Obama wants higher taxes: No deal for...

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#671 Jan 1, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
The conservatives will counter the regressive nature of the consumption tax by saying that things such as food and health care would not be taxed.

So we would all have to pay the full tax when buying products or services, keep all of our receipts, and file them with the IRS every year. THEN we'd get money back, if the IRS agrees with all of your deductions. The huge amount of paperwork involved would make us long for the old 1040 form.

Or the government could issue 'prebates' to the poorest among us on a monthly basis, to be rectified at the end of the year. More paperwork.

It's debatable if the exclusions for necessities would actually help the poor or near-poor. It depends on what items are excluded. What about education costs and health insurance costs? How about the price of buying a home?

Remember, the more things that are excluded means that those non-excluded items will have to be taxed more, severely hurting the middle class. If the tax is set at 50% you will be paying $450,000 for a $300,000 home.

And the very rich will make out like bandits.
Wrong again

I say tax everything...,And I am conservative

Then refund 100 percent of the tax to the poor

But I have also told you this dozens of times and you revert back to your spin spin spin

Typical far left loon
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#672 Jan 1, 2013
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
I have talked with you many times about this and proved your theory wrong
Liar. Bring one link-- and a quote from that one link-- that shows how the rich would pay more with a consumption tax.
Here Is One wrote:
<The poor get a refund and pay zero tax
The lower middle class get a smaller refund by percentage
Eventually you get no refund
"A 30% FairTax could be applied to all taxpayers so everyone would pay the same rate. However, since the low income families spend most or all of their available money on goods and services, a large percentage or all of their income would be taxed and the high income families would spend a smaller percentage of their income on goods and services so only a small percentage of their income would be taxed. In this sense, the consumption tax is viewed as a regressive tax.

As an example, consider a Family of four who has a PI of $500,000. Using the current Federal Income Tax requirements, this family would probably pay around $145,000 after reducing the taxable income to compensate for savings plans, medical, donations, etc. A family of four who has a PI of $100,000 may pay around $10,000 in Federal Income Tax.

The “FairTax” or Consumption Tax would tax the money actually spent on goods and services. The family making $100,000 per year (or less) would probably spend all of their disposable personal income on goods and services so this means that 100% of their DPI is taxed. However, the family making $500,000 per year would most likely not even spend half of their income on goods and services so a smaller percentage of their income would be taxed.

Let’s assume the higher income family spent $200,000 per year for food, clothing, etc.: This means the family making $500,000 per year is taxed on 40% of their personal income and their tax would be $60,000 (a savings of $85,000 compared to the current progressive tax). The family making $100,000 per year would pay $30,000 if they spent all of their income on goods and services. The $100,000 per year family would be taxed on 100% of their DPI and would pay three times the amount they currently pay."

http://www.votersmarket.com/FairTax.aspx
Here Is One wrote:
<If done right the middle class and down would be paying a lot less tax
The upper middle and above would be paying more tax
What a laugh. The upper middle WOULD probably be paying a higher tax, as shown above, but what is the upper middle? Around 100K a year, or less. They shouldn't be paying a higher tax.

And the very rich, who spend a very small part of their incomes, will make out like bandits.

The consumption tax would have to be very high, probably over 30% and up to 50%, to get even close to our current revenue, which is already too little.

What you're talking about would lower our revenue by a lot, would tax those making $70,000 to $200,000 much more, and would let the very rich get much richer.

When rich righties say that some hypothetical tax plan is good because it will tax themselves MORE, I'm a bit leery.

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#673 Jan 1, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>Liar. Bring one link-- and a quote from that one link-- that shows how the rich would pay more with a consumption tax.

Here Is One wrote, "<The poor get a refund and pay zero tax
The lower middle class get a smaller refund by percentage
Eventually you get no refund"

"A 30% FairTax could be applied to all taxpayers so everyone would pay the same rate. However, since the low income families spend most or all of their available money on goods and services, a large percentage or all of their income would be taxed and the high income families would spend a smaller percentage of their income on goods and services so only a small percentage of their income would be taxed. In this sense, the consumption tax is viewed as a regressive tax.

