“Let the bears pay the bear tax — I pay the Homer tax!”
“That’s the home-owners tax.”
“Well, any way, I’m still outraged.”
Rand,
It’s an interesting argument, to be sure. Personally, I think at this point that deficit spending is an implicit tax on the future, so making it an explicit tax on the present (born by *all*, not just “the Rich”) at least on the surface makes a lot of sense.
~Jon
Combine this idea with the elmination of income tax withholding and you’d suddenly see a lot of calls for less government spending. Which is why it’ll never happen.
I love it! Let’s start with an across the board tax increase on everyone, across the board, let’s say two percent. If that doesn’t solve the problem bump it up another one percent. I can hear the howling now.
This article highlights the inconsistent logic of those that admit a sin tax curbs consumption of stuff that is bad for you yet any other tax scheme is some “patriotic duty” as according to V.P. Hair Plugs. Mr. Hayword’s point seems to follow more precisely the consistent notion that those who overly indulge in excessive gov’t services should have a sin tax levied against them to curb there consumption of unhealthy social entitlements that decay the moral fiber of society.
Don’t talk to me about withholding. Our financial year just ticked over and I’ve yet again been overtaxed at 37.6%. I figure it should be more like 24%. My accountant will probably put together sufficient deductions to drop my taxable income into the lower bracket and get it down to 23%, but the bulk of my tax return will come from withholding rules.
Of course, I don’t get any sort of compensation for lending the government 14% of my salary for 13 months.
Hear, hear. I recall seeing a computation that suggested that a parent must earn more than $60,000 a year to have disposable income above what she’d have earning zero — and collecting all the government support and whatnot. That’s insane. Where’s the motivation to work, instead of voting Democratic, which is pretty much the antithesis to constructive labor?
I can’t imagine how much I could do — how much stimulatin’ of the economy, say — with the $30,000 a year in taxes back, or even halved. I do not even count sales taxes, which around here (SoCal) are nearly 8%, actually better than in that cesspit to the north.
What’s worse is this is a recent development. Twenty years ago people of lower income did pay something, albeit not much. I’ve paid income taxes every year of my working life, even when I earned $5000 a year pumping gas part-time. I do not see why that changed, except as a vote-buying scheme by those soul-less conscience-less Democrats.
A 20% federal sales tax, with packaged food, medicine, medical care and veterinary services exempt would be a big step in the direction of fairness. And make folks more aware of the cost of government with each visit to the store. I wonder if any of the Tea Party crowd would have to courage to propose it?
Carl,
[[[Twenty years ago people of lower income did pay something, albeit not much. I’ve paid income taxes every year of my working life, even when I earned $5000 a year pumping gas part-time. I do not see why that changed, except as a vote-buying scheme by those soul-less conscience-less Democrats.]]]
No, try the Republican tax cuts start with President Reagan, which were never limited to the highest brackets but always across the board.
Theftist democrats and their rino allies have always fought tax cuts at higher brackets tooth and nail. Across the board cuts is the best we could get. Hopefully the next congress can do better. Hopefully we last that long as a country.
I’m neutral on income vs. sales tax. Just give me something simple, transparent, and modest top marginal rate. And please count benefits lost due to higher income when figuring the marginal rate.
Thomas,
the Tea Party doesn’t have the ‘courage’ to do that, because it goes against what they believe. That’s as likely to happen as lefty Democrats suggesting we use nukes against Tehran IF we prove they’ve built nukes.
Or that we JUST protect OUR borders from invaders!
Carl,
I’m with you. I paid IN to FICA and IRS when I worked 15 – 25 hrs a week at Mcd’S in HS. Why that changed is beyond me.
I know several young couples, with children, who get Child Deductions and Earned Income Credits SO large that they get all of their taxes back AND more on top of that. I disagree with getting ALL of the taxes back the other money is just a ridiculous redistribution ploy!!
Der Schtumpy,
So the Tea Party isn’t about freedom like they claim? After all privacy and freedom go together and that is exactly what a national sales tax would do, restore financial privacy to individuals by replacing a very intrusive tax collection system with one that is much less so.
If the 20% tax rate part bothers them they could lower it to whatever level they feel is necessary to fund what they think government should be doing.
Or are they just afraid that their millionaire supporters will be unhappy having to pay a 20% sales tax on their corporate jet charters and mansions? Especially since many have already learned how to avoid paying income tax though various gimmicks and exemptions so their actual rate is less than many working folks.
Tom, if you’re talking about replacing the current tax code with a national sales tax, then a lot of Tea Party folks would likely be on board (I believe it’s called the Fair Tax). If you’re talking about a 20% national sales tax in addition to current taxes then I doubt anybody would be in favor of that, in fact I imagine many traditionally Democratic constituencies would be most opposed. Do you think the UAW would favor adding 20% to the price of a new Chevy Volt?
A 20% federal sales tax, with packaged food, medicine, medical care and veterinary services exempt would be a big step in the direction of fairness.
Whenever I hear the expression “direction of fairness” my gag reflex goes into overdrive.
Yeah, because if we just give Congress extra tax revenue, they really, really promise to cut spending this time. We should forget about all the times they promised to cut spending in the past and just trust them. They really, really mean it.
Go ahead and pull my finger.
Of course it would be a replacement. The key is to collect taxes in a way that is both non-intrusive and difficult to avoid. And which provides a constant reminder of the cost of government.
I don’t remember wear I read it JJS, but it made perfect sense to me.
“I love it! Let’s start with an across the board tax increase on everyone, across the board, let’s say two percent.”
For some reason the author, this was before I was hunting around on the net, old hardcopy publications, but someone came up with 2% as the number to be tolerable, but also infuriating for the working poor.
