I Can Fix The Economy?

[BLAZER PROPHET]

First, in all honesty, I was working late and did not watch the President's speech. I asked a co-worker this morning (an ardent Obama supporter) what she thought about it and she stated it was a very good speech. She further states the long & short of the speech is that we need, as individuals, to batten down the hatches at home and he & the government will take care of everything as he has a plan.

OK, I'm fine with that. So far, Obama seems like a President who's willing to work with both sides in order to do what he can and he operates with a lot of personal conviction. I'm willing to give him a fair shot.

However, that got me wondering, if I were President, what would I try and do to solve this financial mess we're in. I came up with my plan- open for debate as well as wanting to know what you would do. So, without further mindless chit-chat:

1) No more deficit spending. Period. We will cut whatever we have to cut, but no more over spending.

2) No more bailouts. Period.

3) Find new and creative ways of adding revenue. For example, a $25 per car yearly federal tax with the money 100% dedicated to interstate roads & bridges. A luxury tax on vehicles, boats & trailers above a certain amount and on vehicles getting less than an "X" amount of gas miles per gallon- that will be used for various dedicated areas as well.

4) Massive Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid overhauls to both trim them up and to aggressively fight fraud.

5) A 3% national sales tax with the money 100% dedicated to paying off the national debt. This would be different from the current intrest payments we make from the general budget. The national debt would be paid off in 12-15 years. Then, the money we current;y pay to the interest will be divided- 50% in a tax break back to all citizens and 50% will stay in the general budget to expand social spending for the citizens.

6) Change our current tax system to a 7% flat tax with no deductions at all. Whatever money comes in your front door, regardless of overall income, 7% goes to Uncle Sam.

There! I've fixed our economy!

 

[Paxil]

I would love your plan... would have taken home $1500 more just on my last check with just 7% taxes.

As far as stopping deficit spending... that would be a disaster. The concept is OK... but imagine a store saying they are not going to buy more inventory if they are not making a profit. They go out of business before they could right the ship.

Now.. don't we have a balanaced budget act or something like that? Which the past administration just got around by not putting a lot of this in the budget. =)

Overhauls cost a lot of money too.

Being an Oregonian... I don't like the sales tax. That is our job here... to poo-poo all sales taxes.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

I'm in agreement with most of your points, overall. Well, except #3 as I don't think there should be a luxury tax. There's no good reason other than to punish people who have the means to spend more on what they buy.

Flat tax is also going to have to be higher than 7%, more like 23%.

www.fairtax.org

 

[WWBRoyD]

First, in all honesty, I was working late and did not watch the President's speech. I asked a co-worker this morning (an ardent Obama supporter) what she thought about it and she stated it was a very good speech. She further states the long & short of the speech is that we need, as individuals, to batten down the hatches at home and he & the government will take care of everything as he has a plan.

OK, I'm fine with that. So far, Obama seems like a President who's willing to work with both sides in order to do what he can and he operates with a lot of personal conviction. I'm willing to give him a fair shot.

However, that got me wondering, if I were President, what would I try and do to solve this financial mess we're in. I came up with my plan- open for debate as well as wanting to know what you would do. So, without further mindless chit-chat:

1) No more deficit spending. Period. We will cut whatever we have to cut, but no more over spending.

2) No more bailouts. Period.

3) Find new and creative ways of adding revenue. For example, a $25 per car yearly federal tax with the money 100% dedicated to interstate roads & bridges. A luxury tax on vehicles, boats & trailers above a certain amount and on vehicles getting less than an "X" amount of gas miles per gallon- that will be used for various dedicated areas as well.

4) Massive Social Security, Medicare & Medicaid overhauls to both trim them up and to aggressively fight fraud.

5) A 3% national sales tax with the money 100% dedicated to paying off the national debt. This would be different from the current intrest payments we make from the general budget. The national debt would be paid off in 12-15 years. Then, the money we current;y pay to the interest will be divided- 50% in a tax break back to all citizens and 50% will stay in the general budget to expand social spending for the citizens.

6) Change our current tax system to a 7% flat tax with no deductions at all. Whatever money comes in your front door, regardless of overall income, 7% goes to Uncle Sam.

There! I've fixed our economy!

Wrong. That's the kinda nonsense that got us in this mess.

