Well, what are you waiting on? Leave!
After all, there is no salida ilegal here. You are more than free to go.
Doing bad things to bad people.
Posted on 05/26/2003 7:07:15 AM PDT by George Frm Br00klyn Park
WorldNetDaily / Commentary
Bush tax package guts middle class
Posted: May 26, 2003
1:00 a.m. Eastern
By Joan Veon
© 2003 WorldNetDaily.com
Using tactics of deceit and distortion, President Bush will sign a tax bill that was literally dictated by him to Congress and passed by the Senate late last week while the writers were still crafting it. What is being put into action will not only completely gut our entire tax code but will add a level of taxation that heretofore was only known by the children of Israel when pharaoh commanded them to make bricks without straw.
The tax deductions have been sold to the American people as creating more jobs but the truth of the matter is that Congress feels you and I are not paying enough in taxes. What Bush has done, Clinton could not have ever gotten away with: a tax on everything we buy – otherwise known as a Value Added Tax – for you and I.
If you think you pay a lot in tax now, just wait and see what the Republicans – or should I say, "neocons" have in store for us. Let me give you a glimpse.
First, a Value-Added Tax system is a more "purer" form of tax because it is structured like the morning dew – it will tax everything and every process . For example, currently you are not taxed on the activity (not the gain but the activity) of buying or selling a house. Under a VAT, we will be taxed. Currently you are not taxed for the professional services of our doctor and dentist – those services will have a tax.
The basic structure of a VAT is that it is essentially equivalent to a tax on wages and pure profits – in other words, it is a superior form of tax. In fact, it is a "vertical" tax – depending on how the VAT is structured, every phase of manufacturing and production will be taxed. Currently it is not taxed. For example, the farmer who grows sheep will pay a tax to buy the sheep, then, when he sells the sheered wool, the weaver who buys it from the farmer will pay a tax on that purchase. When the weaver who spins the wool into fabric sells it to a pants factory, the processed wool will be taxed. When the factory sells the pants to the department store, another tax will be levied. At each phase, while there may be some offset in the tax between the various stages of production, you will be taxed on the cost of the shirt which also includes the tax that was paid at each phase. Will the price of the shirt increase – absolutely! So will the cost of living.
According to the International Monetary Fund, the VAT is a more modern tax, providing the ability to tax each phase of production and also the turnover of goods and services, thus increasing the cost to live while providing a greater income stream to the government. A VAT is basically sustainable development at its finest. Government can't continue spending unless it increases its income stream!
Now this brings me to another point – the need for government to increase their income. Do you remember John Maynard Keynes and his socialistic "Keynesian economics"? Essentially, back in 1933 when America went into a major depression, Franklin Roosevelt relied on the "innovative" thinking of Keynes who recommended deficit spending to create new jobs. Well, 70 years later, every level of government in the United States is broke.
Currently, the U.S. government is $7 trillion in debt. Democrats, who have opposed this bill from the beginning, project that under the weight of the huge tax reductions being given to the very wealthy, that by 2013 when it is fully phased in, our debt will rise to $12 trillion or $36,000 for every person in the United States. Basically the July tax rebates we are going to receive will help contribute to this figure.
Nothing like paying one credit card with cash from another!
Furthermore, instead of you and I paying taxes and receiving a service, we now live in a time when our government is privatizing (selling its assets to reduce its debt), changing the code so it can increase its income while reducing services to you and I. Under the current tax system, mortgage interest and charitable contributions are deductible. These will have to be sacrificed to provide the government with a greater and constant income stream. Simply put, a "pure tax" is basically "squeezing" the turnip – which is you and I.
So how does a government with a VAT increase revenue? In order to switch to a VAT from our current system of taxing income, the tax brackets of the rich will be reduced from 38.5 percent gradually over a 10-year period to the targeted 21-27 percent VAT rate. This level of taxation is the level that will produce the same amount of tax under our current system. At the same time, the tax brackets of those who have an income of $1 million and above is being reduced, those who currently don't pay tax because they have too little income will have be subjected to an increasing tax bracket which may start out at 10 percent but will have to rise to meet the brackets of the extremely wealthy at 21-27 percent. Is your back breaking yet?
So – what if, in this time of never-ending war on terrorism, the government still does not have enough income? Well, then the rate can be increased. For example, in 1973 when England introduced the VAT, it started at 10 percent ... today it is up to 18.5 percent.
Lastly, the president and his cabinet are unwilling to even admit that they are gutting the current system and putting a VAT in place that will benefit those like Warren Buffet who calculated that he will save $300 million while his secretary's tax rate will increase. This tax bill should be more accurately called, "The Gutting of the Middle Class."
Joan Veon is a certified financial planner and is president of Veon Financial Services, Inc., an investment advisory firm. Visit her website, WomensGroup.org.
THIS article at WND
AG, Harry's "old money" has looong been spent, and Harry is now wallowing in new money made from investing tax free.
and their money-handlers. Peace and love, George.
-------------------------------
Any type of sales tax is designed by the wealthy and their sycophants for the wealthy
LOL, sure George. Like your Flat VAT/Income Tax that embeds the tax in the price of goods and services where folks just see taxes as inflation instead of as a charge detailed against their purchase prices.
AG, All forms of taxation pass ALL of a business's costs on to the consumer or they go out of business. Even owners and employer's taxes and wages and expenses even if not recorded. Even in your NRST. It's all "VAT".
----------------------------
And does making untaxed money on investment {dollars you don't spend} count as a "benefit"??
How is it a benefit when it is not be spent by its owner? To be untaxed, it must remain unspent/re-invested to provide for growth of the economy, by someone other than the owner spends it and it get taxed anyway.
AG, Accumulating wealth is not a benefit in itself? And, in what country does the economy grow??
