I like taxes

[Suporex]

Because this is totally what happens....

Hyperbole is awesome. Now how about you move beyond talking points and show me where this happens on a regular basis?

I mean unemployment is at an all-time low and yet we still have a large portion of our population making less than $31,000/year. So is it the people you're complaining about that are the issue with welfare or the large corporations who pay so abysmally low that people have to work 60+ hours just to make ends meet yet still receive corporate welfare with the bullshit claims of job creation?

I mean currently the middle class is funding the wealthy and will do it even more so when this new tax bill passes. There's a difference in that and what you're claiming --my example is a long standing truth while yours is the Reagan era welfare queen which has not ever been shown to actually exist.

Go ask anyone who works in retail who floods stores around tax time it’s not really some big secret. The difference between them and rich people is rich people don’t piss me off at work on a daily basis. The entitlement issues with these people is astounding.

[Endus]

Go ask anyone who works in retail who floods stores around tax time it’s not really some big secret. The difference between them and rich people is rich people don’t piss me off at work on a daily basis. The entitlement issues with these people is astounding.

It's entertaining when you folks cite evidence that completely contradicts the points you're trying to make.

Poor people buy stuff at tax time because they get refunds, and can suddenly afford things they need that they couldn't afford earlier in the year, because their budgets are so tight.

You don't see middle-class types doing the same stuff because their budgets aren't that tight to begin with.

[Logwyn]

Privatized businesses. I bet that made you scared out of your mind with those two words. Like shit can't work right without government intervention.

I'd argue that privatized prison is a failure of something privatized. Its nothing about rehabilitating or making people serve time as punishment. Its all about the company running it making a profit by keeping people in prison no matter what.

[Linkedblade]

So lets tax the middle class just so the lower class can have 6 kids and go out get 70" TVs and iPhones when tax time comes around. Most poor people with kids get more money back than they pay in federal taxes. Ultimately if you have no kids you're the ones getting screwed by taxes whether you're poor or middle class.

Being Dinc's sucks

[GreenJesus]

I don't like paying taxes when I witness how inefficient the government is in using the money. Why do they need 10 people to do the job of 3? I find it so funny when people were crying that all agencies were getting a cut because the Trump administration made a directive to find waste and cut it. "Waaahhh my agency that does ___ is getting a 10% cut!!! Wahhh!!!" The problem is each federal agency fraudulently exaggerates how much they use each year to be able to go to Congress and say "we need more money please". Like at the end of the year they realize they have some money left over. They rush to replace a bunch of supplies/equipment that they just replaced last year so they can say they used up the budget. Cut all spending. Cut my taxes. Profit.

[Captain N]

Go ask anyone who works in retail who floods stores around tax time it’s not really some big secret. The difference between them and rich people is rich people don’t piss me off at work on a daily basis. The entitlement issues with these people is astounding.

People of all income brackets make their luxury purchases during tax return season. That doesn't in any way, shape, or form back up the claim that people are having six kids and on welfare making those purchases. You're still spouting nonsense hyperbole based on your feels. Is your entire argument based on rich people not angering so you support entitlements to them at the expense of the working poor and by extension yourself?

[Torto]

So which is it -- if you flat tax them you're damaging them for working 40 hours a week while allowing those who make more to pay less. You seem to have a terrible lack of understanding how taxation works.

Basically you're saying that people working 40 hours a week at $10/hour will make $20,800/year and if we flat tax them 15% their income drops to $17,680/year. While at the same time someone bringing home $100,000/year paying the same 15% brings home $85,000/year (less than the pay currently). Your math is akin to the Republican Tax Plan where you're funding the already well off at the expense of those struggling and are performing mental gymnastics to justify being a shitty human being.

Have you heard of a thing called a tax free threshold? I don't know if its a thing in the US but basically you have a set level of income that is completely tax free. In my country, it's currently set a $18,200. So in your example, the person working a 40 hour week and earns $20,800 a year would only pay the flat tax on $2600. 15% flat tax on that is around $360 a year.

Pretty cool hey?

[Dald]

Uses backticks like a mong, tries to ask a question but instead makes a statement, jerks off with sand paper. 11/10

[Captain N]

Have you heard of a thing called a tax free threshold? I don't know if its a thing in the US but basically you have a set level of income that is completely tax free. In my country, it's currently set a $18,200. So in your example, the person working a 40 hour week and earns $20,800 a year would only pay the flat tax on $2600. 15% flat tax on that is around $360 a year.

Pretty cool hey?

We don't have that here so a flat tax is incredibly damaging to our lower income brackets. You guys also have a minimum wage of $17.70 so someone working 40 hours a week in Australia is bringing home $36,816 even at the minimum wage. Everyone of your minimum wage full-time workers is paying into the tax system so that those working part time do not have to pay into the system. You're singing the praises of a Progressive Taxation system without realizing it.

A flat tax system would force those who don't pay right now at less than $18,200 to pay the same percentage amount as those making $100,000.

[Ghostpanther]

Have you heard of a thing called a tax free threshold? I don't know if its a thing in the US but basically you have a set level of income that is completely tax free. In my country, it's currently set a $18,200. So in your example, the person working a 40 hour week and earns $20,800 a year would only pay the flat tax on $2600. 15% flat tax on that is around $360 a year.

Pretty cool hey?

Not really. Everyone who has any income, should pay taxes. They do if they use the roads here in the US. No matter how much they make. Reason? They should because they benefit from such like everyone else.

[Vash The Stampede]

I favor more taxes on the rich. Everyone else... no.

