Our tax system explained in beer

No I'm not saying tax fraud is OK. Where does it say that in the cartoon?

The government wastes most of the money it collects from the populace. Often on military ventures and corporate welfare most of us don't support. I'm glad the poor don't pay an income tax. If it were up to me, there'd be no income tax, but I'd be willing to compromise by allowing a flat tax, as in everyone gets taxed 1-2% of their income. That way, those who make less pay less in taxes than those who make more.

 

6

LOL hell man you must have the memory retention of a goldfish, we have been through this before many time.

Ho Hum OK again…

This is the reason for democracy, I mean one of the ideas behind the American war of independence was ‘no taxation without representations’ (again your lack of history shows itself, I do wish you would read more).

The thing is one of the reasons people fought for the vote was so that they could have some say over what elected governments spent the tax money on.

But as I warned you before the problem is that in a capitalist system you have to be very careful about the undue influence wealth can buy within the system. And the other thing is that people need to be educated in how to question propaganda rather than (as I’m afraid you do too often) just accepting things that fit in with your bias and prejudices.

Democracy cannot succeed unless those who express their choice are prepared to choose wisely. The real safeguard of democracy, therefore, is education - FDR


Give wealth too much influence and it will corrupt the system to work for its own interest as has happened in places like the US and UK where neoliberal ‘free market’ policies, like tax cuts and deregulation that serve its interests over those of the majority have led to things like corporate welfare.


The thing is that wealth spends a lot of money pumping out silly ‘free market’ ideas that people like you seem to fall for hook, line and sinker, without question or seemingly even a modicum of thought.


One of those silly ideas that wealth pushes is the flat tax

 

6

A flat tax is a huge (and I mean really massive) tax cut for the few which of course would really boost their power and influence.

Someone who is tax exempted now would be paying 1%

Someone that now pays the top rate tax (on $600,000 or over) at 37% would only have to pay 1% (so getting a tax cut of 36%)

(The rate rates I believe are 10%, 12%, 22%, 24%, 32%, 35% or 37%)

But let’s put it simply and say that there was a simple 10% tax and it was returned.

So someone earning 1000 gets back 100 dollars not much

10,000 = 1000 still not much

An average wage in US is around 40,000 so would mean a return of 4000 dollars

100,000 = 10,000 now that’s better
[“According to the census bureau, 21.8% of FAMILIES made over $100,000 a year” even fewer individuals]

1,000,000 = 100,000 now you’re getting serious money

[People and households earning $1 million or more annually made up just 0.1 percent, or just over 235,000, of the 140 million tax returns filed in 2009]


10,000,000 = 1,000,000 that will buy a lot of influence

[just 8,274 returns were filed by people making $10 million or more – 0.003% of 300 million is 9000]

100,000,000 = 10,000,000 and that a whole lot more.

1 Billion = 100,000,000

There are only about 425 billionaires in the US – 0.00015% of 300 million is 450

To me that’s bad enough but as pointed out actually there is progressive taxation in the US meaning the wealthy pay more and so would get vastly more back if taxes were reduced.

 

Wealth buys power and influence, giving the wealthy more money gives them more power and influence, the quickest and easiest way to give wealth more money is through tax cuts (like the flat tax above)

That is why wealth spends so much pushing political and economic free market ideas that call for tax cuts (corporate and personal) – so it finances think tanks and academic positions that promote ‘free market’ ideas, it pays for adverts and lobby groups that promote ‘free market’ ideas and it contributes to politicians that promote ‘free market’ ideas.

And there are the gullible (like 6 it seems) that drink it all up and don’t seem to ever question why they are supporters of ‘free market’ ideas.

 

Gee, sounds wonderful--if you're a gazillionaire like Steve Forbes, who ran on this

Unless you're for no taxes at all (which is pie-in-the-sky anarchism), a flat tax is much more regressive than a progressive income tax. Your description (everyone gets taxed 1-2% of their income) is unrealistic, since that wouldn't be nearly enough to make up for the amount it takes to run the U.S. government. Most politicians who have called for a flat tax talk about a substantially higher rate: Steve Forbes, who ran on it in '96, called for 17%; Ron Paul talked about !4.5%; Herman Cann's 9-9-9 plan called for 9%. And it's doubtful any of those would be enough. Forbes and Paul coupled theirs with exemptions of the first $50,000 for a family of four; and Cain retained the popular exemptions for mortgages and charities, as well as the lower tax rate for capital gains. The poor would lose their Earned Income tax Credit, our largest poverty relief measure. Since the lower income groups consume a much higher percentage of their after tax incomes just to keep afloat financially, flat taxes would in effect rob the poor and help the rich. What's wrong with a good old fashioned progressive income tax at levels we used to have during the New Deal and Fair Deal, when the middle class could make it and America was great. Let's go back to that, and make Amerka great again!

 

The founders of America looked to ancient Greece and Roman ideals when founding the country. Both those nations had the idea that the wealthy have an extra burden in society to care for the under class. Without Athens and it's men and women there is no "your wealth".

Why is they and all the modern European democracies believe in taxing the wealthy and they do with less cost to the citizens n education and healthcare. Yet Americans arrogantly think their brand of democracy works better? A democracy that is more akin to monarchy where an elite few use their money and personal ties to dictate how and why the underclass will serve them. Also like the times of kings there are some peasants who still LOVE the king. He's from God and he deserves to be there. The king represents our people as strong.

A few elections ago some republican candidates were running on the idea that a tax code should fit on one note card. Anymore and it's too complex and probably corupt. 6 too is trying to have a note card.

 

Okie

It is interesting that many on the right seem to want to look back to times when the US was ‘great’ before the ‘decline’ this is often seen as the 1950’s yet in the 1950’s the top rate tax level was at 91% and Keynesian distribution type ideas were still been followed. The ‘decline’ for many set in after that time when neoliberal ideas took hold in the late 1970’s and began replacing ‘distributive’ policies with the hope that ‘trickle down’ would work.

To put it simply,

The rich were given tax cuts

Middle and lower class incomes stagnated or fell

Personal and Government saving declined (leading later to debt)

Trade deficits grow in 1960 there was a trade surplus of 3.5 billion by 2008 there was a trade deficit of 690 billion

With neoliberal economic globalisation (outsourcing) manufacturing in the US declined, in 1965 manufacturing accounted for 53% of the US’s economy by 2004 it accounted for 9%

Decline in US public infrastructure spending in the 1060 it was 3.2% of GDP in 2016 it was 0.5% leading to such things as crumbing roads, bridges, dams, airports and schools in many areas. The country that once prided itself on its modernity looks increasingly old and worn out.

All of the above is the fault of neoliberal ‘free market’ ideas that many on the right still promote, still support and seemingly want to take even further.

 

Doesn't seem to hurt the rich very much...

 

Sorry Ken but did you read this thread or just watch the video?

If you actually look at it you'd find that distributive tax regimes actually help low-income families tax cuts help the welthy - but please give us your explination?