“Let the bears pay the bear tax — I pay the Homer tax!”
“That’s the home-owners tax.”
“Well, any way, I’m still outraged.”
Rand,
It’s an interesting argument, to be sure. Personally, I think at this point that deficit spending is an implicit tax on the future, so making it an explicit tax on the present (born by *all*, not just “the Rich”) at least on the surface makes a lot of sense.
~Jon
Combine this idea with the elmination of income tax withholding and you’d suddenly see a lot of calls for less government spending. Which is why it’ll never happen.
I love it! Let’s start with an across the board tax increase on everyone, across the board, let’s say two percent. If that doesn’t solve the problem bump it up another one percent. I can hear the howling now.
This article highlights the inconsistent logic of those that admit a sin tax curbs consumption of stuff that is bad for you yet any other tax scheme is some “patriotic duty” as according to V.P. Hair Plugs. Mr. Hayword’s point seems to follow more precisely the consistent notion that those who overly indulge in excessive gov’t services should have a sin tax levied against them to curb there consumption of unhealthy social entitlements that decay the moral fiber of society.
Don’t talk to me about withholding. Our financial year just ticked over and I’ve yet again been overtaxed at 37.6%. I figure it should be more like 24%. My accountant will probably put together sufficient deductions to drop my taxable income into the lower bracket and get it down to 23%, but the bulk of my tax return will come from withholding rules.
Of course, I don’t get any sort of compensation for lending the government 14% of my salary for 13 months.
Hear, hear. I recall seeing a computation that suggested that a parent must earn more than $60,000 a year to have disposable income above what she’d have earning zero — and collecting all the government support and whatnot. That’s insane. Where’s the motivation to work, instead of voting Democratic, which is pretty much the antithesis to constructive labor?
I can’t imagine how much I could do — how much stimulatin’ of the economy, say — with the $30,000 a year in taxes back, or even halved. I do not even count sales taxes, which around here (SoCal) are nearly 8%, actually better than in that cesspit to the north.
What’s worse is this is a recent development. Twenty years ago people of lower income did pay something, albeit not much. I’ve paid income taxes every year of my working life, even when I earned $5000 a year pumping gas part-time. I do not see why that changed, except as a vote-buying scheme by those soul-less conscience-less Democrats.
A 20% federal sales tax, with packaged food, medicine, medical care and veterinary services exempt would be a big step in the direction of fairness. And make folks more aware of the cost of government with each visit to the store. I wonder if any of the Tea Party crowd would have to courage to propose it?
Carl,
[[[Twenty years ago people of lower income did pay something, albeit not much. I’ve paid income taxes every year of my working life, even when I earned $5000 a year pumping gas part-time. I do not see why that changed, except as a vote-buying scheme by those soul-less conscience-less Democrats.]]]
No, try the Republican tax cuts start with President Reagan, which were never limited to the highest brackets but always across the board.
Theftist democrats and their rino allies have always fought tax cuts at higher brackets tooth and nail. Across the board cuts is the best we could get. Hopefully the next congress can do better. Hopefully we last that long as a country.
I’m neutral on income vs. sales tax. Just give me something simple, transparent, and modest top marginal rate. And please count benefits lost due to higher income when figuring the marginal rate.
Thomas,
the Tea Party doesn’t have the ‘courage’ to do that, because it goes against what they believe. That’s as likely to happen as lefty Democrats suggesting we use nukes against Tehran IF we prove they’ve built nukes.
Or that we JUST protect OUR borders from invaders!
Carl,
I’m with you. I paid IN to FICA and IRS when I worked 15 – 25 hrs a week at Mcd’S in HS. Why that changed is beyond me.
I know several young couples, with children, who get Child Deductions and Earned Income Credits SO large that they get all of their taxes back AND more on top of that. I disagree with getting ALL of the taxes back the other money is just a ridiculous redistribution ploy!!
Der Schtumpy,
So the Tea Party isn’t about freedom like they claim? After all privacy and freedom go together and that is exactly what a national sales tax would do, restore financial privacy to individuals by replacing a very intrusive tax collection system with one that is much less so.
If the 20% tax rate part bothers them they could lower it to whatever level they feel is necessary to fund what they think government should be doing.
Or are they just afraid that their millionaire supporters will be unhappy having to pay a 20% sales tax on their corporate jet charters and mansions? Especially since many have already learned how to avoid paying income tax though various gimmicks and exemptions so their actual rate is less than many working folks.
Tom, if you’re talking about replacing the current tax code with a national sales tax, then a lot of Tea Party folks would likely be on board (I believe it’s called the Fair Tax). If you’re talking about a 20% national sales tax in addition to current taxes then I doubt anybody would be in favor of that, in fact I imagine many traditionally Democratic constituencies would be most opposed. Do you think the UAW would favor adding 20% to the price of a new Chevy Volt?
A 20% federal sales tax, with packaged food, medicine, medical care and veterinary services exempt would be a big step in the direction of fairness.
Whenever I hear the expression “direction of fairness” my gag reflex goes into overdrive.
Yeah, because if we just give Congress extra tax revenue, they really, really promise to cut spending this time. We should forget about all the times they promised to cut spending in the past and just trust them. They really, really mean it.
Go ahead and pull my finger.
Of course it would be a replacement. The key is to collect taxes in a way that is both non-intrusive and difficult to avoid. And which provides a constant reminder of the cost of government.
I don’t remember wear I read it JJS, but it made perfect sense to me.
“I love it! Let’s start with an across the board tax increase on everyone, across the board, let’s say two percent.”
For some reason the author, this was before I was hunting around on the net, old hardcopy publications, but someone came up with 2% as the number to be tolerable, but also infuriating for the working poor.