Liberal Forum

slideman » 20 Jan 2023, 11:10 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 11:10 am

Yep tax the poor not the rich

How's it feel to be the equal of the OP nut?

Mrkelly » 20 Jan 2023, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 1:00 pm

consumption taxes are never popular

people are used to paying income tax, and a lot of us look forward to our tax returns 

reduce that burden if you want to make people happy 

but to just add 23% to 30% on top of sales tax on every purchase and every service is gonna hurt a lot of people on fixed or low incomes 

not to mention the 80% of working Americans that live paycheck to paycheck 

and get rid of estate and gift taxes for the people at the top?  … the ones this consumption tax will barely effect?

good luck with that

What you FAIL to comprehend, which NO libretard is capable of doing, is that 100% of ALL PAYROLL TAXES ARE ELIMINATED!! So if you are paid $20 and hour for 40 working hours, you bring home $800 for THAT WEEK. NO TAXES are deducted. SO there is AUTOMATICALLY a 25-30% WAGE INCREASE for every working American. Add to this, NO CORPORATION is going to pay any INCOME TAXES, but they too are paying the SAME CONSUMPTION TAXES everyone else pays, so their bottom line is ALSO better since they no longer need to offset ANY costs or losses. PRICES FOR GOODS AND SERVICES ACTUALLY DECREASE BY AT MINIMUM 15-20%.

But since YOUR VISION of taxation is "redistribution" and PUNISHMENT for those making more than you do, you have NO CONCEPT of why this is more in line with EQUALITY OF THE MASSES in taxation since that CONCEPT OF TAXATION is based on FUNDING THE SERVICES OF GOVERNMENT rather than "Redistribution of wealth" that you love so much!!

Democrats say hell no that will hit the poor hard.

I gotta say it I'm glad the eemocrat kept the senate with this crazy republican BS.

Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 10:50 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 10:50 am

https://l.smartnews.com/TejK4/7gICUv

The issue gets a vote, as part of a deal McCarthy made with mavericks in order to get the gavel. It hasn't a chance in hell - WAY to many oxes gored. And of COURSE the dems and rinos are against it - it would force too many corporate lawyers to get productive jobs. It would save entire FORESTS from the paperwork reduction. And it would kill the government's second favorite muscle: the IRS. That the dems and rinos will defend the IRS goes without saying, so I won't say it. 

I have no idea whether I support the idea - haven't studied it and thought it through. This much is certain - the "underground economy" would have to pay the same taxes the rest of us pay. Here's what uncle google had to say:

Potential Pros for a National Sales Tax include:

• The elimination of all income taxes. This means that annual filing of income tax forms through the IRS would also be eliminated as taxes would be paid at the point of sale. A large portion of the IRS would also be eliminated.
• Encourages saving and investing due to taxes being assessed only when money is spent rather than on what is held by the individual. The trend to consume more would begin to decline while conservation would increase.
• Those who spend more also pay more in taxes. The wealthy, who have more money, traditionally spend more money so the tax advantage that many wealthy individuals receive from investing would be eliminated.
• Only new items purchased would be taxed. Conservation would increase as more individuals seek out used items to avoid paying higher taxes.
• Everyone living in the United States would pay a sales tax, regardless of their citizenship.
• Those participating in illegal activities would no longer avoid paying taxes as the tax would now come from items purchased.
• Americans receive more power in how their money is divided up as it is based on what is spent rather than what is earned. (A system more like a “free” society.)
• Businesses would be able to lower costs and hire more employees due to their own tax rates decreasing.