As an example, consider a Family of four who has a PI of $500,000. Using the current Federal Income Tax requirements, this family would probably pay around $145,000 after reducing the taxable income to compensate for savings plans, medical, donations, etc. A family of four who has a PI of $100,000 may pay around $10,000 in Federal Income Tax.

The “FairTax” or Consumption Tax would tax the money actually spent on goods and services. The family making $100,000 per year (or less) would probably spend all of their disposable personal income on goods and services so this means that 100% of their DPI is taxed. However, the family making $500,000 per year would most likely not even spend half of their income on goods and services so a smaller percentage of their income would be taxed.

Let’s assume the higher income family spent $200,000 per year for food, clothing, etc.: This means the family making $500,000 per year is taxed on 40% of their personal income and their tax would be $60,000 (a savings of $85,000 compared to the current progressive tax). The family making $100,000 per year would pay $30,000 if they spent all of their income on goods and services. The $100,000 per year family would be taxed on 100% of their DPI and would pay three times the amount they currently pay."

http://www.votersmarket.com/FairTax.aspx

Here Is One wrote, "<If done right the middle class and down would be paying a lot less tax
The upper middle and above would be paying more tax"

What a laugh. The upper middle WOULD probably be paying a higher tax, as shown above, but what is the upper middle? Around 100K a year, or less. They shouldn't be paying a higher tax.

And the very rich, who spend a very small part of their incomes, will make out like bandits.

The consumption tax would have to be very high, probably over 30% and up to 50%, to get even close to our current revenue, which is already too little.

What you're talking about would lower our revenue by a lot, would tax those making $70,000 to $200,000 much more, and would let the very rich get much richer.

When rich righties say that some hypothetical tax plan is good because it will tax themselves MORE, I'm a bit leery.
I have posted dozens of them and you refuse to read them
Go google it your self

Fact is if you pay Zero in taxes as a poor person that is better than all of the taxes you are paying now

If you are middle income and get a refund on part of the tax you paid and the rate was 30 percent you would be paying less tax than now
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#674 Jan 1, 2013
Sundog512 wrote:
<quoted text>
Yeah, Kissinger did a lot of good work.
I'll always be thankful to Nixon because he ended the draft just when my number was up....LOL.
>
>
I was dumb enough to enlist in the Marines, aside from a chunk of metal up my butt it was an interesting experience....
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#675 Jan 1, 2013
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
I have posted dozens of them and you refuse to read them
Go google it your self
I knew that would be your non-response.Like always, you can't argue a topic in good faith.
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#676 Jan 1, 2013
Sundog512 wrote:
Lack of skilled workers. Period. There's not enough training available. Everybody thinks college is the answer and there is a whole world of jobs for people who have technical training.
I think the days of unions are pretty much over with now--especially in manufacturing. Something like 11% of American workers are represented by unions and that number is getting smaller every day.
I think too many people are over-looking technical training as a good option. A trained CNC programmer can pretty much name his own price (within reason) in certain parts of the country.
I remember being in China in the late 80's. The company I worked for at the time was setting up a factory for a Chinese company. The workers there were painfully slow and we asked one one day why they were so lazy. He said....whether you work hard, or don't work at all, the pay is the same.
I see that every day.
<quoted text>
>
>
You are right about the lack of skilled workers. We should do like some of the European countries do and encourage underperforming HS students to attend trade schools rather than waste everyone's time and resources sending them to college.

Even in today's economy good help is hard to find....We are having a house built and it is falling behind schedule because our contractor and we insist on top notch craftsmen, and right now one of the areas top cabinet makers , granite fitter and painter are backlogged... I am talking about the kind of workers who take pride in the work they do...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#677 Jan 1, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
I knew that would be your non-response.Like always, you can't argue a topic in good faith.
>
>
Welcome back SOLUTION.

