Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: DIRTYSECRET

We should have a national sales tax and no income tax at all. If we can’t do that, the next best thing is one tax rate and no deductions for anything.


4 posted on 12/05/2017 8:13:19 AM PST by rigelkentaurus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies ]


To: rigelkentaurus
We should have a national sales tax and no income tax at all. If we can’t do that, the next best thing is one tax rate and no deductions for anything.

Make it EVERYONE PAYS no matter how little they make so EVERYONE has skin in the game and I'm in. Best proposal I've seen on here in awhile.

16 posted on 12/05/2017 8:23:21 AM PST by usconservative (When The Ballot Box No Longer Counts, The Ammunition Box Does. (What's In Your Ammo Box?))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: rigelkentaurus

I like either option, but lean toward the sales tax. It may never happen, since Congress uses the voluminous tax code to pick winners and losers. The winners help make congresscritters millionaires by the time they leave office.


19 posted on 12/05/2017 8:26:09 AM PST by LostInBayport (When there are more people riding in the cart than there are pulling it, the cart stops moving...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: rigelkentaurus

I would go with the second alternative, emphasis on no deductions at all. The reason is because a national sales tax always leads to questions about “intermediate” sales, like where the company that produces parts for Detroit argues that the sales tax on cars captures the value added by the parts sold to Detroit, saying it represents double-taxation if their sales aren’t excluded. This leaves the enforcement in the hands of politicians who ultimately screw it up.


20 posted on 12/05/2017 8:26:21 AM PST by econjack
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: rigelkentaurus

We don’t need the federal government encouraging us to do anything, but, there is a sure effect. The effect certainly isn’t always good or bad.

When a wealthy person purchases a house it is usually more house, that is more expensive than a not so wealthy person can afford. Because of the tax deduction the not so wealthy man subsidizes the the purchase of the wealthy mans home that the less wealthy man cannot afford.

It is wonderful that the wealthy man can afford to buy an expensive house, that home builders can make money from him, that local governments can make money on his now increased property tax, but perhaps without the subsidy he would buy less house and all taxes would be lower and now the less wealthy could afford a little more home and still keep the home builders busy.

From the politicians standpoint the subsidy is great because the banks can make a lot more money which is in part donated to the politicians to keep the subsidy going.

When I was young, many decades ago, Sirloin Steak was not for poor people but average middle class people could afford it, at least on occasion. We had it a lot when I was a kid in the 1950’s. Enter Food Stamps. The price of Sirloin shot up because people who could not previously afford it could and the people who paid for it, the middle class tax payer could no longer afford it.

At the turn of the last century, that is going from the 1800’s to the 1900’s there was no income tax. The economy flourished but people who made a lot of money had nothing to do with it other than invest it to make more money. Soon we had several very rich families that controlled most of America.

There is a place for government. The government should promote the welfare of it’s people. Sometimes that means limiting the power of the few to rule over the many. Sometimes it does mean something other than having a free for all.

I don’t like the idea of having a tax deduction for interest nor do I like having a deduction for Property Tax. I have used both to great advantage and will until it is discontinued but, I do believe it should be discontinued.

I do believe that government should promote the welfare of the society but that it should not pick winners and losers. It should do all it can to make all of us winners.

Paying 35% corporate tax is so stupid. Business don’t pay any tax, the customers of a business pay the tax and then the business can’t compete in world markets because they start off at a one third disadvantage.

I don’t know the answer to the proposition of a graduated income tax but I do know that everyone should participate in the economic good of the country by paying taxes. A national sales tax would have to be pretty high, likely about 21% to keep up with what we already spend. It would hit the poor very hard because they don’t pay taxes, they actually get an “earned income credit” that they would lose under a flat or sales tax.

It is actually pretty complicated except business should not pay tax because only consumers really pay it.


26 posted on 12/05/2017 8:36:42 AM PST by JAKraig (my religion is at least as good as yours)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

To: rigelkentaurus
We should have a national sales tax and no income tax at all. If we can’t do that, the next best thing is one tax rate and no deductions for anything.

No, what we should do is get the FedGov out of the tax business.

1) Congress passes a budget, Pres signs it.

2) Budget is divided by 535, with each Congresscritter taking home his 1/535th of the budget.

Each state is responsible for its share of the budget, based on its Senators/Reps.

16/17th both can be repealed - no more income tax, and the states need to be represented in this.

Any mid-year spending bills that pass are split up the same way.
60 posted on 12/05/2017 12:08:37 PM PST by Svartalfiar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson