John Smith wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 11:42 AM, gfn wrote:
On May 24, 2:34 pm, RD wrote:
wrote

om:









On May 24, 1:23 pm, RD
wrote:
wrote in
news:75946acf-fb50-4a71-9677-e0b1afec14b0
@w19g2000yql.googlegroups.com:
On May 24, 11:24 am, John wrote:
On 5/24/2011 8:20 AM, gfn wrote:
...
Where are some credible souces to back up any of that innuendo
you
keep
attempting to push?
Truth is, sure looks like the wealthiest 1% are not paying 42%
of all
of
governments costs, and sure looks like the top 19% are not
paying half of governments costs, until that happens they are
NOT paying their
fair
share ... a flat tax can fix that ...
Regards,
JS
I already said the tax data is at irs.gov
Now, as for a flat tax I agree with you 100%. The one I advocate
is the FairTax.
That is not a flat tax, it is a sales tax.
It's a sales tax but it is flat. It's a flat 23%.
You had better spend some time learning what a flat tax is.

I'm perfectly familiar with a flat tax. The FairTax is a replacement
for the income tax. It uses a flat 23% as the revenue generator.
Call it what you will, the FairTax is a winner.

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

I think the flat tax is great.

I assume you mean Fair Tax, since that is the proposal to get all taxes
from sales or use. The term in common use today for flat tax is on
income.

And, once implemented, all other taxes are dropped. These other taxes
being drivers licenses, contracting licences, cell phone fees/charges
(except for ACTUAL service charges) , property taxes, use taxes,
excise taxes, fuel taxes, all other sales taxes, etc., etc.

Or, simply, ONE TAX PERIOD!

Yep, and that means that the wealthy and the poor pay the same taxes
rather than the wealthy paying more. Do you know what problem you are
trying to fix? According to your statements, it is to get the wealthy to
pay more. There is no way to do that with a sales or use tax.


Even the morons will then realize what they actually pay in taxes
(which is about 40% - 50% of their incomes, or more.)

That part has some truth in it.


--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

John Smith wrote in news:irh10k$l7$15@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 12:21 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 11:40 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 10:47 AM, gfn wrote:
...
Sure it is. It gives a clear, concise and true picture of who
pays
the federal income tax burden in this country. If you want to
talk
about all taxes and all revenue that goes to the government then
your right. I know of no place that compiles that data.
...
OK. Then, please cut and paste the relevant parts here, I need
them
pointed out to me.
If you can't understand the date presented at that site, you have no
hope of understanding any data presented to you. Which explains
some
of your ideas.....
If it is so simple, as you pretend, it would be no problem ... you
are
attempting a circular argument ...

Just post something which proves your point ... if you can, from the
site you are claiming explains it openly ... DUH!
I didn't make that claim, however, here is the data:

2008

Top 1% AGI$380,354 Percentage 38.02
Top 5% AGI$159,619 Percentage 58.72
Top 10% AGI$113,799 Percentage 69.94
Top 25% AGI$ 67,280 Percentage 86.34
Top 50% AGI$ 33,048 Percentage 97.30
Bottom 50% AGI$ 33,048 Percentage 2.70

2007

Top 1% AGI$410,096 Percentage 40.42
Top 5% AGI$160,041 Percentage 60.63
Top 10% AGI$113,018 Percentage 71.22
Top 25% AGI$ 66,532 Percentage 86.59
Top 50% AGI$ 32,879 Percentage 97.11
Bottom 50% AGI$ 32,879 Percentage 2.89

Here is the site:

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

The Virginian-Pilot
© May 15, 2011
By Don Tabor

Who really pays the baker's taxes? The baker may write the check, but
he does not bear the cost, and in that paradox lies the cause of much
of the bitter partisanship and polarization that poisons our political
process. But to understand that problem, we must consider how taxes
are applied to the production of goods and services.

So, how does the loaf of bread the baker sells come to market?

A farmer grew and harvested wheat for sale to the miller to be made
into flour for the baker. The farmer paid income taxes based on his
profit from the sale and property tax on his farm and equipment. Those
taxes were, from his point of view, just another cost of doing
business in the course of earning his living, no different from fuel
for his tractor or wages and taxes for employees.

Since every other farmer had roughly the same expenses and taxes, the
price they charge the miller must cover their expenses and taxes, plus
their after-tax disposable income and savings. Otherwise, there would
be no point in growing wheat. All of these costs and taxes were passed
on to the miller, embedded in the price of wheat.

Likewise, when the miller sold the flour ground from the wheat to the
baker, his taxes, plus the income and Social Security taxes he
withheld from his employees, plus the farmer's taxes, were all passed
on to the baker.

The baker then sold his bread made from the flour, carrying with it
his own taxes plus those of his employees, plus all those previous
taxes from the farmer, miller and their employees, hidden in the price
of that loaf of bread. The buyer and his family ate the bread, and,
having done so, could not sell it to anyone else and pass the taxes
along, as the baker and everyone else before had done.

So, it is the consumer who paid the baker's taxes, along with the
farmer's taxes, the miller's taxes and the taxes they withheld from
all of their employees. From bread to automobiles to brain surgery,
the price of everything we buy carries in it the hidden taxes of
everyone who contributed to the production of that product or service
to the tune of, on average, 23 cents of every dollar we spend for
federal taxes alone.

Our complex, pervasive and expensive tax code is, in reality, a scheme
to draft businesses and individuals as unpaid and unknowing tax
collectors to gather a hidden sales tax and to keep voters from
realizing who really bears the burden of those high taxes.

There is no way around this central reality that all income and
business taxes are a deception and that all taxes are eventually paid
by the consumer, hidden in the price of goods and services. It doesn't
matter what tax rate is applied to which tax bracket, or what
deductions you receive. These devices change only the degree to which
you are a tax collector, but the burden taxes place on your life
depends solely on what you spend.

Paying this hidden consumption tax is unavoidable, but the illusion of
income-based taxing does a great deal of harm. First, it distorts our
economic decisions. Goods and services that are provided by highly
taxed individuals and companies, like health care, are artificially
more expensive than necessary, while raw materials and natural
resources are underpriced, leading to overconsumption and waste.

But even worse, these hidden taxes distort the political process,
encouraging government overspending by politicians who exploit the
mistaken belief of many voters that government spending can be paid
for solely by taxing corporations or the "rich." All of the
exploitation of envy and demagoguery - which brings so much ill will
to our politics and drives wedges between Americans who would be
better served by mutual respect and compassion - is ultimately the
meaningless exploitation of a lie.

Our income tax system, with its escalating marginal rates, appears
progressive, but the reality is extremely regressive. Currently, the
lower income 45 percent of wage earners may pay no income tax
directly, but in reality, with their FICA taxes added to the hidden
embedded tax, their true federal tax burden is almost 30 percent of
their meager income.

Voters might well choose differently were they aware that government
spending is ultimately paid for by everyone, through an invisible
sales tax disguised as a high cost of living.

Guest columnist Don Tabor of Chesapeake is a grandfather, Libertarian
activist and proprietor of TidewaterLiberty.com. He is a dentist in
Norfolk and Hampton.

A flat tax, and NO OTHER TAXES! PERIOD!

Regards,
JS




Then LEARN what the term "flat tax" means in currect usage. It is an
income tax.

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

"Scout" wrote in
:



"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 5/24/2011 12:21 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 11:40 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 10:47 AM, gfn wrote:
...
Sure it is. It gives a clear, concise and true picture of who
pays the federal income tax burden in this country. If you want
to talk about all taxes and all revenue that goes to the
government then your right. I know of no place that compiles
that data. ...
OK. Then, please cut and paste the relevant parts here, I need
them pointed out to me.
If you can't understand the date presented at that site, you have
no hope of understanding any data presented to you. Which
explains some of your ideas.....
If it is so simple, as you pretend, it would be no problem ... you
are attempting a circular argument ...

