Forums | MacLife

mo' ron wrote:

radarman wrote:

Jokotai wrote:

Only here could such a ridiculous proposal merit 45 responses.

Make that 46.

I can already see the animal hoarders smiling in anticipation.

I agree that it's a fairly ridiculous proposal, but look at some of the actual tax breaks offered to businesses and rich people, and it starts to sound a bit fair. We see an endless series of stupid, wasteful tax dodges that help the very few, at the expense of everyone else. This, at least, would help the fairly large number of Americans that own pets.

Considering our mounting debt and deficit, the proper response is to try and raise more revenue, not cut it.

Yes, by eliminating all of these tax dodges - including the ones that help the rich and powerful. We need a tax code that fits on a single size A sheet - not an entire freaking library - and can be understood by even the most stupid citizen.

I really don't see why someone who was irresponsible and got knocked up in high school twice, should get tax deductions, free or reduced college, free babysitting, free health care ect... Where as I being responsible rescued a few dogs shouldn't be entitled to a tax break.
It's not like they are giving me money to have an animal ... It's a tax break ... they are giving me MY money back.

Last edited by mrreet2001 (2009-10-14 10:09 am)

mo' ron wrote:

It would be impossible to make a good tax code fit on a single siza A sheet of paper.

You could make a tax code that applies to 80% of people that fits on a single sheet of paper, with the remaning 20% needed more, but you can't ever have a tax code for everyone that's a single sheet.

Really?

I would have to imagine a flat tax with no deductions would fit on a business card.

Last edited by mrreet2001 (2009-10-14 10:08 am)

Also there's a human being involved that is underage and, by implication, innocent of their situation.  "Culture of Life" and all that... unless it's just for blastocysts and fetuses.

Since the government can take my money and give it to them because they apparently deserve it more. Maybe the government should take the children and give them to someone who is deserves them more.

Because I post here for 4 years that automatically means I agree with 90% of the thoughts here?
Just because I own a mac doesn't make me a liberal.

I come here to help people with their computer problems ... I just happen to wonder into minithink occasionally.

Last edited by mrreet2001 (2009-10-14 12:54 pm)

mrreet2001 wrote:

Because I post here for 4 years that automatically means I agree with 90% of the thoughts here?
Just because I own a mac doesn't make me a liberal.

I come here to help people with their computer problems ... I just happen to wonder into minithink occasionally.

You don't have to be a liberal to see that the "flat tax" is a bad idea.

Practically no one likes the flat tax, it's why the "fair tax" was created. I don't even think big-L libertarians push a literal "flat tax" anymore.

And the time you spent here merely has to do with the fact that we've had no less than a dozen discussions detailing the nuances of flat/fair/progressive/regressive tax systems, and I don't think anyone, not even Res, would argue for a flat tax.

The only people who would think a flat tax is a good idea are 15 year olds who haven't actually thought about it, and other ignorant peoples (but at least 15 year olds have an excuse).

radarman wrote:

mo' ron wrote:

mrreet2001 wrote:

Because I post here for 4 years that automatically means I agree with 90% of the thoughts here?
Just because I own a mac doesn't make me a liberal.
I come here to help people with their computer problems ... I just happen to wonder into minithink occasionally.

You don't have to be a liberal to see that the "flat tax" is a bad idea.

Practically no one likes the flat tax, it's why the "fair tax" was created. I don't even think big-L libertarians push a literal "flat tax" anymore.

And the time you spent here merely has to do with the fact that we've had no less than a dozen discussions detailing the nuances of flat/fair/progressive/regressive tax systems, and I don't think anyone, not even Res, would argue for a flat tax.

The only people who would think a flat tax is a good idea are 15 year olds who haven't actually thought about it, and other ignorant peoples (but at least 15 year olds have an excuse).

In fairness, the fair tax is essentially just a graduated flat tax. However, the fairness comes from recognizing that different income levels can afford different tax levels.

I'm not really a fan of that model either. I would rather see a capped, proportional tax; where everyone files and pays - even if it's only a few dollars a year, say for those below the poverty line. You could add in the graduations, but like tithing, I think paying income taxes - even if minimal - makes one a stake holder.

But a fair tax plan can't fit on a business card. And if we tried to implement the fair tax in real life, it would soon grow to be as complex as the current system, because it's still a complicated affair. Which is mostly unavoidable in a country as large as ours, with a government as large as ours.

And our current system, in a general sense, is a "graduated (aka progressive) flat tax."

Pariah wrote:

The pariah Tax plan:
0 to 50,00-0%
50,001 to 150,000-15%
150,001 to 500,000-30%
500,001 to 1,000,000-50%
1,000,001+ 90%

That's a really really bad tax plan.

Farmerkev wrote:

Pariah wrote:

The pariah Tax plan:
0 to 50,00-0%
50,001 to 150,000-15%
150,001 to 500,000-30%
500,001 to 1,000,000-50%
1,000,001+ 90%

That's a really really bad tax plan.

If those were marginal, why not ?


Also Mr Pariah forgot to tax inheritance at 100%.

Farmerkev wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

He doesn't want anybody bringing home more than 100k it seems. I certainly have some issues with that kind of thinking.

It's actually worse than that.
Look at the take home for a guy making 500 grand compared to the guy making a million.
Woe be to the poor sobs that earn 1 buck over the bracket lines.

Marginal rates my friend.

Pariah wrote:

Farmerkev wrote:

Chickenhawk wrote:

He doesn't want anybody bringing home more than 100k it seems. I certainly have some issues with that kind of thinking.

It's actually worse than that.
Look at the take home for a guy making 500 grand compared to the guy making a million.
Woe be to the poor sobs that earn 1 buck over the bracket lines.

Marginal rates my friend.

It's only valid if you can fit that explanation on the back of business card.

I like my plan better. Everyone else pays out the wazoo. I get all my money back.