Flat Tax

[Osotogari]

My first instinct would be to say that I'm in favour of a flat tax but only if equalization were drastically changed if not eliminated altogether.  That program is nothing more than a patronage program, and if we're going to re-tool the way taxes are levied then the methods for spending have to be changed as well.

Still, both situations are as likely as a cold day in hell. 

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Why?

Your $23K/year worker would pay no tax per year under most flat tax regimes- they don't usually kick in until at least $30K, to avoid being regressive.

Even at 10%,  a guy who makes $2 Million is going to pay $200,000 (remember- no deductions under flat tax- he owes exactly $200,000.  It doesn't matter how much charity he gives away or how many political parties he supports).  Is that not enough for crappy, socialized medicine and poor roads throughout most of the Dominion?  Or is your premise that anyone making that kind of money must have stolen it or done something other than work hard?

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

Why?

Your $23K/year worker would pay no tax per year under most flat tax regimes- they don't usually kick in until at least $30K, to avoid being regressive.

Even at 10%,  a guy who makes $2 Million is going to pay $200,000 (remember- no deductions under flat tax- he owes exactly $200,000.  It doesn't matter how much charity he gives away or how many political parties he supports).  Is that not enough for crappy, socialized medicine and poor roads throughout most of the Dominion?  Or is your premise that anyone making that kind of money must have stolen it or done something other than work hard?

Or is your premise that anyone making that kind of money must have stolen it or done something other than work hard?

Whatever, the Libertarian Party is down the hall, to the left

Ok, what if my country isnt one of those that has minimum income laws for taxation ? On another note, isnt this also an ideological argument ? That falls in to the arena of equity and fairness, and to have the people making less income after to give a higher proportion of their income isn't fair. Why should I give the same amount as a rich person, even if is johnny Hard Working he will still have a lot of disposable income and no significant loss to happiness by giving more. That leads me to another point, what about your Paris Hilton's and your other spoiled inheritors ? There are likely more people that are rich through virtue of their parents than through their own hard work. or who were allready on the 10th step of the ladder before reaching the 11th.

Id rather my crappy socialized medicine than the ludicriciously expensive private system, where Ill  go bankrupt from treatment costs for anything more serious than diabetes, but thats an argument for another thread.

Also, what if the country dosent make enough revenue as a result ? They will have to raise other taxes to compensate. Also, what if the business community moves somewhere else , where taxes are lower ? Unless you want to severly reduce government revenue you will have to comply by lowering the taxes ro the rich, thus shouldering the state on the Lower and middle classes.


Oh, we havent been a dominion since 1982

 

[a_majoor]

My view on the flat tax is that Im against it. It should be based on ability to pay. Why should a guy making 23K a year pay the same rate as a guy making 2,000K (2 million) ? Im not saying tax them till everyone has the same disposable income, but if you're making money hand over fist you should pay a higher rate than a lower middle class mill worker

Read the previous six pages and you will see those arguments for "progressive" tax demolished

My first instinct would be to say that I'm in favour of a flat tax but only if equalization were drastically changed if not eliminated altogether.  That program is nothing more than a patronage program, and if we're going to re-tool the way taxes are levied then the methods for spending have to be changed as well.

Still, both situations are as likely as a cold day in hell.  

Taxation is a means for governments to collect revenues. Attempting to make taxation a vehicle for social or economic adjustments results in a complex and inefficient tax code that is estimated to cost $30 billion a year in compliance costs, plus an unknown amount as Canadians shift their monies into vehicles and investments designed to minimize taxation (monies that could have been invested in other vehicles with greater ROI and impact on the Canadian economy). Simply changing the tax code to a flat tax will release $30 billion into the productive economy; contrast that with Mr Dion's claim to extract $10-15 billion from Alberta and Saskatchewan's oil industry for social programs (the "Green Shift", copyright owned by Jennifer Wright).