Just post something which proves your point ... if you can, from
the site you are claiming explains it openly ... DUH!
I didn't make that claim, however, here is the data:

2008

Top 1% AGI$380,354 Percentage 38.02
Top 5% AGI$159,619 Percentage 58.72
Top 10% AGI$113,799 Percentage 69.94
Top 25% AGI$ 67,280 Percentage 86.34
Top 50% AGI$ 33,048 Percentage 97.30
Bottom 50% AGI$ 33,048 Percentage 2.70

2007

Top 1% AGI$410,096 Percentage 40.42
Top 5% AGI$160,041 Percentage 60.63
Top 10% AGI$113,018 Percentage 71.22
Top 25% AGI$ 66,532 Percentage 86.59
Top 50% AGI$ 32,879 Percentage 97.11
Bottom 50% AGI$ 32,879 Percentage 2.89

Here is the site:

http://ntu.org/tax-basics/who-pays-income-taxes.html

The Virginian-Pilot
© May 15, 2011
By Don Tabor

Who really pays the baker's taxes? The baker may write the check,
but he does not bear the cost, and in that paradox lies the cause of
much of the bitter partisanship and polarization that poisons our
political process. But to understand that problem, we must consider
how taxes are applied to the production of goods and services.

So, how does the loaf of bread the baker sells come to market?

A farmer grew and harvested wheat for sale to the miller to be made
into flour for the baker. The farmer paid income taxes based on his
profit from the sale and property tax on his farm and equipment.
Those taxes were, from his point of view, just another cost of doing
business in the course of earning his living, no different from fuel
for his tractor or wages and taxes for employees.

Since every other farmer had roughly the same expenses and taxes,
the price they charge the miller must cover their expenses and
taxes, plus their after-tax disposable income and savings.
Otherwise, there would be no point in growing wheat. All of these
costs and taxes were passed on to the miller, embedded in the price
of wheat.

Likewise, when the miller sold the flour ground from the wheat to
the baker, his taxes, plus the income and Social Security taxes he
withheld from his employees, plus the farmer's taxes, were all
passed on to the baker.

The baker then sold his bread made from the flour, carrying with it
his own taxes plus those of his employees, plus all those previous
taxes from the farmer, miller and their employees, hidden in the
price of that loaf of bread. The buyer and his family ate the bread,
and, having done so, could not sell it to anyone else and pass the
taxes along, as the baker and everyone else before had done.

So, it is the consumer who paid the baker's taxes, along with the
farmer's taxes, the miller's taxes and the taxes they withheld from
all of their employees. From bread to automobiles to brain surgery,
the price of everything we buy carries in it the hidden taxes of
everyone who contributed to the production of that product or
service to the tune of, on average, 23 cents of every dollar we
spend for federal taxes alone.

Our complex, pervasive and expensive tax code is, in reality, a
scheme to draft businesses and individuals as unpaid and unknowing
tax collectors to gather a hidden sales tax and to keep voters from
realizing who really bears the burden of those high taxes.

There is no way around this central reality that all income and
business taxes are a deception and that all taxes are eventually
paid by the consumer, hidden in the price of goods and services. It
doesn't matter what tax rate is applied to which tax bracket, or
what deductions you receive. These devices change only the degree to
which you are a tax collector, but the burden taxes place on your
life depends solely on what you spend.

Paying this hidden consumption tax is unavoidable, but the illusion
of income-based taxing does a great deal of harm. First, it distorts
our economic decisions. Goods and services that are provided by
highly taxed individuals and companies, like health care, are
artificially more expensive than necessary, while raw materials and
natural resources are underpriced, leading to overconsumption and
waste.

But even worse, these hidden taxes distort the political process,
encouraging government overspending by politicians who exploit the
mistaken belief of many voters that government spending can be paid
for solely by taxing corporations or the "rich." All of the
exploitation of envy and demagoguery - which brings so much ill will
to our politics and drives wedges between Americans who would be
better served by mutual respect and compassion - is ultimately the
meaningless exploitation of a lie.

