 10% of his income
and...if a person makes 50 thousand a year, and spends 45 thousand...he is taxed on 90% of his income



EXACTLY!

If person A makes 10M a year and only spends 10% of his income and saves the rest, why on earth should he be taxed on those savings?

If person B makes 50k a year and spends all but 5% why shouldn't he be taxed on the commerce he engages in?

Oh, and BTW. If Person A (the dirty rich bastard) spends 10% of his income his tax will be 100k a year. If person B (that poor bastard) spent 100% of his income he would still only pay 50% as much as the rich bastard in taxes that year.

Funny that.

So, why are you against saving money?



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bakatono

Originally posted by jimmyx

so...if a person makes 10 million a year, but only spends 1 million a year...he is taxed on 10% of his income
and...if a person makes 50 thousand a year, and spends 45 thousand...he is taxed on 90% of his income



EXACTLY!

If person A makes 10M a year and only spends 10% of his income and saves the rest, why on earth should he be taxed on those savings?

If person B makes 50k a year and spends all but 5% why shouldn't he be taxed on the commerce he engages in?

Oh, and BTW. If Person A (the dirty rich bastard) spends 10% of his income his tax will be 100k a year. If person B (that poor bastard) spent 100% of his income he would still only pay 50% as much as the rich bastard in taxes that year.

Funny that.

So, why are you against saving money?


so why should a poor person have to dole out a higher percentage of their income than a rich person? Tax the rich's savings? Hell it should be ripped from them like they rip it from their customers and employees.



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   
The only taxation system that is fair and makes sense is the progressive taxation system but with the income brackets adjusted way upwards from what they are now. For example the $350k that is considered wealthy should move to lets say $1 million income per year; this way middle class pays less and the truely wealthy pay more.

Then start raising tariffs to make business come back. They don't need favors, they need the fear of punishment. I am so sick and tired of bending over to make wall street investors/speculators happy. Is this what america was founded on? It was founded on hard work and religious tolerance; well at least after the civil war ended.

If people started voting left instead of right, perhaps we would get real change for the better. There must be a lot of stupid people on ATS or they are rich indeed. Consumption tax and Fair tax(10%) target everyone the same but the low income earners get affected much more than the high income earners. Completly unfair!!



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:44 PM
link   


why should a poor person have to dole out a higher percentage of their income than a rich person?


Because Republicans think that the wealthy should pay less in taxes and move that tax burden to the poor and middle class.

The unfair tax is a gigantic scam to guarantee that wealthy hardly pay any taxes at all (relative to their wealth).

It is designed to sucker ignorant people and is apparently doing a hell of a good job.



posted on Jan, 7 2013 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Bildo
 


good point, who will own our ALL CAPITAL NAME? will we no longer be the property of the federal bank/irs.... that is the iou we signed to get money... me and you are the iou on paid debt.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 12:08 AM
link   
They should not abolish the IRS. They should nationalise the federal reserve and stop paying interest to the investors. That would solve everything. No inflation either. Why should the government have to borrow from anyone?

Some times things are so simple, but the boss makes it look dificult on purpose....to confuse you!

Ask the USSR who it borrowed from. No one! It only failed because everything was nationalised and everyone was a government employee. Find a happy medium between capitalism(private investment) and communism, and you solved the problem.

The solution is a mixed economy without the rothschilds funneling money to israel!



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 12:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by ~widowmaker~
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


"Our politicians will never allow it to pass. "


the military complex wont allow it to pass thats for sure.



Even though I get what you are saying...at the same time would this not bring in more revenue for big banks? Considering not only do they get to charge interest on the stuff you borrow to pay for, but interest on the tax they let you borrow?

Mo money for the big banks since American's love to spend money that they dont have.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 12:29 AM
link   
reply to post by jimmyx
 


And? I don't get your point. I really don't. Last I checked, it's none of your business what I make or others. It sure as heck isn't your money. You aren't entitled to a single penny I earn. Unless, I want to give it you you.
edit on 8-1-2013 by milkyway12 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 01:31 AM
link   
So you'd be taxed on what you spend rather than what you make?