At any rate, if New Brunswick follows through, the effects of compound interest alone will almost certainly compell other Canadian jurisdictions to follow suit (the extra monies released to New Brunswick's productive economy will create new wealth in an ever accelerating cascade; wait too long in Nova Scotia or Ontario and you will never catch up!)

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

Quote from: Proud_Newfoundlander on Today at 14:54:36
My view on the flat tax is that Im against it. It should be based on ability to pay. Why should a guy making 23K a year pay the same rate as a guy making 2,000K (2 million) ? Im not saying tax them till everyone has the same disposable income, but if you're making money hand over fist you should pay a higher rate than a lower middle class mill worker


Read the previous six pages and you will see those arguments for "progressive" tax demolished

No, I will see arguments and opinions, some of which are good. Flat tax is mostly used by second/third world nations to help grow their economies, and eventually msot will plateau and become more progressive in their taxation

 

[SeaKingTacco]

That falls in to the arena of equity and fairness, and to have the people making less income after to give a higher proportion of their income isn't fair.

You do understand the meaning of "proportion", right?  

I'll help you out-

Q. If citizen A earns $50K/year and citizen B earns $100K/year under a 10% flat tax regime, what "proportion" of their income do each pay in taxes?

A. The same- 10%.  The quantity each citizen pays is different, however ($5k and $10k respectively).

So- the guy making more money, pays more.  But, clearly, that burns your a$$, so he should pay even more.  How about 50%?  or 70%?  or 93%?  At what point do you calculate citizen B either:

emigrates someplace else or
quits working altogether because it no longer pays?

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Flat tax is mostly used by second/third world nations to help grow their economies, and eventually msot will plateau and become more progressive in their taxation

And more is the pity...

 

[Reccesoldier]

Making money is evil, making more money than someone else is way evil, making more money than you or your offspring will ever be able to rationally spend is the epitome of absolute evil...

Now where on earth is that puking smiley?

Now...

While Paris Hilton is a useless debutante her father built a company that employs tens of thousands of people, who in turn support hundreds of thousands of family members and numerous separate business interests. 

The economic spin off of Mr. Hilton's obscene wealth easily leads directly and indirectly to the enrichment of hundreds of business' and the livelihoods of hundreds of thousands of individuals. 

But Mr Proud_Newfoundlander seems to think that it would be perfectly acceptable to tell Mr Hilton that not only is he to be punished for his success through paying more taxes but, Proud_Newfoundlander also seems to want to tell Mr. Hilton and his ilk what they can do with their wealth once they die (i.e. not give it to their useless offspring).

Now if you have been paying attention you aught to be able to determine Proud Newfoundlander's political philosophy.  No? Here's a hint... From each according to his ability to each according to his need  lets take a look at what that means.

It means that the MORE you contribute to the enrichment of society through your productive labour the more some in that society want to milk you like some sort of sacrificial cow.  The more money you make, the better standard of living you create for those that work for you or work because of your ingenuity or intelligence, the more able you are the more some want you to pay.

Why?

What Proud Newfoundlander and his fellow travellers want is an ideological blank cheque on the productive effort of every single person who earns above some arbitrary quota of their choosing. 

He mouths the words "fair and equal" but ignores the meaning of the words and what he really wants is unfair and unequal, in his favour of course.

I could have sworn that I spent 4 years in Germany opposing that same sick ideology.

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

Theres no need to act condenscending and smug, and using all the right wing jargon stereotypes to characterize your opponenents. You can also expect a response with sake to the flat tax tomorrow

 

[RangerRay]

Theres no need to act condenscending and smug, and using all the right wing jargon stereotypes to characterize your opponenents. You can also expect a response with sake to the flat tax tomorrow

Well, by reading your posts, you definitely sound like someone who is envious of others' wealth and success, and want the state to "eat the rich"...

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

Yeah, I absolutely hate the rich, im just a red commie trying to redistribute all money equally, I also wear a Che Guevera shirt and demonstrate outside Bell canada with my free time, which is always cause I have no job.