Our income tax system, with its escalating marginal rates, appears
progressive, but the reality is extremely regressive. Currently, the
lower income 45 percent of wage earners may pay no income tax
directly, but in reality, with their FICA taxes added to the hidden
embedded tax, their true federal tax burden is almost 30 percent of
their meager income.

Voters might well choose differently were they aware that government
spending is ultimately paid for by everyone, through an invisible
sales tax disguised as a high cost of living.

Guest columnist Don Tabor of Chesapeake is a grandfather,
Libertarian activist and proprietor of TidewaterLiberty.com. He is a
dentist in Norfolk and Hampton.

A flat tax, and NO OTHER TAXES! PERIOD!

Agreed. A flat tax. Mr A buys a product he pays the same tax as Mr. B.

Mr. A pays the same rate of taxes on his income that Mr. B does.

No exceptions, no exclusions, except those which apply to ALL.

If you're going to exempt Mr. A housing, food, medical, then Mr B gets
the exact same exemptions.

Otherwise, it's not a flat tax.




And it won't fix the problem he is whining about....which is the rich not
paying a hundred times what the poor do.

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

" wrote in
:

On May 24, 10:45*am, gfn wrote:
On May 24, 12:07*pm, John Smith wrote:









On 5/24/2011 9:02 AM, gfn wrote:

On May 24, 11:24 am, John *wrote:
On 5/24/2011 8:20 AM, gfn wrote:

* *...

Where are some credible souces to back up any of that innuendo
you k
eep
attempting to push?

Truth is, sure looks like the wealthiest 1% are not paying 42%
of al
l of
governments costs, and sure looks like the top 19% are not
paying ha
lf
of governments costs, until that happens they are NOT paying
their f
air
share ... a flat tax can fix that ...

Regards,
JS
I already said the tax data is at irs.gov

Now, as for a flat tax I agree with you 100%. *The one I advocate
i
s
the FairTax.

Let me put this more bluntly. *If I buy and item and pay 7% sales
tax
,
the top one percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax,
that way they will be contributing their fair share to run
government ...

Impossible to implement.


It *might* be possible to implement - in a totalitarian state. The
government would have to always know what your worth (in terms of
wealth) is at all times, and exactly what you purchase throughout the
year, and when.

Yikes.

I suspect that such a system would encourage a black market or two.

And a MASSIVE tracking system on the income status of over 300 million
people. Think BIG BROTHER in real time.



--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

John Smith wrote in news:irh49m$id0$3@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 1:18 PM, wrote:
...
You chose the easy point of my post to reply to.

The point you ignored is that your suggested system - "Let me put this
more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales tax, the top one
percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax, that way they
will be contributing their fair share to run government ..." - is
either impossible to implement, or requires a dictatorship.
...

Yes, that is a fair system, you simply want to take it literally and
say
it doesn't work. I am not stuck on any particular system to implement
it with. Any system which can demonstrate that it can successfully
accomplish the goal, and costing the least, would be great.

THINK for a change, John. How would a system like that have to work?
How would a merchant know whether to charge 7% sales tax or 42% sales tax
or some amount in between?

Any system only needs to manage that 1% of those with control of 42.7%
of the financial money pay 42.7% of the sales taxes. And that 20% at
the top pay 50.3% of the taxes.

And just how do you think it knows which one you are? Or who is in those
brackets? You are looking at Big Brother from 1984 big time.

I simply gave a simplified version of what is to be accomplished.

No, you showed that you really don't understand what is involved in that
scheme.
Those
with any common sense would have realized it was over simplified ...

REally, really oversimplified....so much so that you don't seem to have
any grasp of the basics.

I don't give a rats arse how you get the water from the well, just that
the water comes from the well ...

If you are whining about the costs and fairness of things, you really
should care. In this case you are pushing the costs would completely
overwhelm the result.


