The case for the Fair Tax; the time is NOW
- Thread starter Truth Detector
- Start date
Kamala Trump
Verified User
I think elimination of loopholes and tax credits for corporations would be a great start. The fair tax is worse than just the small measures i mentioned.
cawacko
Well-known member
Why is that?
cawacko
Well-known member
Because I'm not nearly as smart, successful or as good a predictor of future events as you.
evince
Truthmatters
http://www.investopedia.com/articles/tax/09/flat-taxes.asp
So, Why Not Move to a Flat Tax?
First, while there is no doubt that many countries that have adopted the flat tax have had booming economies, there is no actual proof that the flat tax is the reason why these nations have grown. After all, many of these places were Communist nations behind the Iron Curtain. Once the Soviet Union collapsed they were able to open up their economies to investment and had an easier time trading with the developed countries in the west. (To find out how former Iron Curtain countries used private enterprise to join the world financial markets, refer to State-Run Economies: From Public To Private.)
In addition, a flat tax may not be as fair as one would think. A gradual tax system does allow for things like wealth redistribution, which many have argued is a major benefit to society. And a flat tax could also give middle class families an extra burden. If someone making one million per year has to pay 18% of his income in taxes, he still has netted $820,000 for the year, a figure which still has great purchasing power. But a person making $50,000 per year is left with $41,000 per year; that difference can influence fiscal decisions, like purchasing a new car versus a used car, whether to place a down payment on a house or affording either a state school or private college, extremely tough for people who make closer to the national median income level.
In addition, when a group of countries near each other enact a flat tax, it creates a race towards the bottom; in order to compete, nations must keep on lowering their tax rates, a problem which could lead to fiscal instability.
Lastly, in the wake of the 2008 recession, many countries who have adopted a flat tax have suffered greatly. Take for instance, Latvia, one of the earliest countries to adopt the flat tax. Latvia's economy fell by a whopping 10.5% in the final quarter of 2008; it's expected to drop another 12% over the course of 2009. Its debt is 116% of its GDP; unemployment has climbed to 9%, a figure which would be higher if not for the many residents who have moved to other parts of Europe to find work, and it has had to take a bailout from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay public sector workers. And Latvia's Baltic neighbors, Lithuania and Estonia, have also faced similar pitfalls. All of this, some say, is a sign that these nations have not raised enough tax dollars due to their tax policies. Others, however, say that these nations rely on exports, which have suffered greatly due to the downturn facing major economies. (For a list of recession indicators, read Recession Stats You Need To Know.)
So, Why Not Move to a Flat Tax?
First, while there is no doubt that many countries that have adopted the flat tax have had booming economies, there is no actual proof that the flat tax is the reason why these nations have grown. After all, many of these places were Communist nations behind the Iron Curtain. Once the Soviet Union collapsed they were able to open up their economies to investment and had an easier time trading with the developed countries in the west. (To find out how former Iron Curtain countries used private enterprise to join the world financial markets, refer to State-Run Economies: From Public To Private.)
In addition, a flat tax may not be as fair as one would think. A gradual tax system does allow for things like wealth redistribution, which many have argued is a major benefit to society. And a flat tax could also give middle class families an extra burden. If someone making one million per year has to pay 18% of his income in taxes, he still has netted $820,000 for the year, a figure which still has great purchasing power. But a person making $50,000 per year is left with $41,000 per year; that difference can influence fiscal decisions, like purchasing a new car versus a used car, whether to place a down payment on a house or affording either a state school or private college, extremely tough for people who make closer to the national median income level.
In addition, when a group of countries near each other enact a flat tax, it creates a race towards the bottom; in order to compete, nations must keep on lowering their tax rates, a problem which could lead to fiscal instability.
Lastly, in the wake of the 2008 recession, many countries who have adopted a flat tax have suffered greatly. Take for instance, Latvia, one of the earliest countries to adopt the flat tax. Latvia's economy fell by a whopping 10.5% in the final quarter of 2008; it's expected to drop another 12% over the course of 2009. Its debt is 116% of its GDP; unemployment has climbed to 9%, a figure which would be higher if not for the many residents who have moved to other parts of Europe to find work, and it has had to take a bailout from the International Monetary Fund in order to pay public sector workers. And Latvia's Baltic neighbors, Lithuania and Estonia, have also faced similar pitfalls. All of this, some say, is a sign that these nations have not raised enough tax dollars due to their tax policies. Others, however, say that these nations rely on exports, which have suffered greatly due to the downturn facing major economies. (For a list of recession indicators, read Recession Stats You Need To Know.)
cawacko
Well-known member
So according to what you have posted here Desh some people have said three countries Latvia, Lithuania and Estonia have not raised enough money because of their tax policies. And this is what you point to as your evidence that the flat tax can't raise enough revenue and you question why I wouldn't know this?
Kamala Trump
Verified User
You seem to have comprehended her post very well.
Poet is creative, intelligent, and decent. Completely unlike you.
It works pretty well for me. Maybe you need to start a business or something, now that your employment at the clothes hanger factory has ended.
Last edited:
Well of course it does; you're probably on welfare living in a trailer park.
I did start a business shit-for-brains. I've been self employed since 2004.
Carry on dimwit.
Pull your head out of your ass troll, if you started a business you are using the code more than most.
Get ready for your commute
Anti-Party
Tea Is The New Kool-Aid
It speaks more than 2 sentences!
First of all I stated that the majority of charity contributions are church donations. Church is not exactly a charity and shouldn't be used in the calculations. This is a FACT. Check the Fair Tax website, check the amount of charity they say already gets donated, then look into what is considered a charity...
I side with Republicans on many issues, but right now we don't have any core Republicans. We only have a bunch of Tea Baggers that don't want to fix a program to save money, they want all programs to fail so they can end it.
Now go play on the playground 13 year old internet troll...
AnglScarlett
New member
I believe this was the post I reported this morning. Was this the post i Reported this morning? Was this post edited by a mod?
AnglScarlett
New member
I was wrong, sorry. It was this post.
Last edited by a moderator:
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
The post Rune is talking about is right here, it's on page 5 of this thread, post #63.
Cancel 2016.11
Darla
And by the way whatever thing is married to this sick, twisted, sexually abusive, monster, is lower and dirtier than anything that crawled out of the worst trailer park in this country. They must smell her coming two miles away.