Suggested consequences to a national sales tax have been:

• Lower income families would be paying a higher percentage of their income in taxes. This makes a national sales tax a regressive tax.
• Consumer spending could potentially decrease which could harm the economy. (Some debates have said this would level out after a period of adjustment.)
• A loss of jobs in the form of attorneys, accountants and human resource employees due to an easier tax system.
• Mortgage and consumer debt would increase. Due to a higher tax rate on items purchased at the time of sale, a larger amount would then be financed over the course of the loan. This would increase the amount of interest paid on debts thereby greatly increasing consumer debt.
• Tax advantages to owning homes could cause home prices to decrease drastically. Advantages to improving the efficiency of homes would also decrease.
• The costs of moving to a national sales tax would be very expensive to the country. Not only would the changes be expensive to implement but new options would need to be developed to fund social security.
• Retirees who have already paid taxes on the income they have earned would then be taxed at a greater level on items they consume. Essenti

 
 

Just do a 15% flat tax and be done with it. File your taxes in 2 min, with no exemptions, no credits. Everyone pays 15%.

Z09 » 21 Jan 2023, 5:58 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 5:58 am

I thought the same

You thought?
For yourself.
All alone?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
 

crimsongulf » 21 Jan 2023, 12:11 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 12:11 am

Just do a 15% flat tax and be done with it. File your taxes in 2 min, with no exemptions, no credits. Everyone pays 15%.

 

Who are you filing your taxes to when you abolish the irs?

Squatchman » 21 Jan 2023, 7:54 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 7:54 am

You thou
For yourself.
All alone?
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha!
 

Aren't you the one they called "squatty" over on .org??

Fitting.

Beekeeper » 21 Jan 2023, 7:57 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 7:57 am

Aren't you the one they called "squatty" over on .org??

Fitting.

  Because I tea bag trump supporters.
 Did you shave? I hate the irritation razor stubble gives my scrotum.

 

Squatchman » 21 Jan 2023, 8:47 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 8:47 am

  Because I tea bag trump supporters.
 Did you shave? I hate the irritation razor stubble gives my scrotum.

Yeah, we know how you love that gay ****, "squatty".

Looks like you prefer pitching, huh??

SJConspirator » 20 Jan 2023, 10:59 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 10:59 am

Wow, you’re a real fountain of scumbag misinformation.

The bill calls for the ELIMINATION OF THE INCOME TAX AND THE IRS, you **** liar

And to replace them with a Fair Tax, as described. 

Being that you're an uninformed slack jawed rube, I suggest you shut the **** up.
 

Beekeeper » 21 Jan 2023, 8:49 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 8:49 am

Yeah, we know how you love that gay ****, "squatty".

Looks like you prefer pitching, huh??

 

Blackvegetable » 21 Jan 2023, 8:54 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 8:54 am

Is that Trump in drag. 

Once a drag queen always a drag queen. 
 

Justthetruth » 21 Jan 2023, 8:57 am » wrote: ↑

21 Jan 2023, 8:57 am

Is that Trump in drag. 

Once a drag queen always a drag queen.

Better yet....it's Grifty in the tow of his mentor Roy Cohn, America's Most Notorious Sodomite and All Around **** Human Being...


 

Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:21 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 11:21 am

As of right now retired people pay no federal income taxes on their social security benefits.

But after this passes they will have to pay at least 23% on all goods.

 

Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 11:28 am

That's only if you earn more money than you are allowed to make.

it's obvious you know >>>NOTHING<<< about collecting SSI, so do everyone here a favor and STFU...

slideman » 20 Jan 2023, 11:31 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 11:31 am

That's correct. There are a complex set of factors involved in when one should take social security. You get more money if you wait till you're 70 but then on the other hand you might die. You are taxed on the social security if you continue to work but if you don't work you make less money.

SSI is Federally taxed at a rate you choose...IE 0%, 12% or 22%... period...if the state you reside in taxes it as well, you have to set it aside as the Fed won't collect it for you...

Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:38 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 11:38 am

And raising taxes on the working poor.

It's called paying your fair share...
 

Justthetruth » 20 Jan 2023, 11:42 am » wrote: ↑

20 Jan 2023, 11:42 am

So it take Medicare and social security out. 

Something that poor seniors rely on daily.

Are you this **** stupid? The benefits remain while the collection method changes...