[Endus]

Have you heard of a thing called a tax free threshold? I don't know if its a thing in the US but basically you have a set level of income that is completely tax free. In my country, it's currently set a $18,200. So in your example, the person working a 40 hour week and earns $20,800 a year would only pay the flat tax on $2600. 15% flat tax on that is around $360 a year.

Pretty cool hey?

By definition, that is not a flat tax. At best, it's a progressive tax system with two brackets.

If you don't mean a flat tax, then stop using the term, because it doesn't represent what you're talking about.

[Powerogue]

That's the idea at least. If that's what it all went towards I doubt many people would have a problem with it.

[Graeham]

I'd feel a lot better about taxes if people could choose where a portion of their contribution went and the government were held accountable for failing to spend it sensibly. I'm more interested in keeping things like the NHS funded and upgrading infrastructure such as roads, railways and the like than I am seeing taxes go towards war and foreign aid to countries who really do not need the money or who will inevitably abuse it.

[Sorcath]

You argument might have a leg to stand on if governments were better than businesses, but they are not. Governments are riven with inefficiencies, service duplication, ineptitude and in a lot of cases corruption. The simple reality is when you are spending other peoples money (the taxpayers) you simply don't give a fuck about expenditure or value for money.

It's no coincidence that the richer businesses become the wealthier the society becomes as a whole.

Except there's a glass wall government can do before people revolt, where as a business will liquidate it's assets to avoid legal complications and just restructure(which is exactly happens).

Wealthier like Wal-Mart? Which is at the foremost of breeding poverty lines and an exampled case in the Federal limitations of how much overtime a person must be paid? How about that FCC ruling? Where the majority of Americans stood against it(despite your held beliefs) and it still passed? Seems very Democratic system you have there. Exactly a torch bearer for how much more honest business is.

It's a complicated poison you must suffer from. It's silly to believe one side is more inherently "truer" or "honest". This is why government exists; So the median of both decisions can be arbitrated by people representing the desires of both sides. Unfortunately, neither side is willing to compromise on beliefs, and stagnate the pool with ineptitude and zealotry of their constituents.

Yours is the choice to decide which side you will sell your soul to, but honestly, it really doesn't matter.

[Cruor]

In the same (stupid) sense that "meat is murder" or "paying $5 for a coffee is highway robbery".

In other words, not at all, and everyone sane knows that.

Mind sharing with us what you do for a living?

While we need taxes for some services, plenty of tax IS theft, there is a lot of tax going to system we don't need or should be cut down, like welfare.

[Adam Jensen]

This. Theft at gun point by government. A lot of people are okay with this.

Okay.

How do you propose paying for the many things that make this nation operate?

- - - Updated - - -

We haven't had true Capitalism here since 1912.

- - - Updated - - -



State isn't federal government.

And states (looking at most of the deep south that's constantly in the red when borrowing money from the Feds) often don't have the vast resources the federal government has to actually handle these services. Not to mention that many services need to be standardized across state lines, which usually requires federal oversight.

"States rights" is a cop-out argument, just as "taxes are theft."

- - - Updated - - -

Less parasites which is a win win for this country.

So old people who put money into the system for 40 years are now parasites.

- - - Updated - - -

i pay my government national insurance. a part of that goes towards the british military, some of it goes towards our national health service.

when i walk into a hospital, my doctor will fix me up and i don't have to pay anything. it's quite beautiful, actually.

I love how the only people who bash European and Canadian healthcare systems are Americans who don't know the first thing about it.

[d00mGuArD]

Which means you want poor people to be forced into homelessness and struggle to feed themselves and their families.

You don't get to propose a flat tax so that upper-middle class and the wealthy get to live even more luxuriously than they already do, and not implicitly make that argument. That's how flat taxes work. Unless you're also proposing some massive overhaul of welfare support, like a basic income system, to offset the impact of this flat tax, you're just arguing that poor people should suffer even more than they already do, because you want the well-off to be even more well-off. Because you think that's "fair".

It isn't. It's abusive and inhumane.

That does not make it "fair" it makes it necessary.
It is not fair for someone that pays 30k in taxes to get the same out of his taxes than someone that pays 10k. They pay different amount of money to receive the same services, the definition of unfair.
However, it is *necessary* to have such unfair tax system because otherwise our world probably would suck more than now

But let's call it for what it really is: "extremely unfair, but necessary - until we find a better way"

[Revi]

Hell yes.

Of course, if the prime minister called me up and offered to let me and only me avoid all taxes I'd take the deal in a heartbeat. But since that's impossible and super detrimental to getting others to pay theirs, I'm happy to pay tax for all the stuff it pays for.

If all tax went away and I had to individually pay for every single service it provides, I'd be poor. The tax systems leaves me with a lot more money left at the end of the month.

[Holofernes]

By definition, that is not a flat tax. At best, it's a progressive tax system with two brackets.

If you don't mean a flat tax, then stop using the term, because it doesn't represent what you're talking about.

Actually it does. income tax: for the first 20k u pay 0 tax for the next 5 k you pay 10 % tax. the next 5 k 15 and so on. the maximum is 50 in my country.

And the income tax base amount is not what u earn. it is what u earn minus free rides (10 k per kid under 18, the cost for social insurance (health, pension) and a lot of other stuff (driving far too work, needing a 2nd flat for work) and so on.

That is an easy flat rate tax.

Even If u say its not flat, than it still is. Your "taxable Income" gets flat taxed 0 % the first 20 k, 10 % the next 5 k , 15 % the next 5 k and so on. Its flat as fuck. everybody understands it, no difficult lists or magic tables you pull the tax values from.

What you mean with your version of "flat" tax is actually a poll tax, its what mrs thatcher wanted to introduce. What happend next was

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5o98_hia8tA