Are ready for this tax?

[22WRF]

Pelochit says new tax is 'on the table'
By Michael O'Brien - 10/06/09 10:59 AM ET

A new value-added tax (VAT) is "on the table" to help the U.S. address its fiscal liabilities, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) said Monday night.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefi...s-on-the-table

[kingchip]

Damm that's fugly.

[Bobitis]

Where I'm at we already have that tax under another guise.

If you go to the store and buy a watermelon, you pay one price.
If someone cuts it in half (cuz you can't eat a whole one before it spoils), you pay a lot more for it. Value added.

[Bobitis]

Pelosi argued that the VAT would level the playing field between U.S. and foreign manufacturers, the latter of which do not have pension and healthcare costs included in the price of their goods because their governments provide those services, financed by similar taxes.

Is this tax applied to only foreign made products? If so, who's responsible for providing/collecting the data? Yet another beaurocratic nightmare that tax payers get to pay for. Just increase the tarrifs on importing the products. Those laws are already in place.

Something's sinister here. And it reeks of control.

[22WRF]

More taxes from democrats. The VAT or Value Added Tax. The VAT adds taxes at each stage of production. This of course will raise the price of goods significantly. Democrats are trying to make the United States the new socialist Europe in every way.
The VAT is pernicious because it gets embedded in the cost of goods and it's almost impossible, after a while, to determine just how big a share government is getting.

[obxned]

We already have a greater tax burden than most any industrialized nation. Do these treasonous megalomaniacs know about King George and his Tea Tax and the Stamp Act? They appear unable to learn from history.

[topper]

about 125 years ago, we had almost no taxes of any sort. America was an emerging world power and was financially solvent. Now we have many sorts of taxes and our country is a debtor nation. think about that. too many taxes and too many politicians have destroyed our system. everytime a politician says that a new tax will pay for some project, why does it not happen? where does all the tax money go? why can we not get our money's worth from taxation?

[Doc1911]

It is not Halloween yet. Please put your pumpkins up.

Hidden taxes are still taxes.

[Trouble 45-70]

22 WRF, How did you create that miracle? You actually improved her appearance. How is that possible? Unbelievable!

[Terry_P]

Lets see the campaign promise of taxing only those over $250k isn't looking real good. Geez you don't suppose they were lying do you?

[dge479]

B.O.H.IC.A.

[bcj1755]

Originally Posted by dge479

B.O.H.IC.A.

Classic military term And so applicable.


Freddie the Fed needs more money, huh? I guess it's time for Blinky the Zombie to get more plastic surgery

[walien]

We already have a greater tax burden than most any industrialized nation. Do these treasonous megalomaniacs know about King George and his Tea Tax and the Stamp Act? They appear unable to learn from history.

Really? You care to quantify that? Have any data to justify that? Perhaps you might want to compare the US income tax rates to that of almost any other nation. The majority of people in this country don't pay any income tax. I think you'd be surprised if you did some research on this.

[Bobitis]

Originally Posted by walien

Really? You care to quantify that? Have any data to justify that? Perhaps you might want to compare the US income tax rates to that of almost any other nation. The majority of people in this country don't pay any income tax. I think you'd be surprised if you did some research on this.

This is precisely why we need a flat tax across the board.
Everyone pays, no one is exempt.

[killbuck]

Originally Posted by Bobitis

This is precisely why we need a flat tax across the board.
Everyone pays, no one is exempt.

Except congressmen and senators, and friends.

[walien]

So basically you want to raise the taxes on the poorer people, including those on this board, and lower them on the rich? That's what you're saying.

By the way, under even the flat tax policies that have been put forward there is still an exemption for lower income earners. Thus, the flax taxes aren't that remarkably different.

Lets see the campaign promise of taxing only those over $250k isn't looking real good.

Well, the Democratic leader of the House isn't the same as the President. Last I recall, he was the one talking about $250k. He also didn't promise to just tax those over $250k. He wanted to only increase taxes on those making more than $250k. This linked tax proposal really doesn't have anything to do with the campaign promise.

It's sort of funny that people are throwing a sales tax in the face of Democrats. I seem to recall it being pushed by people like Mike Huckabee as well.

[graehaven]

Originally Posted by walien

Really? You care to quantify that? Have any data to justify that? Perhaps you might want to compare the US income tax rates to that of almost any other nation. The majority of people in this country don't pay any income tax. I think you'd be surprised if you did some research on this.

The MAJORITY don't pay? YOU care to prove that? That's a pretty sweeping statement. If that's the case, then, you've answered the problem already - that's the problem - they're either not working (sucking at the public teat), or, they need to pay like the rest of us.

It's not rocket science.

Pretty simple really. Everyone pay a 2% flat tax, across the board, with NO deductions for anything - and reign in the government spending - we'd have the wealthiest nation on the planet in no time.

Again, it's not rocket science.

[Bobitis]

Originally Posted by walien

So basically you want to raise the taxes on the poorer people, including those on this board, and lower them on the rich? That's what you're saying.