Yes, it is pointless to try and discuss anything with HERE IS ONE, he is like a 3 year old and thinks he knows it all....

But RABBIT and SUNDOG are teaching him some manners....

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#678 Jan 1, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>I knew that would be your non-response.Like always, you can't argue a topic in good faith.
I have posted links
I have laid out a plan
More than once..........LOL

And all you post is that it is unfair as claimed by some moron that is talking about a plan that most are not
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#679 Jan 2, 2013
Most righties can't see past their noses. They read a few sentences about the 'fairness' of a consumption tax and they think they understand it all.

And if someone says that the IRS will be dissolved because income is no longer taxed-- these guys think they've gone to heaven.

But it's not nearly that easy. A little thought-- something righties can't muster-- shows that there are a ton of problems with the consumption tax.

First there is all the lost revenue from no longer having a capital gains tax, estate tax-- not to mention all the revenue that currently comes from the income tax itself.

The consumption tax would have to replace ALL that revenue. Since payroll taxes that cover social security and social net programs would be eliminated, that revenue has to be covered in the consumption tax.

And the super-rich only need to spend 5% to 10% of their income, with the rest going into savings of one kind or another-- all tax free.

IF things such as food, medical costs, and rent payments are not taxed, the very poor MAY not do any worse than now. But if they, and the middle class, can't write off medical costs and get no break for higher education (such as pell grants, etc.), or for dependent credits, they're screwed as well.

The middle class and upper middle class would pay 3 to 5 times more taxes than they pay now.
Tea Party Solution

Paradise, CA

#680 Jan 2, 2013
The IRS would not be dissolved, but it's functions would change. Now the IRS, or some other agency, would need to keep track of all the paperwork coming from we citizens to show the amounts we've each paid that year for food, medical costs, rent payments, etc-- so that the IRS will refund taxes on those essentials.

We'd be keeping and disclosing every grocery receipt, circling the food and necessity items, making notes and being ready to defend every item.

But the hardest thing for the government to enforce would be making sure that we pay the tax on EVERY item we buy, and EVERY service we pay for. We'd all buy our goods from other countries-- think of how difficult and expensive it would be for the government to find out what products people bought elsewhere and then has shipped to them.

In fact, what would keep ex-patriots such as the mexitroll from simply living in another country and buying everything in that country. How would he be taxed on his purchases? And how would we monitor plutocrats from buying their expensive cars in other countries and shipping them here?

We'd have to expand our border control and customs into a huge kind of IRS, complete with a squadron of investigators to research every item brought into the country. Or maybe congress wouldn't allocate funds for this kind of agency, letting all out-of-country purchases go untaxed.

Eliminating the income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax is absurd. It's another scam pushed by the greedy super-rich to accumulate even more wealth at the expense of the rest of us-- all the while proclaiming how 'fair'it is.

GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#681 Jan 2, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
T
Eliminating the income tax and replacing it with a consumption tax is absurd. It's another scam pushed by the greedy super-rich to accumulate even more wealth at the expense of the rest of us-- all the while proclaiming how 'fair'it is.
>
>
You nailed it once again SOLUTION...

A consumption tax will primarily benefit the well to do who can very well make the majority of their purchases overseas, thus avoiding US taxes altogether while availing themselves of all the benefits this nation offers for free.... talk about wannabe freeloaders and closet welfare queens.

Also, the word "consumers" somehow does not invoke visions of the Waltons, Trump or Gates rummaging through a department store nor dickering with a car salesman...
Here is One is a liar

Lincoln, CA

#682 Jan 2, 2013
GRANDPA NICOLAI wrote:
<quoted text>
>
>
You nailed it once again SOLUTION...
A consumption tax will primarily benefit the well to do who can very well make the majority of their purchases overseas, thus avoiding US taxes altogether while availing themselves of all the benefits this nation offers for free.... talk about wannabe freeloaders and closet welfare queens.
You’ve just described our own Mexi -troll. If how he describes himself is true, to many of us he’s nothing butt a traitor just like a vulture capitalist,“rape and run”.

