Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * * * 1 votes

How would you simplify the tax code?


  • Please log in to reply
35 replies to this topic

#16    Tiggs

Tiggs

    Relax. It's only me.

  • 8,779 posts
  • Joined:30 Jan 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Orange County, California

  • Universe Service Pack 2 still needs patching.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 02:44 PM

View PostSakari, on 18 May 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

For personal tax only....Federal only.

Then 2.133 trillion.


"What happens when an irresistible force meets an immovable object?" - Tiggs vs PA - Did Jesus Really exist? - The Formal Debate:
HERE
Posted Image


#17    questionmark

questionmark

    Cinicus Magnus

  • Member
  • 33,478 posts
  • Joined:26 Jun 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Greece and Des Moines, IA

  • In a flat world there is an explanation to everything.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 02:44 PM

View PostF3SS, on 18 May 2013 - 01:57 PM, said:

Fair tax, flat tax. I'm up for either. Don't have time to get into it but anything beats what we've got now. BTW, I think the tax code is more like 90,000 pages and not 2,000. Consumption tax which I believe is the fair tax is awesome. Imagine getting a cash paycheck, legally, and paying only a higher sales tax and only on new products, not used. Everybody pays, even drug dealers, illegals and criminals. And in a way, you get to decide how much in taxes you want to spend.

That would work if you want those who don't earn enough to feed their family to get from what you paid to compensate for the taxes they paid... also known as food stamps.

For me it is quite easy, for the first 15,000 nobody pays taxes (no matter how much they make), for the first 15,000 to 30,000 5% for the first 30,000 to 500,000 10% and for anything above 500,000 15%. No exceptions.

So, a guy earning 500,000 would pay:

to  15,000 -> $0
to  30,000 -> $750
to  500,000 -> $45,500
total ----------> $46,250

A skeptic is a well informed believer and a pessimist a well informed optimist
The most dangerous views of the world are from those who have never seen it. ~ Alexander v. Humboldt
If you want to bulls**t me please do it so that it takes me more than a minute to find out

about me

#18    randompHactor

randompHactor

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:18 May 2013

Posted 18 May 2013 - 03:35 PM

No income tax, let everyone earn all they can!
BUT tax everyone, corporations, too, equally with no deductions when they spend or transfer money anywhere. The rate could be very low...
And to make this system work, ban all lobbying, corporations can't vote and should not have a say with governments..."for the people' by the people...". If corporations want to influence gov't, they should have to convince the people first!


#19    Sakari

Sakari

    tohi

  • Member
  • 11,222 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 05:32 PM

View PostTiggs, on 18 May 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

Then 2.133 trillion.



Is that paid, end result.

Not taken out of checks and such, then write offs done later.

Not to sure how much I want to get into this :)

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#20    regeneratia

regeneratia

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,405 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:All my posts are my own views, my own perceptions. Will not be finding links for why I think the way I do.

  • It is time to put the big guns down now, Little Boys!
    It is not my intent to make anyone feel bad because of what I am writing.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 05:40 PM

Reagan wanted to do this, at 16%.
Bush, then VP, seriously resisted it. Hmmmm! makes ya think.
I fully support a flat tax of 16% or less.


View PostAus Der Box Skeptisch, on 18 May 2013 - 04:23 AM, said:

How would you simplify the tax code?
I haven't had any real in depth discussions with anyone yet on this so I'm going to just throw something out there and see how it flies.

I would like to see te tax code drop from over 2000 pages to under 5.

I would like to see a flat tax of between 10 to 15 percent across the board. No fancy loopholes just a simple flat tax.

If after putting in to social security and Medicaid and also after health insurance, you pull in 1000 on your paycheck I feel 100 to 150 in taxes is not to much to ask. Kiss rules keep it simple stupid... LOL.
If you make less per paycheck such as an example of 300 you would pay 30 to 45 of that in taxes.
If you made more such as 10000 per paycheck it would be 1000 to 1500. Nice and simple easy to figure out and everyone would do the same no matter what you make.
what do you all think? This was just an example to start the ball rolling. As I said I have never had any in depth conversation and I would like to see where this takes us.
Do you have a better solution? The current model is too rife with loopholes and deductions.
So I hand the ball to you guys now. I hope this discussion continues.


Truth is such a rare quality, a stranger so seldom met in this civilization of fraud, that it is never received freely, but must fight its way into the world
Professor Hilton Hotema
(quote from THE BIBLE FRAUD)

Robert Heinlein: SECRECY IS THE HALLMARK OF TYRANNY!