Sounds like a good way to produce capital honestly.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 02:29 AM
link   
Seriously, unless the government would be able to suck more money out of our pockets, why would they make a change at all? To do US a favor? If a change IS made to tax law, I seriously doubt it will be in our favor. Regardless of promises to the contrary.

And please stop calling a tax that involves any sort of percentage as a "flat tax". A tax of 10 percent is not flat. Someone paying 10 percent of a million bucks will be paying more than someone paying 10 percent of fifty thousand bucks. It is STILL a progressive tax if a percentage of income is involved. A truly flat tax is a fixed amount of money due by each citizen, regardless of anything else.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 02:31 AM
link   
Ohhhh! Love me some good pipe dreams.


Just another idea being tossed around until it lands in the trash.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 02:42 AM
link   
If capital gains from the sale of stocks and bonds is considered a sale than this could be fair.

Locally produced goods and services should not have to pay a fed tax is they do not cross state or federal borders.

Purchasing stock and bonds should be considered the same as purchasing anything else, as all purchases are investments, whether it is real estate, a car, electronics, tools, home furnishings, or even food.

Investing in stocks isn't any more of an investment than spending on yourself or your family.

I doubt if the repubs are willing to make this a fair deal.

edit on 8-1-2013 by poet1b because: Typos



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 03:03 AM
link   
reply to post by AtcGod
 


omg i almost cant even reply to you wetting my pants at your avatar lol THUMBS UP ^^

well either way banks will still make a good amount because there is always those that will spend spend spend. it just in some peoples nature, that applies for super wealthy and those that dont have a dime but some how manage to spend it all anyway.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by MmmPie
 


"Ohhhh! Love me some good pipe dreams.


Just another idea being tossed around until it lands in the trash. "


heh really , im pretty sure they are reading it from that very spot, already in it hah!

regardless they will have to think of something, country and others are trillions in debt, no one can pay each other back and as far as usa goes, our federal bannk charter ends. what a perfect time to add a new money system/tax system heh? oh and lets not also forget libor is floating around out there as well. possible 43 trillion or something stupid is owed to america..... and some of the top names in government and banking cartels are named ...... im pretty sure they will find a way to make us forget about that lol



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by tkwasny
 


I agree the income tax and the federal reserve are the only things keeping our government together, this won't become reality because people know that will be the end of big government as we know it. There's too much at stake to allow it to be compromised.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 03:53 AM
link   
reply to post by DarthMuerte
 


The government system has to be fixed before drastically downsizing federal spending is even considered. It would be folly to even attempt to pull in an equivalent amount of taxes through anything except an income or capital gains tax, consumer spending alone will never be able to support our entire government. Such an event would spell economic disasters that would ruin all social progress we have made this past century.

A tax cut is not worth your salary.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by ~widowmaker~
 


No doubt, the entire government would collapse and destroy the free market as we know it. It's a silly idea.



posted on Jan, 8 2013 @ 04:19 AM
link   
Just as the property taxes trippled before the housing bubble burst, by way of sucjering home owners into refinancing at "lower rate" or to get some equity out.

I may be wrong, but It seems 10% is max if you live in the home. That is, max property tax increase from purchase price.

So as many refinanced, their taxes were inflated costing more than just leaving the mortgage alone.

How do you think B43 managed to increase tax revenues while funding war to the hilt?

Property taxes!

Now, with most out of home ownership, the forclosures are tapped for insurance then bought back at auction for pennys.

Many without a home, or jobs for as much as 20-25% (in my calculation) of unlemployed, as well as home owners who are still making ends meet,

but with the three kids. the dog and higher gas and utilities, You can keep your whole check and pay massive taxes on merchandise and food. Then, when you see that there is no gain, but in reality, the dollars are not going as far as before,. even with the wacky-massive code that exists.

And to top it off, no matching funds to your soc. sec. and medicare, and even worse,
No child credits!

Add 23% to the already heavily taxed tobacco and luxury items industries.

You didn't think the tax already attached would be exchanged? NO it most likely will be added on top of existing.

They are clever that way.





new topics

top topics



 
41
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join