 

[WWBRoyD]

I'm in agreement with most of your points, overall. Well, except #3 as I don't think there should be a luxury tax. There's no good reason other than to punish people who have the means to spend more on what they buy.

Flat tax is also going to have to be higher than 7%, more like 23%.

www.fairtax.org

The flat tax is regressive. It impacts poor people far worse than the wealthy.

It's a non-starter.

 

[Draco]

If flat tax also eliminates payroll tax (SS/Med) I'd be for it. I don't think you should be taxed at a higher rate for actively earning income.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

The flat tax is regressive. It impacts poor people far worse than the wealthy.

It's a non-starter.

the current system is broken. the guy running the treasury dept. can't even do his own taxes properly. eliminate it all. simplify.

Change!

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#13

# How does the FairTax protect low-income and lower-middle-income families and individuals?

Under the FairTax Plan, poor people pay no net FairTax at all up to the poverty level! Every household receives a rebate that is equal to the FairTax paid on essential goods and services, and wage earners are no longer subject to the most regressive and burdensome tax of all, the payroll tax. Those spending at twice the poverty level pay a tax of only 11.5 percent -- a rate much lower than the income and payroll tax burden they bear today.

Under the federal income tax, slow economic growth and recessions have a disproportionately adverse impact on lower-income families. Breadwinners in these families are more likely to lose their jobs, are less likely to have the resources to weather bad economic times, and are more in need of the initial employment opportunities that a dynamic, growing economy provides. Retaining the present tax system makes economic progress needlessly slow, thus harming low-income people the most.

In contrast, the FairTax dramatically improves economic growth and wage rates for all, but especially for lower-income families and individuals. In addition to receiving the monthly FairTax prebate, these taxpayers are freed from regressive payroll taxes, the federal income tax, and the compliance burdens associated with each. They pay no more business taxes hidden in the price of goods and services, and used goods are tax free.

Back to FAQ Index


# Is it fair for rich people to get the exact same FairTax prebate from the federal government as the poorest person in America?

Let’s look at a billionaire under the FairTax -- if he spends $10,000,000 dollars he pays a tax of $2,300,000 and gets a prebate of $4,697 (assuming he is married and has no children). His effective tax rate as a percent of spending is 22.95 percent.

Now, let’s look at a middle-income married couple with no children under the FairTax -- if they spend $50,000, they pay $6,803 net of their prebate for an effective tax rate of 13.6 percent. The effective tax rate increases as spending increases, but never exceeds 23 percent!

Figure 4: Comparison of effective tax rates: FairTax, income tax

FairTax Current tax
Expenditures = income $50,000 $50,000
Net tax $6,803 $7,918
Effective tax rate 13.6% 15.8%

In contrast, if this same couple earns $50,000 in wages today under the current tax system, they pay $4,093 in income taxes and $3,825 in payroll taxes for a total of $7,918 in taxes (15.8 percent) -- a tax burden 14.1 percent higher than under the FairTax. In addition, their employer pays another $3,825 in payroll taxes. Most economists agree that the employer payroll tax is actually borne by employees in the form of lower wages. Looked at this way, this couple is paying $11,743 (23.5 percent) in taxes today, which doesn’t even include the hidden taxes they pay every time they make a purchase.

Finally, let’s look at a low-income couple that spends at the poverty level under the FairTax -- they pay no net FairTax at all. Today, under the income tax system, they not only pay 15 percent in payroll taxes, but they also pay hidden taxes -- arising from corporate taxes, private sector compliance costs, and payroll taxes passed on to consumers and embedded in the price of everything they buy.

 

[WWBRoyD]

the current system is broken. the guy running the treasury dept. can't even do his own taxes properly. eliminate it all. simplify.

Change!

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_faq_answers#13

Nonsense. The flat tax scam just another scam for rich people to pay even less tax than they do now.

Flat-tax is a non-starter.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

its a fair tax since everyone is paying the same rate.

Plus no more IRS...just the presence of Geithner and his problems as well as the others who obama nominated prove that even the most "upstart" of individuals try to cheat on their taxes. Its such a flimsy system, simplify it, man.

and what is this "non-starter" shit you're talking aboot?

 

[WWBRoyD]

its a fair tax since everyone is paying the same rate.