--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

John Smith wrote in :

On 5/24/2011 1:38 PM, wrote:

As long as it is a fair system, where criminals can "shelter" money in
foreign countries and pay a tax which is in scale to what all others pay
(exempting the poor, starving, without medical, etc.) I am for it ...
anything else is just the criminals setting up another system to buy
politicians, get special favors, and steal others money to pay the bills
while they get the pay check ...

That is pure bull**** emotion and not much thought as to implementation.

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

On May 25, 3:18*pm, RD Sandman wrote:
gfn wrote :









On May 24, 3:00 pm, RD Sandman wrote:
gfn wrote
innews:fafaebf4-7788-4906-a699-839c2c5dac6b@
s2g2000yql.googlegroups.com:

On May 24, 2:34 pm, RD Sandman
wrote:
gfn wrote
innews:5111f00d-80ed-4513-9bae-c9a63b5cdb40@
x3g2000yqj.googlegroups.com:

On May 24, 1:23 pm, RD Sandman
wrote:
gfn wrote in
news:75946acf-fb50-4a71-9677-e0b1afec14b0
@w19g2000yql.googlegroups.com:

On May 24, 11:24 am, John Smith wrote:
On 5/24/2011 8:20 AM, gfn wrote:

...

Where are some credible souces to back up any of that
innuendo you
keep
attempting to push?

Truth is, sure looks like the wealthiest 1% are not paying
42% of all
of
governments costs, and sure looks like the top 19% are not
paying half of governments costs, until that happens they
are NOT paying their
fair
share ... a flat tax can fix that ...

Regards,
JS

I already said the tax data is at irs.gov

Now, as for a flat tax I agree with you 100%. The one I
advocate is the FairTax.

That is not a flat tax, it is a sales tax.

It's a sales tax but it is flat. It's a flat 23%.

You had better spend some time learning what a flat tax is.

I'm perfectly familiar with a flat tax.

Not sure about that since it has nothing to do with sales.

Sure I do. *The "flat tax" has the government deriving its revenue
from the income tax.

Yep....at a flat rate for everybody.


As does the FairTax. Best part is the consumer pays it only when they
buy something. They decide when to pay it, not when the government
decides you owe it on payday.

The FairTax is related because it is a flat sales

tax that generates revenue from sales. *It replaces the income tax as
the method of funding government. *If you fully understand the FairTax
you will see exactly where I am coming from.

Then to keep it from becoming regressive you must drop that sales tax
from certain items, like food, housing, public transportation, gasoline,
etc.. or you end up with the poor paying a much larger percentage of
their income on those taxes than the wealthy.


Nope, There are two reasons why it's not regressive. First, 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. Second, per my example an item that costs $100 today
still costs $100 under the FairTax. If that's regressive then sign me
up.

The poor are always going to pay a larger percentage of their income
on everything. No tax system is going to change that. Isn't that
what the bulk of this thread is about?

The FairTax is a replacement

for the income tax.

Yes....and a flat tax is another method of figuring income tax.

Yeah....and they both accomplish the same thing. *The FairTax is
better because a flat tax still involves taxing income which then
leads to exemptions, deductions, and keeps the 16th amendment in place
as well as the IRS, and I can go on and on about the pitfalls of our
current tax system.

A flat tax on income replaces the current tax system. *If properly
administered it only has ONE deduction and that is poverty level wages
for a family of four. *Everyone gets that ONE deduction, or exemption if
you prefer, and no other. *You can do your tax on a postcard.


Under the FairTax you don't have to worry about deductions or
exemptions. You don't even have to do your taxes on a postcard
because there is nothing to do. April 15 would be just another
beautiful spring day.