-------------------------------
Is this still not socialism.
Since when is not having to pay or receiving a return of excess tax payments socialism.
AG, Anytime that a transfer of money is made by government to an entity to effect any government promoted "society preference". In this case "family".
---------------------------------
AG, does that "Estimate" of"Effective" tax rate include deductions and/or exemptions?
It is on gross dollars before any exemptions, exclusions, deductions or credits of any kind.
AG, This I saved for last because these numbers are the basis for your whole arguement. Many times, deductions and exemptions reduce the "effective" 32% top tax rate to an actual 7-15%.
=====================================
Your whole arguement is based on smoke and mirrors to say the least, if not a downright lie. Using statistical "estimate" numbers creating an illusional "Effective" tax rate that has no resemblance to the factual reality of taxes paid. An example is the Presidential salary that is in the 32%"highest bracket".
By the way, I never "clicked" on any link in your post. The reason I have blocked IPs is because at one time or another, while "surfing", an IP with no relation to my current interest plugs into my computer and makes my hard drive "sing". It ain't necessary. Peace and love, George.
TM, Communism as written in Marx's manifesto has never been "alive". And, God willing, it will never be. Of course, the socialists who attain power will see that it never "lives", because they would lose their power when that happened. So........
I have been trying lo "lead" you to a flat tax {NOT PROGRESSIVE} based on income system that allows for the equal opportunity free interprise that has allowed for people in this country to flourish in freedom. NOT a "market" that is encouraged by a tax code, and controlled by government and their chosen toadies in the fixed game. Due to statistics you seem to have accepted from the "fair" taxers, you decline to follow.
I will stay in "the way" as much as I can though to prevent the implementation of the socialist {maintaning and strengthening of a social hierarchy that any tax based on sales engenders} investor promoting NRST.
I believe in equal rights, opportunity, and free interprise. I have no idea where you guys came up with the idea that I "cherish" the Communist manifesto. I've never even read it, let alone studied or pushed it. Unless of course I am merely being villified and censored as was common in the former{?} Union of Soviet Socialist Republics that some call "communist" while they proclaim "communism is dead". {/rant} Hey, stay passionate. Peace and love, George.
AG, Accumulating wealth is not a benefit in itself?
How is money(i.e. investment) some one else has and spends, wealth to one's self?
Who benefits the most, the spenders of the invested money or the one who invests.
There is no wealth accrued to the possessor until it is spent by that owner. Until then it is nothing more than numbers in a computer.
And, in what country does the economy grow??
Since we are talking about Americans, obviously this country is where money is being spent and benefits the most.
Anytime that a transfer of money is made by government to an entity to effect any government promoted "society preference". In this case "family".
Since every legal resident in the nation receives the FCA how does this act as a preference for "family". It doesn't.
AG, This I saved for last because these numbers are the basis for your whole arguement. Many times, deductions and exemptions reduce the "effective" 32% top tax rate to an actual 7-15%.
So? what's your point?
To state a range of rates without comparison to other groups or a definition of what precisely is being included in your tax rate is of no value whatsoever.
You figure no tax other than income is ever paid by anyone?
The top 1% income group pays 35.7% total tax. With individual income tax at 23%.
The bottom 20% pay 4.5% total tax, while paying a negative (-6.9%) individual income tax.
The average family pays 24.4% total tax, while paying 11.2% individual income tax.
http://www.cbpp.org/taxday98.htm
|
CBO Estimates of Effective Federal Tax Rates for 1998 |
|||||
|
Families Ranked by Income Quintile |
Individual Income Tax |
Social Insurance Taxes |
Corporate Income Tax |
Excise Tax |
Total Federal Taxes |
| Lowest | -6.9% | 7.8% | 0.5% | 2.8% | 4.2% |
| Second | 1.7% | 9.9% | 0.9% | 1.6% | 14.2% |
| Third | 6.3% | 10.8% | 1.4% | 1.2% | 19.7% |
| Fourth | 9.0% | 11.3% | 1.4% | 1.0% | 22.7% |
| Highest | 16.2% | 8.0% | 4.6% | 0.5% | 29.3% |
| Top 10% | 18.0% | 6.7% | 5.8% | 0.4% | 30.8% |
| Top 5% | 19.7% | 5.3% | 7.0% | 0.3% | 32.3% |
| Top 1% | 23.0% | 3.0% | 9.5% | 0.2% | 35.7% |
| Average for all families | 11.2% | 9.3% | 3.0% | 0.9% | 24.4% |
| Source: Congressional Budget Office, May 15, 1997. Notes: Pre-tax family income is the sum of wages, salaries, self-employment income, rents, taxable and non-taxable interest, dividends, realized capital gains, and all cash transfer payments. Income also includes the employer share of Social Security and federal unemployment insurance payroll taxes, and the corporate income tax. For purposes of ranking by adjusted family income (AFI), income for each family is divided by the poverty threshold for a family of that size. Quintiles contain equal numbers of people. Families with zero or negative income are excluded from the lowest income category but included in the total. Individual income taxes are distributed directly to families paying those taxes. Payroll taxes are distributed to families paying those taxes directly or indirectly through their employers. Federal excise taxes are distributed to families according to their consumption of the taxed good or service. Corporate income taxes are distributed to families according to their share of capital income. |
|||||
This means, of course, that you are now OFF George's "A" party list.
Well, what are you waiting on? Leave!
After all, there is no salida ilegal here. You are more than free to go.
Doing bad things to bad people.
B R A V O ! ! !
I don't think that there's a "ping list" per se, but you can look for articles indexed by the (pseudo-)user "*Taxreform".
I thought it only referred to those converted since 9/11. Reagan was a convert long before that.
Perhaps true, but in the new tax package...will they? This author needs some more facts before goimng off half cocked.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.