Plus no more IRS...just the presence of Geithner and his problems as well as the others who obama nominated prove that even the most "upstart" of individuals try to cheat on their taxes. Its such a flimsy system, simplify it, man.

and what is this "non-starter" shit you're talking aboot?

non·start·er (nn-stärtr)
n.
1. One that fails to start.
2. An idea, proposal, or candidate with no chance of being accepted or successful


http://www.thefreedictionary.com/nonstarter

Tax policy is headed back in the more progressive direction.

By the way, you know Barry Goldwater supported a 70% top income tax rate, don't you?

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Well, I don't know who barry goldwater is.

We should have a fair tax rate for all citizens, regardless of income.

 

[WWBRoyD]

Well, I don't know who barry goldwater is.

We should have a fair tax rate for all citizens, regardless of income.

Nonsense. The people who economically benefit most from being able to profit off the use of America's economic infrastructure should pay the most to maintain that economic infrastructure.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Nonsense. The people who economically benefit most from being able to profit off the use of America's economic infrastructure should pay the most to maintain that economic infrastructure.

And they will in a flat tax system. They'll pay more in numbers of dollars versus a cascading taxation system filled with complex loopholes, rules and regulations not even the Treasury Secretary can keep track of.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Why can't we have Universal Taxation? sounds like a good plan, right?

 

[WWBRoyD]

And they will in a flat tax system. They'll pay more in numbers of dollars versus a cascading taxation system filled with complex loopholes, rules and regulations not even the Treasury Secretary can keep track of.

I told you flat tax is a non-starter. It's a regressive tax that harms the poorest most.

Why can't we have Universal Taxation? sounds like a good plan, right?

Our progressive tax system needs to be more progressive. Higher income tax rates on the top brackets. Like at least back to a 50% top bracket.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Whether or not it hurts the poorest the most is irrelevant to me. Tough shit. We give the poor more than enough handouts and breaks to begin with.

I believe in a fair taxation system. I don't care if its a "non-starter" or not, I'm going to continue supporting it.

I don't like the idea of a Robin Hood government in which success is penalized and the tax code requires you to hire professionals to do your taxes properly and worry about deductions and if you're single or married. Screw that man, tax everyone the same, its the only fair system.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

and a 50% income tax bracket is ridiculous. For someone working, half the day, they're basically working for FREE. That's retarded.

 

[blazerboy30]

AgentDrazenPetrovic, you apparently haven't had any discussions with WWBRoyD.

It is useless. His reasoning is basically like this:

"""
You can't have a "fair tax" because it isn't progressive.
We have to have a progressive tax because it isn't regressive.
I'll throw out a random number of 50% for the top tax bracket. Seems like a nice round number.
"""

 

[blazerboy30]

and a 50% income tax bracket is ridiculous. For someone working, half the day, they're basically working for FREE. That's retarded.

And it gets better. Add in payroll tax onto that, if you are self employed, you are bumped up to almost 65%. OUCH.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

And it gets better. Add in payroll tax onto that, if you are self employed, you are bumped up to almost 65%. OUCH.

at least the lower tax brackets actually get to take more of the money they worked for home.

progressive tax rates are lame, the more you make, the more of the day you're working and basically not getting paid for.

 

[WWBRoyD]

and a 50% income tax bracket is ridiculous. For someone working, half the day, they're basically working for FREE. That's retarded.

People who make 2 million a year in income should be paying 1 million in taxes to pay for all the cost of maintaining the economic infrastructure that allows them to make all that money. Roads and bridges that delivery trucks run on cost money. That Fed-Ex plane delivery takes off and lands on expensive runways and fly through airspace kept in order by air traffic controller that have to be paid and radar system that cost money.

 

[WWBRoyD]

at least the lower tax brackets actually get to take more of the money they worked for home.

progressive tax rates are lame, the more you make, the more of the day you're working and basically not getting paid for.

You think highways and bridges are FREE?

You think the Air Force that keep the air space above the US free of foreign fighter planes are FREE?

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

People who make 2 million a year in income should be paying 1 million in taxes to pay for all the cost of maintaining the economic infrastructure that allows them to make all that money. Roads and bridges that delivery trucks run on cost money. That Fed-Ex plane delivery takes off and lands on expensive runways and fly through airspace kept in order by air traffic controller that have to be paid and radar system that cost money.

