![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
View Poll Results: What should paying one's "fair share" mean with regard to taxes? | |||
Flat Tax: Everyone pays the same proportional tax rate on earnings above a defined minimum |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
9 | 40.91% |
Head Tax - Everyone pays the same flat dollar amount regardless of income level |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
0 | 0% |
Progressive - Your taxes are driven by the "bracket" you are in |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
10 | 45.45% |
Fairness cannot be defined anywhere in life, so politicians using this phrase are clueless |
![]() ![]() ![]() |
3 | 13.64% |
Voters: 22. You may not vote on this poll |
![]() |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() I'd like to see a two-pronged approach. First I would like there to be a national sales tax of somewhere around 5%. If we had that, then we could lower everybody's income tax.
When it comes to income tax, I think it should be some type of progressive system. Maybe if you make under $40,000 a year, then you would pay no income tax. For anything a person makes over $40,000 up to $250,000, they would pay 10% in income taxes. For anything a person makes over $250,000 up to $1 million, they would pay 20% in income tax. For anything a person makes over $1 million, they would pay 30% in income taxes. Something like that seems reasonable. In addition, I would like to see most of the loopholes and write-offs eliminated. It is ridiculous for some of these people making millions to pay no taxes. We need to get rid of the loopholes and tax shelters that allow people who make millions to pay no taxes. I don't know if my system would work (because I have no idea how much money it would bring in), but assuming it would work, I think it is reasonable. If you make more money, you would pay a little more in taxes but nobody would be getting taxed to death. In addition to wanting them to change the tax system, I obviously think the government needs to cut way back on their spending. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I agree that a progressive system in federal taxes is good, especially when you have regressive state and local taxes that hit the poor the hardest. You can't get Congress to even consider eliminating a tax break, loophole or subsidy. See what just happened with oil company subsidies. I remember Bush laughing when they picked the expiration date for his unfunded tax cuts. We knew it was coming, and so did the GOP. And they calculated right: they wouldn't be the ones in office when they expired.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
If you think that is too much I guess there could be an exemption on the sales tax for people who make under a certain amount. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
We'd have to exempt certain poverty-level incomes. The middle class, heck, those making less than $300,000 or so a year, hasn't had an effective "raise" in their real income in four decades. Flatline. Stagnant. They can't afford any additional taxes. Can we just start eliminating loopholes for those that can best afford it first? The very wealthy?
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
For a person that makes $200,000 a year, I had suggested they would be in the 10% tax bracket, which would be on any income above $40,000. So that person would be taxed 10% of $160,000. So they would pay $16,000 in income taxes. If they spent an additional $70,000 a year on items that were part of the national sales tax, then they would have spent an additional $3,500 on the sales tax. That means the person's total federal taxes (income + sales tax) would be $19,500 for the year. I think that is reasonable for a person who clears $200,000 a year after expenses. I agree with you that we should eliminate most of the loopholes that some of the very wealthy use. |
#6
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
I've seen estimates that a flat tax would have to be at a rate of 23-25% to replace our current income. Rick Perry wanted 20%, and his budget busted immediately as there wasn't enough income to pay for what we need. We can't figure income first or separately from our expenditures. We have certain fixed expenses as a country. We have to pay those. We use taxes to pay our group expenses. Bush gave massive tax cuts (cut our income markedly) without cutting spending, then added on unfunded wars on top of that. That's why we have a massive deficit. Obama worsened it by not allowing Bush tax cuts to expire. They must. Bush gave away our income, and we need it back. Especially as he added those unfunded wars on top of what he suddenly stopped paying for.
__________________
"Have the clean racing people run any ads explaining that giving a horse a Starbucks and a chocolate poppyseed muffin for breakfast would likely result in a ten year suspension for the trainer?" - Dr. Andrew Roberts |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
How much do you think someone should pay in federal income tax if they make over $1 million a year? I think 30% is reasonable. |
![]() |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|