By the way, under even the flat tax policies that have been put forward there is still an exemption for lower income earners. Thus, the flax taxes aren't that remarkably different.



Well, the Democratic leader of the House isn't the same as the President. Last I recall, he was the one talking about $250k. He also didn't promise to just tax those over $250k. He wanted to only increase taxes on those making more than $250k. This linked tax proposal really doesn't have anything to do with the campaign promise.

It's sort of funny that people are throwing a sales tax in the face of Democrats. I seem to recall it being pushed by people like Mike Huckabee as well.

Why should hard working people pay more taxes than those that choose not to contribute?
Flat tax, NO exemptions.
A simple concept with no room for interpretation.

[graehaven]

And..................................................................crickets.




Hmmmm. Seems to be a recurring theme.

[williamd]

A lesson from our northern neighbor .. Canada has had this tax for years. Temporary, of course, like our income tax. Nancy needs it for jet fuel so you should not complain!

[walien]

The MAJORITY don't pay? YOU care to prove that? That's a pretty sweeping statement. If that's the case, then, you've answered the problem already - that's the problem - they're either not working (sucking at the public teat), or, they need to pay like the rest of us.

It's not rocket science.

Pretty simple really. Everyone pay a 2% flat tax, across the board, with NO deductions for anything - and reign in the government spending - we'd have the wealthiest nation on the planet in no time.

Again, it's not rocket science.

That should have actually read as almost. Surprised you didn't know this already.

http://money.cnn.com/2009/09/30/pf/t...axes/index.htm

2%? What's that going to cover? Things actually do cost money.

Why should hard working people pay more taxes than those that choose not to contribute?
Flat tax, NO exemptions.
A simple concept with no room for interpretation.

Hard working people? People of lower incomes pay less taxes and many don't pay any net federal income tax. That DOES NOT mean that they aren't hard working. There are plenty of people in this country who bust their backs working hard. Your post implies that in order to work hard, you have to be making a lot of money. That is not the case.

Flat tax? Assuming a normal distribution of people on this site, you just raised taxes for more than half of the people on this site. You did lower mine by a good bit though. Thanks. I'm not sure that everyone else is going to be that happy about it.

A lesson from our northern neighbor .. Canada has had this tax for years. Temporary, of course, like our income tax. Nancy needs it for jet fuel so you should not complain!

The GST was never really temporary. It has been lowered and at least Canada, for all of it's social programs, is in much, much better fiscal shape than the US. During most of the Bush years while the US was running huge deficits, Canada had a surplus. It's likely the same nowadays but I haven't really looked.

[walien]

crickets....

[Bobitis]

'Why should hard working people pay more taxes than those that choose not to contribute?
Flat tax, NO exemptions.
A simple concept with no room for interpretation'.

"Hard working people? People of lower incomes pay less taxes and many don't pay any net federal income tax. That DOES NOT mean that they aren't hard working. There are plenty of people in this country who bust their backs working hard. Your post implies that in order to work hard, you have to be making a lot of money. That is not the case.

Flat tax? Assuming a normal distribution of people on this site, you just raised taxes for more than half of the people on this site. You did lower mine by a good bit though. Thanks. I'm not sure that everyone else is going to be that happy about it".




You implied and your implications are not valid to my post.
Nor did you answer the question.

Thanks for the link. It supports my position quite well, though I would question where they get there information from.
22% of those that make 50-75k a year pay no taxes? That's patently absurd.
As is your comment about raising the taxes of more than half the members here.

I don't expect everyone to be 'happy' about a flat tax. The ones it would affect adversely are currently paying little or no taxes. Of course they won't be happy.
So sad - too bad.

I don't care what you make.
$1.00 and the fed gets 15 cents.
$100.00 and the fed gets 15 dollars.
$100,000.00 and the fed gets $15,000.00
15% flat tax - no exemptions.
What's NOT fair about that?

The concept of something for nothing is what brought our nation to its knees. The consumers now outweigh the suppliers.
And instead of holding the consumers responsible, we punish the suppliers.
Great way to balance a checkbook eh?

Read the last line in the link you posted.
What do you propose that will accomplish that?

[Popgunner]

The statement that "most Americans don't pay income taxes" can be backed up by realizing that if you pay less than $5,000.00 in federal income taxes during a year you have it handed right back to you in the "Earned income Credit". In effect no income tax paid.

[graehaven]

I have to disagree with Bobitis, but only on the amount. I like the idea of a fair, flat tax.

But it should be done at less than 5 percent.

And to answer Walien: Yes, it can be done with 2 percent. They have to STOP pissing it all away on the masses. To reiterate another thread, where you didn't like my answer, Social Security MUST be ended, so mush Medicaid and Medicare. So must any grant programs or freebie money giveaways, etc.

The real key is, STOP SPENDING money!

Your premise is that it has to be spent. You're beginning with an erroneous premise.