Here's the problem with the flat tax, it retains the invasive income
tax administration apparatus and can easily revert to a graduated,
convoluted mess, as it has many times over many years. In addition, a
large part of the burden of the flat tax -- the business tax -- will
remain hidden from people in the retail price of goods and services.
Under a flat tax, individuals would still file an income tax return
each year. Postcard or not, it's still a return. While this is a
simple postcard, the record keeping requirement is still there. Under
the FairTax, individuals never file a tax return again, ever! Under
the flat tax, the payroll tax would be retained and income tax
withholding would still be with us. Under the FairTax, the payroll
tax, which is a larger and more regressive tax burden for most
Americans than is the income tax, is repealed. Under the FairTax, what
you earn is what you keep. No more withholding taxes; no more income
tax.









It uses a flat 23% as the revenue generator.

Call it what you will, the FairTax is a winner.

You may think so. I don't. I think it needs too many adjustments so
that it does not become regressive.

I don't think so, I know so. *Tell me how this is regressive?

Current tax system:

Taxpayer earns $1000 a year.
IRS takes 25%: $250.
Taxpayer has $750 left to spend.
Taxpayer buys a new toaster for a FINAL total of $130.
Taxpayer has $620 left.

Fairtax system:

Taxpayer earns $1000 a year.
IRS takes 0%: $0
Taxpayer has $1000 left to spend
Taxpayer buys a new toaster for a FINAL total of $130.
Taxpayer has $870 left.

I'll go one better under the fairtax system.

Taxpayer earns $1000 a year.
IRS takes 0%: $0
Taxpayer has $1000 left to spend
Taxpayer buys a USED toaster for a total of $100.
Taxpayer pays NO fairtax sales tax.
Taxpayer has $900 left.

So, again, how is that regressive.

Same taxpayer......buys $100 worth of groceries.....pays $123 for them.

Stop right there. That's incorrect. Under the FairTax the $100 of
groceries will still cost $100. There's no need to even go any
further with your example.

Rich guy, he eats the same, so he buys a $100 worth of groceries...pays *
$123 for them. *Which one spent the bigger percentage of their income on
a necessity? *OK, let's fix it....we will not pay that tax on
groceries....oooops, you just generated an exception. *

Three suggestions for you to find out why as well as any other
questions you might have:

1) go visit fairtax.org and read it from front to back. *Pay
particular attention to the FAQ.
2) Buy and read "The FairTax Book" by Linder and Boortz.
3) Then buy and read "FairTax:The Truth: Answering the Critics"

It will all become crystal clear.

I am familiar with sales tax schemes, they have been around for years. *
With exemptions, they become just as convoluted as the current system.
Excise luxury taxes were another attempt to soak the rich as poor poeple
would never buy luxury taxed items. *How did that work out?


You may be familiar with sales tax schemes, but it's clear you aren't
familiar with the FairTax. Instead of speculating as you have done
above why not go visit the site and base your criticisms on the plan
itself? You will find that many of the things you raised above are
answered there.

Look, I'm with you that a flat tax would be better than the current
system. Problem is that it, as opposed to something like the FairTax,
leaves itself open to far more manipulation than the FairTax. The tax
code itself is evidence of just that.

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

John Smith wrote in :

On 5/24/2011 1:44 PM, Dave LaRue wrote:
...
Well, it is impossible for you to be smart, you retard.
You can't do otherwise, you retard.


You are like dog **** on the shoe ...

And, nothing but personal attacks, opinions, etc.

... sad, so very, very sad ...

Perhaps it you paid some attention to what it would take to implement such
a system and what it would cost in freedom, etc.. then perhaps folks
wouldn't be so hard on you. Instead you simply seem to wish to deal on
emotion.


--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

"Scout" wrote in
:



"John Smith" wrote in message
...
On 5/24/2011 11:36 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in news:irgsdu$b0g$2@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 10:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 9:02 AM, gfn wrote:
On May 24, 11:24 am, John wrote:
On 5/24/2011 8:20 AM, gfn wrote:

...

Where are some credible souces to back up any of that innuendo
you keep attempting to push?

Truth is, sure looks like the wealthiest 1% are not paying 42%
of all of governments costs, and sure looks like the top 19%
are not paying half of governments costs, until that happens
they are NOT paying their fair share ... a flat tax can fix
that ...