How would a consumption tax work on say “foreign” investments in places like China and Pakistan and on money earned in the U.S. and parked in off -shore banks like mutt rummy did?

Me, I’m leaning towards a flat tax with minimal write -offs that aren’t open ended.

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#683 Jan 2, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
Most righties can't see past their noses. They read a few sentences about the 'fairness' of a consumption tax and they think they understand it all.
And if someone says that the IRS will be dissolved because income is no longer taxed-- these guys think they've gone to heaven.
But it's not nearly that easy. A little thought-- something righties can't muster-- shows that there are a ton of problems with the consumption tax.
First there is all the lost revenue from no longer having a capital gains tax, estate tax-- not to mention all the revenue that currently comes from the income tax itself.
The consumption tax would have to replace ALL that revenue. Since payroll taxes that cover social security and social net programs would be eliminated, that revenue has to be covered in the consumption tax.
And the super-rich only need to spend 5% to 10% of their income, with the rest going into savings of one kind or another-- all tax free.
IF things such as food, medical costs, and rent payments are not taxed, the very poor MAY not do any worse than now. But if they, and the middle class, can't write off medical costs and get no break for higher education (such as pell grants, etc.), or for dependent credits, they're screwed as well.
The middle class and upper middle class would pay 3 to 5 times more taxes than they pay now.
The troll again is posting his lies.........
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#684 Jan 2, 2013
The "Obama era".

Higher taxes for everyone.
The destruction of the middle class.
The American middle class is about to get hit by an unseen double edged sword of economic reality. A very rare economic phenomenon indeed, wherein a society experiences the twin vices of inflation and deflation, SIMULTANEOUSLY. This is a catastrophic scenario wherein, while the costs of basic goods and daily necessities are rising because of inflation, simultaneously, the value of society’s wealth-storing assets is falling because of deflation. Prices go up, personal accounts go down (and are wiped out), and the middle class is eliminated and reduced to rubble.

Squeezed by the three-pronged vices of inflation, deflation, and (soon) rising taxation to offset uncontrolled pork-barrel spending.
Local

Hidden Valley Lake, CA

#685 Jan 2, 2013
The Obama era

The liberal machine is in the mist of unveiling their gargantuan new spending and tax plans, they are set to be raised by the greatest amount in history, and regulation and micro management is their middle name, they are smart and you are stupid. Right into the teeth of all time low negative savings rates and the impossible debt burdens the middle class currently labors under. Over regulation and higher taxes are set to move higher like a steamroller. It is not a good recipe for success in a global economic competition, so we will lose.

So the impoverishing of the MIDDLE CLASS is set to accelerate. It's Gold and non printable assets of all varieties going to the moon as the printing presses go into high gear and wealth creation is further diminished, so taxes so each will cut deeper and deeper from both edges of the sword. Destruction of the Broad American and European Middle classes is in full swing and has 30 years or more of momentum built into it, and it is accelerating as the loss of purchasing power is accelerating. It is now pathological in nature and built into the psychology of the developed world. What we have voted for is what will do the most damage to our own futures!
Here is One

United States

#686 Jan 2, 2013
Here Is One wrote:
<quoted text>
I have posted links
I have laid out a plan
More than once..........LOL
And all you post is that it is unfair as claimed by some moron that is talking about a plan that most are not
Prove it RESEARCH GENIUS!

Ya can't even pull up data on your own ASSumptions and Opinions that YOU HAVE POSTED here?

Sad, VERY Sad!

