The case for the Fair Tax; the time is NOW

evince said:
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.)
Click to expand...



post 207
 
Now I thought you guys said it was about school funding in the other thread you said I needed to say sorry for something?
 
cawacko said:
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?
Click to expand...

Post 208.

Are you able to give your own opinion on why the flat tax won't raise enough revenue? Do you believe that at no matter what rate the flat tax rate would be set up it couldn't raise enough money? Even if that rate is 100%?
 
evince said:
post 207
Click to expand...

which does NOTHING to prove that a flat tax can't bring in enough revenue.

In the last quarter of 2008 and into 2009 (which the reference for Latvia)... US GDP dropped 8.3%, our unemployment rate climbed above 10%, our debt is 100% of GDP...

Looking at the timeframe of the global economic meltdown and then pretending it just hit countries with a flat tax is dishonest... something you are quite good at being.
 
evince said:
Now I thought you guys said it was about school funding in the other thread you said I needed to say sorry for something?
Click to expand...

No Desh, I said it is not possible to have a real conversation with you because all it consists of is you posting a random Wikipedia link and that's the end of the discussion. You are doing it here with the flat tax and you did it with school funding.
 
NO fool

I gave you facts from people you might respect because you respect nothing I say.


Now you answer my question about WHY you refuse to accept the facts that clearly show the SCOTUS thinks the republican party has cheated voters out of their votes for decades?
 
evince said:
NO fool

I gave you facts from people you might respect because you respect nothing I say.


Now you answer my question about WHY you refuse to accept the facts that clearly show the SCOTUS thinks the republican party has cheated voters out of their votes for decades?
Click to expand...

How about we give it a shot. In your own words why do you think a fair tax can't raise enough revenue?
 
the level would have to be too high to bring in the money needed.

the little guy would get hit REALLY hard.

what you want is debtors prison for the poor
 
evince said:
NO fool

I gave you facts from people you might respect because you respect nothing I say.


Now you answer my question about WHY you refuse to accept the facts that clearly show the SCOTUS thinks the republican party has cheated voters out of their votes for decades?
Click to expand...

you did not give 'FACTS' Desh...

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.)
Click to expand...

The above is all your wiki link said about flat tax and revenue... It doesn't tell us who the 'some people' are. It also clearly shows it is just an OPINION... not FACT. Clearly those with that OPINION are fucking morons. Because countries around the world faced such numbers regardless of their tax codes. The US included.
 
Now why do you REFUSE to comment on the clear FACTS that the SCOTUS KNOWS the republican party has cheated legal American citizens out of their votes for decades?
 
evince said:
the level would have to be too high to bring in the money needed.

the little guy would get hit REALLY hard.

what you want is debtors prison for the poor
Click to expand...

While I believe you are wrong and that the rich is able to milk our system of loopholes now to pay less than they would under a flat tax I appreciate your response.
 
evince said:
Now why do you REFUSE to comment on the clear FACTS that the SCOTUS KNOWS the republican party has cheated legal American citizens out of their votes for decades?
Click to expand...

as wacko stated... you REFUSE to acknowledge you 'made a mistake' on this thread. You REFUSE to comment on the clear FACTS of this thread. You told him you would apologize... but again you proved yourself a LIAR.
 
great facts you guys are bringing.

now why do you REFUSE to admit the SCOTUS thinks the republican party needs to be punished for cheating in elections?
 
evince said:
and your diversion tactics completely failed huh guys
Click to expand...

dear moron... on this thread we were talking about the flat tax. It is you that is trying to divert the topic with your nonstop obsession with cheating from 5+ years ago... all the while you ignore what your party did in the past. Why the fuck should anyone care to discuss this with you if all you want to do is point to what Reps do, while ignoring what Dems have done?
 
you made a claim I came to check it out as asked then you refused to hold up your end of the bargan and answer my questions about the FACT that the SCOTUS agrees with me that the republican party needs to be watched b the courts so they cant cheat in elections.

it was merely a diversion.


it didn't work and you have sstill failed to even discuss the FACTS given you
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top