Regards,
JS
I already said the tax data is at irs.gov

Now, as for a flat tax I agree with you 100%. The one I
advocate is the FairTax.
Let me put this more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7% sales
tax,
the top one percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales tax,
that
way they will be contributing their fair share to run government
...

http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html
And how do you know that at the time of purchase?
You set up a system which handles it ... where they pay their fair
share
of the cost of government.
IOW, when buying a pack of gum at a Stop-N-Rob, you have to go
through a check on your income so they know how much tax to charge?

C'mon, even you can't be that stupid.



The flat tax, the flat tax, I thought you would be able to catch on
... I was wrong.

Oh, flat tax, then they should pay 7% tax just like EVERYONE
ELSE....not the 42.7% you asserted they should be paying.





I'm not sure that John is knowledgable enough to contune this thread. He
seems to be stuck on the emotion of the discussion rather than on the
practicality or complexity of installing what he wants.

--
Sleep well tonight....RD (The Sandman)

If you woke up this morning....
Don't complain.

On 5/25/2011 12:25 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 12:05 PM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in news:irgufi$l7$7@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 11:36 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in news:irgsdu$b0g$2@dont-
email.me:

On 5/24/2011 10:24 AM, RD Sandman wrote:
John wrote in
:

On 5/24/2011 9:02 AM, gfn wrote:
On May 24, 11:24 am, John
wrote:
On 5/24/2011 8:20 AM, gfn wrote:

...

Where are some credible souces to back up any of that innuendo
you
keep attempting to push?

Truth is, sure looks like the wealthiest 1% are not paying 42%
of all of governments costs, and sure looks like the top 19%
are not paying half of governments costs, until that happens
they are NOT paying their fair share ... a flat tax can fix
that ...

Regards,
JS
I already said the tax data is at irs.gov

Now, as for a flat tax I agree with you 100%. The one I
advocate
is
the FairTax.
Let me put this more bluntly. If I buy and item and pay 7%
sales
tax,
the top one percent should buy an item and pay a 42.7% sales
tax,
that
way they will be contributing their fair share to run government
...
http://sociology.ucsc.edu/whorulesam...er/wealth.html
And how do you know that at the time of purchase?
You set up a system which handles it ... where they pay their fair
share
of the cost of government.
IOW, when buying a pack of gum at a Stop-N-Rob, you have to go
through
a
check on your income so they know how much tax to charge?

C'mon, even you can't be that stupid.


The flat tax, the flat tax, I thought you would be able to catch on
... I was wrong.
A flat tax is on income. It replaces the current method of
calculating income tax by applying the same tax rate to all income
not just wages and salaries. I gave an example of it here in this
thread. Did you take the time to read it? It is really quite simply
and quite short so you should have no problem understanding it.

What you proposed above is a sales tax and it sure as hell isn't
flat. A flat sales tax would be the same percentage on whatever was
purchased and no matter who purchased it.

You need to learn a bit more before you venture out into the real
world.

Everyone paying their fair share, this is how the discussion began,
or, basically, everyone being equally taxed.

Of course, even with a flat tax certain safeguards would have to be in
place from preventing criminals from crimes which would allow them to
ignore the taxes.

See Al Capone.

For example, a case where they made their dollars
here and bought only foreign goods in mexico or canada ... it is a
given, as soon as any fix, situation, solution, etc. is enacted, the
criminals will come crawling out from under their rocks attempting to
avoid it ... some of these safeguards to prevent this will have to be
worked out as we catch the criminals ...

Unfortunately, every discussion must begin on the premise that
everyone is capable of realizing "common sense."

At the bottom of the fair tax or fair tax is the real intent and sole
purpose that all contribute equally and in direct relationship to how
much they profit from business here.

Just how is your fair tax different from your scenarios above. After
all, you said folks would by only foreign goods from outside the US which
avoids your fair tax.


I said everyone needs taxed at an equal rate of every dollar earned. I
said crooks will always attempt to break any laws in existence.

Regards,
JS