Its hard to take you seriously when your response is "oh, your just envious of the rich or hate them". The federal tories act like that as well, and it hurts their popularity

 

[evil drunken-fool]

Yeah, I absolutely hate the rich, im just a red commie trying to redistribute all money equally, I also wear a Che Guevera shirt and demonstrate outside Bell canada with my free time, which is always cause I have no job.

Its hard to take you seriously when your response is "oh, your just envious of the rich or hate them". The federal tories act like that as well, and it hurts their popularity

I don't think anybody here believes that you are like that, you just need to back up your arguments a little better.  You just came in and said, "My view on the flat tax is that Im against it. It should be based on ability to pay."

You need a little more meat to your point.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Proud Newfoundlander,

Look- you are free to believe whatever you like but, if your neighbour earns more than you do- does it hurt you?  How?

I've actually sat through a University Economics class and the answer is (drum roll)- no.

You appear to be under the quite normal misapprehension that there is a finite amount of wealth in the world.  In fact, there is not.

I will give you an example:

Before Microsoft existed, where did all of the money that Bill Gates currently has (what, like a $100 Billion?) come from?  It wasn't just sitting in bank accounts or invested in now defunct abacus companies, waiting for him to invent Windows so that thousands of investors could give him Billions of dollars.  He quite literally created that $100 Billion out of thin air (more or less) when the market place decided that was what his idea was worth.

That, in a nutshell, is how economics works, my boy.  You have a good enough idea and the marketplace will "create" a billion for you, too.  And it won't hurt another soul.  That is the beauty of the system.

But, like I said, you are free to believe whatever you like.  Just promise me that you will never run for office...

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

Uh huh, you sat through an economics class ? How often, do you have a degree or diploma ?
Well, you take into question my validity, and your response, again, is "you're envious" or you imply I have something against the rich. Oh, and yes I do plan on running for public office in 10-15 years


Uhh, there are hundreds if not thousands of people supporting progressive taxation that have university degrees in Economics, including Warren  Buffet http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/story?id=3869458&page=1

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

I don't think anybody here believes that you are like that, you just need to back up your arguments a little better.  You just came in and said, "My view on the flat tax is that Im against it. It should be based on ability to pay."

You need a little more meat to your point.

I wasnt serious, he used stereotypes and exaggerations against me, so I ran with it

 

[evil drunken-fool]

I wasnt serious, he used stereotypes and exaggerations against me, so I ran with it

No, that was obvious. I am basically telling you to stop making silly comments.

Anyway, I was just trying to give you some advice on how to come in here and make a point without getting torn apart.
So do with that as you see fit.

 

[SeaKingTacco]

Uhh, there are hundreds if not thousands of people supporting progressive taxation that have university degrees in Economics, including Warren  Buffet

And millions supported Stalinism... look how well that worked out.

You seem like a nice enough kid.  It just that you come off... well... knowing everything.  I doubt being 19 qualifies you for that.

And it was two years of Economics at University.  At the time, I thought it was horse$hit, too.  Then, I met the real world.

Like I said- believe what you want, but you are going to have to work alot harder than "cuz I think it's fairer" to convince me our current system of taxation is particularly fair or works well.

 

[aesop081]

How often, do you have a degree or diploma ?

I also detect a certain "my shit dont stink" comming from you.......that really helps your argument.

Yes, i do have a degree.

 

[aesop081]

but if you're making money hand over fist you should pay a higher rate than a lower middle class mill worker

Why?

Because you are successful the state should penalize you more ?

 

[Proud_Newfoundlander]

I also detect a certain "my crap dont stink" comming from you.......that really helps your argument.

Yes, i do have a degree.

I wasn't asking you


Acting no more than anyone else I've been arguing, I just havent been as childish in my argument, with such crap as

-why do you think rich should be penalized more
-you must be envious of the rich
-implied dislike of the rich

Least when I do it it's to mock these incessent statements. if you wanna play that game, I can easily say "why do you not care about the poor", etc etc. It can go both waysb'y