Flat or Progressive Income Tax?

Author Topic: Flat or Progressive Income Tax?  (Read 2870 times)

1. That's not at all what the quote even said.
2. Just because people argue a point doesn't make it fact, bud.

“The brown townysis based on this simple inference implies that the cut in benefits in 2014 can explain nearly all of the observed aggregate employment growth in 2014. The abrupt reversal in the relative employment growth trend of high benefit states and border counties in December 2013, right at the time when the benefit durations were cut, strongly suggests that our brown townysis indeed identifies the implications of this particular policy change. There were no other policy changes at the turn of 2014 likely to have significant labor market implications. Moreover, we are not aware of any policy changes that could have differentially affected states depending on their pre-reform benefit duration.”

*reviewed all of the pages*

Theory A: Nonnel is a rich 15 year old idiot.
Theory B: Nonnel is trolling.
Wrong on both counts but good effort

Wrong on both counts but good effort
Then explain.

Just because you're poor and can't pay the fire department the month your house is on fire, doesn't mean it is alright.

People aren't poor because they want to be poor.

We HAVE to regulate things. We HAVE to have non-privatized things in our society. People created governments so they protect their freedoms and rights, not to have them be forced to give money to companies.

Besides, privatizing things would make people pay more money than what they do in taxes.

TL;DR: Cutting entitlement programs would decrease the amount of money the government needs to spend which would open us up to the possibilities of using a flat tax because a government that needs less money doesn't need to strangulate the upper end of the income of the wealthy just to survive.

our current tax system is set up so that the people who need the money the most get to keep what little they earn. any kind of flat tax system greatly increases the tax burden on the poor while massively cutting taxes on the rich. it's extremely unhealthy for the economy to have a broke middle class while all the money congeals at the top, its completely unsustainable.

and i despise the argument "oh they're rich because they earned their money so they should get to keep it." no, that's bullstuff. taxing someone for 50% of their income when they make $200,000,000 a year leaves them with $100,000,000 a year to live on. taxing someone 0% for making $25,000 a year gives them that tiny amount of money in an economy suffering from rapid inflation to scrape by.

a flat tax of any kind steals from the poor to give to the rich

our current tax system is set up so that the people who need the money the most get to keep what little they earn. any kind of flat tax system greatly increases the tax burden on the poor while massively cutting taxes on the rich. it's extremely unhealthy for the economy to have a broke middle class while all the money congeals at the top, its completely unsustainable.

Our current tax system is set up so that the rich pay for everything for everyone while the poor pay for nothing. It doesn't make sense to take more money from people and give them no more, or in some cases, even less benefit. Whether or not you think they earned their money, it's their money. It's not inherently owned by the government, and every dime taken by taxes is money the government gets of someone elses money. Taking huge chunks more money from people but giving them no benefit from that extra money taken is extortion.

taxing someone for 50% of their income when they make $200,000,000 a year leaves them with $100,000,000 a year to live on. taxing someone 0% for making $25,000 a year gives them that tiny amount of money in an economy suffering from rapid inflation to scrape by.

It's not about poverty line vs top 1%. In any and every tax system people are going to get tax breaks if they're below the poverty line, flat tax or not. Here's how the FairTax system I supported earlier deals with this:
Quote from: http://fairtax.org
The FairTax provides a progressive program called a prebate. This gives every legal resident household an “advance refund” at the beginning of each month so that purchases made up to the poverty level are tax-free. The prebate prevents an unfair burden on low-income families. Learn more.

Regardless, you skipped past most of my argument. The issue is that we're spending too much money, so taxes have to be progressive or else the government won't be able to extort enough money from the public to pay for their poorly planned budget. If spending is cut then the government won't need as much money, which would make a flat and fair tax perfectly fine to fund the government without taking an unfair proportion of anybody's money.
« Last Edit: January 27, 2015, 12:30:24 AM by $trinick »

The rich pay for every thing? More like the poor pay nothing, the rich barely pay anything, while the government rides off the backs of the middle class. Trivial items like TV, computers, phones, those are cheap and generally affordable, but the necessities like insurance are expensive as hell.

FairTax system I supported earlier deals with this:

that's horrifying. it's literally a system designed so that poor and middle class people float near the poverty line so that money can congeal at the top.

like $trinick said I think it's ridiculous to modify a universal ratio of earned money to taxes, only on the affluent.

on the topic of (unemployment) benefits:

turns out cutting unemployment benefits and the like saves us money AND creates more jobs. who knew.
Yeah but what kind of jobs are they getting?

One of the problems I see is that a good amount of people who use these government aid programs are uneducated, unskilled workers, who can't get a lot. My mom was actually in this situation, where every job she was offered would pay her less then the unemployment she was receiving, and she'd have added costs like transportation to the job. So she just hung onto the unemployment while it lasted, then grabbed something (lower paying, as mentioned) once it ran out

The current welfare program is like a bandaid on the real problem


we dont use either right now.
either would be nice