Explain this thought process, please.

Jiro said:
hence Post #117. That's the only way for you to understand tax issue.
Click to expand...

Finally, now, I got it but previously, I thought that post #117 seems insult to my view on tax issues and mocking at me about being zero experience on tax issue since I work at wal fart for 3 years.

Some people make a lot of money on hourly jobs too.

I guess that I'm going stop to discuss and don't want this thread to be locked up.
 
Foxrac said:
Finally, now, I got it but previously, I thought that post #117 seems insult to my view on tax issues and mocking at me about being zero experience on tax issue since I work at wal fart for 3 years.

Some people make a lot of money on hourly jobs too.

I guess that I'm going stop to discuss and don't want this thread to be locked up.
Click to expand...

images
 
Oh look, how cute... a male catfight.

It looks like to me that the fundamental issue is basically... do you trust your government with your money?

To me, it doesn't really have to do with "fairness" of taxing the wealth.

Looks like those who don't do not want to give any more money to the government and taxing your earnings is just adding fuel to the fire. Or even taking more of their own money is also adding fuel to the fire. They prefer for the government to be MORE efficient with what they have now. If I had that mental state, OF COURSE, I'd be against any additional taxes, especially one where they take more money from the rich. I may be okay with them taxing things that have nothing to do with me.

Those who do trust their government thinks that it's only fair that the rich pay the same or more tax as everyone else. 2% of the population benefits 98% of the population.

The general population tends to think of the nation's inner workings in simple terms, i.e.
"Tax the rich more and give it to the poor? That is just wrong!"

When you make it simple like that, OF COURSE, it is wrong.

"The rich keeps more of their money while the government takes more out of the middle class and lower class? That is just wrong!"

When you make it simple like that, OF COURSE, it is wrong.

When are people going to realize that the way the nation's economy works isn't that simple? I know it isn't that simple. So I tend to ignore those comments. To me, all the comments made simply comes from whether they trust the government or not with their money. (Or they want to be greedy and keep all of their own money, but I'm going to ignore that group)

I have a question for those who do not trust the way the government spends their money. What would make you trust them? If everything goes well? Would that make that make you more open about raising taxes or a tax change? Or do you believe that whatever tax revenues they have now is sufficient? If so, until when? Forever? Or do you believe tax revenues should only come from people who have vices such as smoking?
 
Daredevel7 said:
... Or do you believe tax revenues should only come from people who have vices such as smoking?
Click to expand...
First of all, why are "vices" taxed? Are they taxed in order to motivate people to stop doing that "vice?" Or are they taxed in order to collect more revenue for the government treasury?

If vice taxes are imposed in order to cut back on a particular behavior, and it's successful, then theoretically there will be no more revenue from that vice. Instead of increasing revenue it will actually decrease revenue.

On the other hand, if the goal is to increase revenue, then it would benefit the state to encourage participation in a that vice in order to collect even more money.

An example is smoking. If the state's goal is to cut down on smoking, and they are successful, then eventually there would be no smokers and no revenue from cigarette taxes.

If the state's goal is to increase revenue, then the state would encourage more people to smoke and to increase their packs per day in order to raise more money for the state.

It just doesn't make any sense. So-called vice and luxury taxes don't work. (Remember what happened with the yacht tax? Jobs were lost.)

Same problem with increasing gasoline taxes. Is the goal to increase revenue for improving roads, or to cut back on fuel consumption? :hmm:

You can't have it both ways.
 
Actually Reba, your #164 post implies that if we want to discourage people from smoking or other vices via tax revenue, it implies that we would KEEP the tax for a long time. If I were to impose tax in order to make people to stop a vice, I simply would tax it until the revenue goes below the target, then I would move on to another vice, since it worked the first time around. Right? That would make sense to me.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Actually Reba, your #164 post implies that if we want to discourage people from smoking or other vices via tax revenue, it implies that we would KEEP the tax for a long time. If I were to impose tax in order to make people to stop a vice, I simply would tax it until the revenue goes below the target, then I would move on to another vice, since it worked the first time around. Right? That would make sense to me.
Click to expand...
What would you do to maintain revenue when you ran out of vices?
 
Reba said:
What would you do to maintain revenue when you ran out of vices?
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that I'm all for vice taxing, just that it would make sense to move on to another vice instead of standing around "Oh um.... people stopped smoking, we ran out of money."

P.S. if we ran out of vices.... yay!

P.P.S why not do the fair tax as you said? Maybe we don't have to do it right now? Just throwing ideas out there.. since we sometimes act like we have influence on the government... :)
 
Daredevel7 said:
I'm not saying that I'm all for vice taxing, just that it would make sense to move on to another vice instead of standing around "Oh um.... people stopped smoking, we ran out of money."

P.S. if we ran out of vices.... yay!
Click to expand...
One problem is, who defines what is a "vice?"

P.P.S why not do the fair tax as you said? Maybe we don't have to do it right now? Just throwing ideas out there.. since we sometimes act like we have influence on the government... :)
Click to expand...
I support switching to the Fair Tax. It probably won't happen any time soon.
 
Daredevel7 said:
Very true. This can be troublesome. Vices are somewhat defined by moral standards.


Do you see any cons to Fair Tax?
Click to expand...
Mostly in the conversion process of ditching IRS and putting all the tax attorneys out of work.
 
Reba said:
Mostly in the conversion process of ditching IRS and putting all the tax attorneys out of work.
Click to expand...

You know my position on income taxes, don't you?
I agree that the Fair Tax will never see light of day, phooey.
 
I think we should tax vices AS long as they are here but those taxes should be paid for the health costs and indirect costs on others. Sin taxes should NOT be used for any other purposes.
 
Reba said:
Mostly in the conversion process of ditching IRS and putting all the tax attorneys out of work.
Click to expand...

and people who live on SSI/SSDI/SS will have pay Fair Tax rate too.
 
netrox said:
I think we should tax vices AS long as they are here but those taxes should be paid for the health costs and indirect costs on others. Sin taxes should NOT be used for any other purposes.
Click to expand...
What happens when consumers quit "sinning?" There will be no more revenue from those taxes then. How will they pay for the health costs then?

Suppose everyone quit smoking. No more revenue from tobacco will be collected. No more sin tax money will be used to support health costs. Health costs continue. What will pay for those health costs if there is no more tax money collected?
 
Foxrac said:
and people who live on SSI/SSDI/SS will have pay Fair Tax rate too.
Click to expand...
They will also be entitled to the prebates, which will actually give them more money to spend.
 
Reba said:
They will also be entitled to the prebates, which will actually give them more money to spend.
Click to expand...

I think so too.

I found a misinform in my post, I'm going correct the misinform about Fair Tax will charge on new auto, new house, mortgage, auto payment, credit card payment, medical bills, etc unless politicians are going make them as not taxable or at special tax.

Our state have special sale tax on car, that is 3%.
 
Back
Top