Fair Tax (take two)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Saint of Killers

Hello, what's this?

Uh, yeah, in Palo Alto. buttcheeks lives in Mississippi.

---

I know that. I'm just sayin.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stormy

I know that. I'm just sayin.

---

have you been to Mississippi? They should be giving the houses away.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Diff-chan

Lets say there's a flat tax of 20%. 20% of $40,000 is $8,000. 20% of $200,000 is $40,000. So the first person has $32,000 left while the second has $160,000. You think thats fair?

---

Well, um, yeah?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

I clearly said that I don't like death tax on the grounds that the person who originally owned it, and the person that will inherit it, has paid tax on said thing, and will continue to pay tax on said thing. The gov taking a nice lump sum for it to transfer hands with in a family is shitty in my eyes.

---

Yes, but the family member who inherits the property never paid tax on it. Why is it less "fair" to pay tax on a two-million-dollar inheritance than, say, a two-million-dollar lottery ticket?

Quote:

---

That is all I've said. This would have went a lot smoother if you could keep from lumping the top of the middle class in with rich asshole business men that make thousands an hour doing nothing, and uses lawyers and accountants to get out of paying all taxes.

---

Well, tough luck. You can't. If you abolish the estate tax, then the "rich assholes" benefit just as much as the friendly farm-owning country bumpkin doctors.

Quote:

---

how the fuck is that NOT fair? they each paid an equal percentage. They each earned their money. How can you tell one that he needs to give more money than the other simply because the guy on the left or right didn't make as much?

what the fuck are you basing your concept of "fair" on. It sure the fuck isn't logic.

---

Think about it for a moment. Suppose that both incomes support a family of four. Let's assume that both families spend roughly the same amount of after-tax income on necessities such as food, rent/mortgage, and utilities. In short, assume that cost of living is a constant.

Under a flat tax system, lower-income families would thus suffer disproportionately to upper-income families. Is that "fair"?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

Yes, but the family member who inherits the property never paid tax on it. Why is it less "fair" to pay tax on a two-million-dollar inheritance than, say, a two-million-dollar lottery ticket?

---

what sort of logic is that? The dead person is giving it to them. You shouldn't have to pay tax on something given to you by your family, especially if that person is dead.. Should kids start paying tax when santa comes or during their birthday? Are we going to start having a birthday tax, or a santa tax?

And with things like property, the person who inherits it will continue to pay property tax on it. They will pay tax if they sell it, and they will pay tax if they cut the timber and sale that. It’s not like the government will suddenly stop seeing money when the land changes hands.

besides, I don't think you should pay tax on a lottery ticket. You won it, its a prize. It's not income because you didn't work to get it.

You really are clueless.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

Think about it for a moment. Suppose that both incomes support a family of four. Let's assume that both families spend roughly the same amount of after-tax income on necessities such as food, rent/mortgage, and utilities. In short, assume that cost of living is a constant.

Under a flat tax system, lower-income families would thus suffer disproportionately to upper-income families. Is that "fair"?

---

is that the problem of taxation, or is it a problem of the US not paying people fairly? A person should be able to suport a family on a min wage. That is why it is the min wage.

And you know people like yoshi are going to say that so and so should have kept her legs shut if she didn't think hubby could make enough to keep them all fed. Which is technically true.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by g0zen

You really are clueless.

---

then educate me, oh wise gozen. Speak and let my mind be full of your golden words.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by buttcheeks

Should kids start paying tax when santa comes or during their birthday? Are we going to start having a birthday tax, or a santa tax?

---

Gifts are not taxable up to $10,000. MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

Well, tough luck. You can't. If you abolish the estate tax, then the "rich assholes" benefit just as much as the friendly farm-owning country bumpkin doctors.

---

they could rase the limit. Maybe raise it from 2 to 3 or 4 million. Or maybe get over trying to fuck everyone. Fucking a couple bad guys doesn’t make fucking a couple good ones ok. This is the real world, where things are not black and white and the end doesn’t really justify the means.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stormy

Gifts are not taxable up to $10,000. MERRY CHRISTMAS!

---

but what if little cindy sue wants 4 ponies? She's been really good this year and done humanitarian work. She feeds the sick and elderly. She takes in dying cats and dogs. And she really wants those 4 ponies.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by sleeveboy

Think about it for a moment. Suppose that both incomes support a family of four. Let's assume that both families spend roughly the same amount of after-tax income on necessities such as food, rent/mortgage, and utilities. In short, assume that cost of living is a constant.

---

And the guy that makes more money has more disposable income--sounds about right to me. Why the hell would he bother making better money if he didn't end up with more after necessities?

Quote:

---

Under a flat tax system, lower-income families would thus suffer disproportionately to upper-income families. Is that "fair"?

---

Is it fair that a person that makes more money has more expendable income? Yeah? How is it not?