But then, " You are a liar. You will always be a liar until YOU can prove you are not a LIAR"! God your lines are STUPID!
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#687 Jan 2, 2013
Local wrote:
The "Obama era".
Higher taxes for everyone.
The destruction of the middle class.
The American middle class is about to get hit by an unseen double edged sword of economic reality. A very rare economic phenomenon indeed, wherein a society experiences the twin vices of inflation and deflation, SIMULTANEOUSLY. This is a catastrophic scenario wherein, while the costs of basic goods and daily necessities are rising because of inflation, simultaneously, the value of society’s wealth-storing assets is falling because of deflation. Prices go up, personal accounts go down (and are wiped out), and the middle class is eliminated and reduced to rubble.
Squeezed by the three-pronged vices of inflation, deflation, and (soon) rising taxation to offset uncontrolled pork-barrel spending.
>
>

Reagan's own budget director says you are full of crap, but we all already knew that:



For your further edification : http://www.youtube.com/watch...
GRANDPA NICOLAI

Chico, CA

#688 Jan 2, 2013
Local wrote:
The Obama era
What we have voted for is what will do the most damage to our own futures!
>
>
Did you vote for Ronald Reagan, or were you in kinder garden then...???

Tea Party Solution

United States

#689 Jan 2, 2013
Local wrote:
The Obama era
The liberal machine is in the mist of unveiling their gargantuan new spending and tax plans, they are set to be raised by the greatest amount in history, and regulation and micro management is their middle name, they are smart and you are stupid.
Another couple of copy/ paste jobs with no link. It's called plagiarism.

“Facts”

Since: May 08

Location hidden

#690 Jan 2, 2013
Tea Party Solution wrote:
<quoted text>
Another couple of copy/ paste jobs with no link. It's called plagiarism.
What do you call yhis grumpy???
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

Grumpy is so stupid that he claimed that California did not give Amazon a special deal

Lets see what Amazon has to say about this subject..........ROTFLMAO

, Amazon.com Inc. AMZN +1.52% has warned it will sever ties with thousands of California-based advertising affiliates if the state government passes legislation requiring the e-commerce giant to collect taxes on items sold to residents

.http://online.wsj.com/article /SB100014240527487035596045761 75023806874498.html

Amazon.com said it could cut off more than 10,000 California affiliates if the state passes legislation forcing the Internet company to collect sales taxes from California residents, Cnet reports
http://www.bizjournals.com/sanfrancisco/morni ...

AMZN Threatens to Leave Calif. Over Sales Tax
http://www.wealthwire.com/news/economy/1226

May 2011 Amazon Tax Bill Passes State Assembly But Amazon does not halve to pay tax until November 2012 just as they asked for..........LOL
http://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/politics/Am ...

Amazon Threatens To Cut Ties With California Affiliates Over Tax Issues
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/03/02/amaz ...

The grace period negotiated between Amazon and the state of California in September 2011 officially ends
http://mashable.com/2012/09/14/amazon-sales-t ...

READ THAT GRUMPY..........THE GRACE PERIOD IS OVER AFTER ONE YEAR..........LOL

The two sides reached a deal in 2011 that included a one-year grace period set to end Saturday.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/09/13/amaz ...

READ THAT GRUMPY??? EVEN PUFFINGTON SAYS THE ONE YEAR DEAL AMAZON ASKED FOR IS NOW ENDING..........ROTHFLMAO

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Gerber Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Proof Democrats Are Mentally Ill 14 min a-citizen 2
Biggest Crowds Ever! 14 hr TrumpWorld Solution 1
roofiess Xan bar, Blues OC H Addyis weed molly 15 hr now 1
President elect Trump 16 hr ANONYMOUS 67
Move Embassy To Jerusalem, Remove All Palestini... 16 hr ANONYMOUS 1
Ugly Fat Freak Dykes Protest President Lincoln ... 17 hr Bob ButtHeadhulland 3
The Democrat Party Is Going Extinct 17 hr Middle of the road 2

Gerber Jobs

More from around the web

Personal Finance

Gerber Mortgages