#21    Sakari

Sakari

    tohi

  • Member
  • 11,222 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:08 PM

View Postregeneratia, on 18 May 2013 - 05:40 PM, said:

Reagan wanted to do this, at 16%.
Bush, then VP, seriously resisted it. Hmmmm! makes ya think.
I fully support a flat tax of 16% or less.

16%

That would be almost 2x what I normally pay. And I have no deductions.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#22    regeneratia

regeneratia

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,405 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:All my posts are my own views, my own perceptions. Will not be finding links for why I think the way I do.

  • It is time to put the big guns down now, Little Boys!
    It is not my intent to make anyone feel bad because of what I am writing.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:11 PM

View PostSakari, on 18 May 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

16%

That would be almost 2x what I normally pay. And I have no deductions.

No offense here. I think you are underestimating what you really pay. With all taxes combined,not including sales, we normally pay around 33%. That is what I would put back to save if I were going into business for myself at present. That is what I tell people to do. Your income is not all yours. Assume that a third of it will go to the government, local, state and national.

Truth is such a rare quality, a stranger so seldom met in this civilization of fraud, that it is never received freely, but must fight its way into the world
Professor Hilton Hotema
(quote from THE BIBLE FRAUD)

Robert Heinlein: SECRECY IS THE HALLMARK OF TYRANNY!

#23    Sakari

Sakari

    tohi

  • Member
  • 11,222 posts
  • Joined:16 Aug 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Safford, Arizona

  • Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 06:14 PM

View Postregeneratia, on 18 May 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

No offense here. I think you are underestimating what you really pay. With all taxes combined,not including sales, we normally pay around 33%. That is what I would put back to save if I were going into business for myself at present. That is what I tell people to do. Your income is not all yours. Assume that a third of it will go to the government, local, state and national.

I am only talking Federal.
If federal took out 16%, that would be 2x of what Federal normally takes out.

Our Wolf's Memorial Page

http://petsupports.com/a04/sakari.htm


#24    F3SS

F3SS

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,402 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:12 PM

View Postquestionmark, on 18 May 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:



That would work if you want those who don't earn enough to feed their family to get from what you paid to compensate for the taxes they paid... also known as food stamps.

For me it is quite easy, for the first 15,000 nobody pays taxes (no matter how much they make), for the first 15,000 to 30,000 5% for the first 30,000 to 500,000 10% and for anything above 500,000 15%. No exceptions.

So, a guy earning 500,000 would pay:

to  15,000 -> $0
to  30,000 -> $750
to  500,000 -> $45,500
total ----------> $46,250

Nothing wrong with that either. My accountant wouldn't be so useful anymore but that's ok.

View Postregeneratia, on 18 May 2013 - 06:11 PM, said:

No offense here. I think you are underestimating what you really pay. With all taxes combined,not including sales, we normally pay around 33%. That is what I would put back to save if I were going into business for myself at present. That is what I tell people to do. Your income is not all yours. Assume that a third of it will go to the government, local, state and national.

I am self employed and I put away 30% and so far it has always been just right.

Posted Image

#25    pallidin

pallidin

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,137 posts
  • Joined:09 Dec 2004
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Somewhere south of the North Pole

  • "When life gets you down... swim with a dolphin"

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:35 PM

Here's what I would like to see...

Remember how the tax form has a "check box" for contributing 1 dollar to the Presidential Campaign fund?

Well, I would like to see, like 17.

For example, 1 dollar(or more) to cancer research, to heart and diabetes reasearch, etc..(separate boxes)

Then apart from medicine, I would like to see a check box for, say, NASA, or highway/bridge infrastructure repair/expansion, and other stuff like that.

Then several check-boxes specific to education, job creation apart from oversea's dominance, etc...

And so on. Totally optional.
........................................

Let the ACTUAL TAXPAYERS have a legally binding voice on, say, 15% of where their own money goes to.
OK, 12% if it makes Congress happy that they can't RAPE ALL OUR MONEY.

Within 10 years(maybe a little more) America would grow much stronger, and the taxpayers would be MUCH MORE HAPPY.

Edited by pallidin, 18 May 2013 - 08:05 PM.


#26    ninjadude

ninjadude

    Seeker of truths

  • Member
  • 10,785 posts
  • Joined:11 Sep 2006
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Illinois

  • "dirt collects at the interfaces"

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:37 PM

Just because it's a simple "flat" or "fair" tax that you all can easily understand, it also means that you'd be giving a HUGE tax break to those at the top thereby actually reducing revenues. Not a good plan.