So a neurosurgeon who makes 2 million dollars a year takes up more bridges and roads than anyone else? So for all of their training and 80 hour work weeks, they should be taxed at progressively higher rates than anyone else? The longer hours they work, the more of that money should be money they are just giving to the government? bollocks.




Look, the trucks and gas they used gets taxed. The FedEx planes and fuel gets taxed...it all gets taxed....they're generating jobs and incomes. you make the rich seem evil and greedy. some of the ones at the top actually worked and sacrificed, then they get screwed...they work for the government and are taxed more of their work day just because they happen to be more successful.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

You think highways and bridges are FREE?

You think the Air Force that keep the air space above the US free of foreign fighter planes are FREE?

I never said they were. everyone uses these infrastructures. from public transportation to roads and bridges. I don't know how you can extrapolate that based on one's income they personally utilize more infrastructure than others.

 

[WWBRoyD]

And it gets better. Add in payroll tax onto that, if you are self employed, you are bumped up to almost 65%. OUCH.

IF... and that's a BIG IF... you are in the top tax bracket, which somewhere around a couple million a year in income.

 

[blazerboy30]

I never said they were. everyone uses these infrastructures. from public transportation to roads and bridges. I don't know how you can extrapolate that based on one's income they personally utilize more infrastructure than others.

I have never seen numbers showing that higher income earners use more public infrastructure and programs more than low income workers. But I always hear people bring it up to try to convince others that upper tax bracket rates should increase.

Thinking of a few public programs and infrastructure:

Where I live, way more low income individuals use public transportation than higher income earners.
Low income earners get welfare
Low income earners get food stamps
Low income earners use public attorneys more than rich people, who use private attorneys

I'd be interested to see somebody intelligent break this down, not WWBRoyD.

 

[WWBRoyD]

So a neurosurgeon who makes 2 million dollars a year takes up more bridges and roads than anyone else? So for all of their training and 80 hour work weeks, they should be taxed at progressively higher rates than anyone else? The longer hours they work, the more of that money should be money they are just giving to the government? bollocks.




Look, the trucks and gas they used gets taxed. The FedEx planes and fuel gets taxed...it all gets taxed....they're generating jobs and incomes. you make the rich seem evil and greedy. some of the ones at the top actually worked and sacrificed, then they get screwed...they work for the government and are taxed more of their work day just because they happen to be more successful.

Neorosurgeons don't even make a million. Their malpractice insurace costs too much.

The majority of the people making 2 million + a year don't earn that money. They sit on their ass and collect that income from interest/dividends from their trust accounts.

 

[blazerboy30]

IF... and that's a BIG IF... you are in the top tax bracket, which somewhere around a couple million a year in income.

BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!

Dude, you are arguing on here, and you have ABSOLUTELY NO idea what you are talking about. How old are you? Have you ever even paid taxes?

It really is amazing that you have ZERO shame in arguing about something that you are so incredibly wrong about.

The top Federal tax bracket starts at $357k.

 

[AgentDrazenPetrovic]

Neorosurgeons don't even make a million. Their malpractice insurace costs too much.

The majority of the people making 2 million + a year don't earn that money. They sit on their ass and collect that income from interest/dividends from their trust accounts.

They could gross 1-2 million, then get taxed AND have to pay their malpractice insurance. Even some oral surgeons make over $1million. I know doctors that make over $5 million a year and others and they hardly sit on their ass and collect dividen interest from their trust accounts.

Partners at law firms make in the 7 figure range. Doctors who run and manage multiple clinics make that and more. small business owners can make that much. restaurant owners.


But I guess its a bunch of stoned, trust fund babies that live off the suffering of others that make the big bucks eh?

Look, the only people that make good money aren't CEOs of big multi-nationanl corporations.

 

[WWBRoyD]

I have never seen numbers showing that higher income earners use more public infrastructure and programs more than low income workers. But I always hear people bring it up to try to convince others that upper tax bracket rates should increase.

Thinking of a few public programs and infrastructure:

Where I live, way more low income individuals use public transportation than higher income earners.
Low income earners get welfare
Low income earners get food stamps
Low income earners use public attorneys more than rich people, who use private attorneys

I'd be interested to see somebody intelligent break this down, not WWBRoyD.

You're got nothing to defend your stated opinion. You have nothing but personal insults to fling.

Conservatives have a way of never seeing evidence that inconvenient for them to see even when it's waived in their face.