"Whatever you can do or dream you can, begin it. Boldness has genius, power and magic in it. Begin it now!""
- Friedrich Nietzsche

#27    regeneratia

regeneratia

    Government Agent

  • Member
  • 3,405 posts
  • Joined:20 Jun 2010
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:All my posts are my own views, my own perceptions. Will not be finding links for why I think the way I do.

  • It is time to put the big guns down now, Little Boys!
    It is not my intent to make anyone feel bad because of what I am writing.

Posted 18 May 2013 - 07:48 PM

View PostSakari, on 18 May 2013 - 06:14 PM, said:

I am only talking Federal.
If federal took out 16%, that would be 2x of what Federal normally takes out.

Hmmm! I will look into that. Thank you.

View PostF3SS, on 18 May 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Nothing wrong with that either. My accountant wouldn't be so useful anymore but that's ok.



I am self employed and I put away 30% and so far it has always been just right.

That is just about what I am thinking.

Truth is such a rare quality, a stranger so seldom met in this civilization of fraud, that it is never received freely, but must fight its way into the world
Professor Hilton Hotema
(quote from THE BIBLE FRAUD)

Robert Heinlein: SECRECY IS THE HALLMARK OF TYRANNY!

#28    Rafterman

Rafterman

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 5,553 posts
  • Joined:27 Sep 2010
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Upstate

Posted 18 May 2013 - 10:24 PM

View Postninjadude, on 18 May 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Just because it's a simple "flat" or "fair" tax that you all can easily understand, it also means that you'd be giving a HUGE tax break to those at the top thereby actually reducing revenues. Not a good plan.

Oh yeah, I forgot, Ninja isn't interested in raising revenue for the government.  He's more interested in punishing the wealthy.


#29    Jeremiah65

Jeremiah65

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,595 posts
  • Joined:25 Jun 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:The mists at the edge of your dreams...

  • "It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it." Aristotle

Posted 18 May 2013 - 11:28 PM

No...as much as I hate to say this...a "flat tax" is not fair....those on the lower end suffer the most.  A scaled percentage (similar to what we have) is the most fair...but the deductions really-really need to be reeled in.  No loopholes...when a company like GE can make billions and pay zero taxes...obviously the system is not structured properly.

That is my practical answer...I don't like income tax...I don't think it is fair at all.  I realize we have things that we need as a collective...but I find income tax offensive.

I am more of a sales tax kinda guy.  The more you "spend" the more you pay.  certain things need to be off the table or have income based limitations....food, water, shelter, and maybe some warped thing for clothing...and some limits on transportation.

The more money you have, the more likely you are to spend extravagantly...and you pay your taxes then.  The poor person that only buys what he needs does not pay much at all...if anything.

Just my opinion...

"Liberty means responsibility.  That is why most men dread it."  George Bernard Shaw
"I would rather be exposed to the inconveniences attending too much liberty than to those attending too small a degree of it."  Thomas Jefferson

Posted Image

#30    F3SS

F3SS

    Alien Abducter

  • Member
  • 5,402 posts
  • Joined:11 Jun 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Pittsburgh, Pa

Posted 18 May 2013 - 11:43 PM

View Postninjadude, on 18 May 2013 - 07:37 PM, said:

Just because it's a simple "flat" or "fair" tax that you all can easily understand, it also means that you'd be giving a HUGE tax break to those at the top thereby actually reducing revenues. Not a good plan.

So what? I win, they win. Sounds fair to me.

View PostJeremiah65, on 18 May 2013 - 11:28 PM, said:

No...as much as I hate to say this...a "flat tax" is not fair....those on the lower end suffer the most.  A scaled percentage (similar to what we have) is the most fair...but the deductions really-really need to be reeled in.  No loopholes...when a company like GE can make billions and pay zero taxes...obviously the system is not structured properly.

That is my practical answer...I don't like income tax...I don't think it is fair at all.  I realize we have things that we need as a collective...but I find income tax offensive.

I am more of a sales tax kinda guy.  The more you "spend" the more you pay.  certain things need to be off the table or have income based limitations....food, water, shelter, and maybe some warped thing for clothing...and some limits on transportation.

The more money you have, the more likely you are to spend extravagantly...and you pay your taxes then.  The poor person that only buys what he needs does not pay much at all...if anything.

Just my opinion...
Exactly, you get to choose how much you spend on taxes and the richer people will obviously spend more money and pay the most taxe

Posted Image




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users