Taxes

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

I'm proposing a new tax plan for you to comment on and I'm thinking Democrats will hate it and Republicans will have likes and dislikes.

Flat tax rate of 15% for all Americans.
Eliminate charitable and itemized deductions.
Require companies to take out taxes for their employees.
Make up for loss of revenue in the near future with increased user fees.

At least it's a start.

[Associate Justice PiT]

     My feeling towards this plan is generally positive, though taxation is just one half of the fiscal paradigm. A tax plan without a spending plan is a nonstarter. Specifically, I fear it would be very difficult to fund the function of government without the user fees becoming exorbitant.

[Supersonic]

Making those on the bottom of the pay scale pay the same in tax as billionaires is wholly immoral. While, yes, I do support significantly lower taxes on everybody, there has to be some modicum of progressive income taxation, however little that may be.

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

     My feeling towards this plan is generally positive, though taxation is just one half of the fiscal paradigm. A tax plan without a spending plan is a nonstarter. Specifically, I fear it would be very difficult to fund the function of government without the user fees becoming exorbitant.

I agree let's propose congress only meets twice a week for an 8 hour day with an hour lunch and a pay cut of 25%. We should cut the president's pay to $250,000. I'd like to see a constitutional amendment requiring congress to balance the budget at least every 4 years. If that means an across the board cut in spending by say 20% then that's a start. Also as a conservative libertarian I would like to see the government employee staff cut by 20%. A lower or no corporate tax would bring companies back from overseas too because it would be more profitable to start a business here. Combine that with allowing supply and demand to compensate for the minumum wage laws but not all at once and we can then inflate the value of a dollar. I was mainly talking about taxes but this is a basic view of my economic plan.

[opebo]

I'm proposing a new tax plan for you to comment on and I'm thinking Democrats will hate it and Republicans will have likes and dislikes.

Flat tax rate of 15% for all Americans.
Eliminate charitable and itemized deductions.
Require companies to take out taxes for their employees.
Make up for loss of revenue in the near future with increased user fees.

At least it's a start.

Your plan is ludicrous.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

[TJ in Oregon]

If you raised it to 90% they wouldn't reinvest most of it; people would just quit at that point. Why bother working?

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

Forget studies, charts, and diagrams and let's use common sense. Do you really want the government to have that much of a monopoloy over our lives and what we can and can't do with our money? Besides a conservative can do their own studies to so that it looks like their plans are better. Your studies would turn us into Greece.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

If you raised it to 90% they wouldn't reinvest most of it; people would just quit at that point. Why bother working?

I wasn't really suggesting that we should raise it to 90%, but the concept is that progressive taxation is better at growing the economy than a flat tax.  Frankly, we used to have much higher taxes than we do now and the economy was quite stable back in those days.

Forget studies, charts, and diagrams and let's use common sense. Do you really want the government to have that much of a monopoloy over our lives and what we can and can't do with our money? Besides a conservative can do their own studies to so that it looks like their plans are better. Your studies would turn us into Greece.

...Forget studies and charts?  You've lost me.

[TJ in Oregon]

If you raised it to 90% they wouldn't reinvest most of it; people would just quit at that point. Why bother working?

I wasn't really suggesting that we should raise it to 90%, but the concept is that progressive taxation is better at growing the economy than a flat tax.  Frankly, we used to have much higher taxes than we do now and the economy was quite stable back in those days.

I would agree that the optimal tax structure for growing the economy would be progressive, but that does not mean all progressive structures are better than all flat structures by default. A 90% tax would either be nominal by allowing wealthy individuals to ensure their income is done in other ways not subject to it, or if you close all loopholes, a complete disaster since they wouldn't bother working. If the scale on that chart had a maximum of ~40% I would agree with it, but at 90% so many other factors have long since started to take effect that the comparison is junk. You aren't going to get any more revenue beyond somewhere around 50% so proposing anything higher than that is pretty much just hating rich people.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

If you raised it to 90% they wouldn't reinvest most of it; people would just quit at that point. Why bother working?

I wasn't really suggesting that we should raise it to 90%, but the concept is that progressive taxation is better at growing the economy than a flat tax.  Frankly, we used to have much higher taxes than we do now and the economy was quite stable back in those days.

I would agree that the optimal tax structure for growing the economy would be progressive, but that does not mean all progressive structures are better than all flat structures by default. A 90% tax would either be nominal by allowing wealthy individuals to ensure their income is done in other ways not subject to it, or if you close all loopholes, a complete disaster since they wouldn't bother working. If the scale on that chart had a maximum of ~40% I would agree with it, but at 90% so many other factors have long since started to take effect that the comparison is junk. You aren't going to get any more revenue beyond somewhere around 50% so proposing anything higher than that is pretty much just hating rich people.

Exactly.  Personally, I always felt that around 40% or so is the ideal top rate people should be paying, but once again I posted the chart for its general idea.  Rolling back the rates to the way they were twenty years ago isn't a radical idea, but a flat tax would just shift the burden to the poor by making them pay a greater share of their income.

[Grumpier Than Thou]

If you raised it to 90% they wouldn't reinvest most of it; people would just quit at that point. Why bother working?

^^^^

This. That chart is so flawed it hurts. It basically states that by taking money from rich business owners who create jobs, the Government instead should create the jobs. Government does not create private sector jobs, the private sector creates private sector jobs. To tax the living shit out of the richest Americans (most of whom are business owners) in order to "invest in jobs or businesses" is ludicrous. It's only adding more complications and it just further fucks up the already flawed system.

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

If you raised it to 90% they wouldn't reinvest most of it; people would just quit at that point. Why bother working?

^^^^

This. That chart is so flawed it hurts. It basically states that by taking money from rich business owners who create jobs, the Government instead should create the jobs. Government does not create private sector jobs, the private sector creates private sector jobs. To tax the living shit out of the richest Americans (most of whom are business owners) in order to "invest in jobs or businesses" is ludicrous. It's only adding more complications and it just further fucks up the already flawed system.

I agree. The biggest problem in our country right now is tax envy generated by the far left.

[stegosaurus]

The Flat Tax:
Taxes should be flatter, but a universal rate comes with complications. For starters the flat tax would have to be 21-22% to be revenue neutral. A flat rate lower than that would leave the government supremely underfunded and/or explode the deficit. Secondly, a flat rate disproportionately affects low income people, who can not live so easily on only 80% of their gross income. Furthermore, to propose such a thing is to ignore the fact that most of America's wealthiest already pay a ~15% rate through "Capital Gains" rates and deductions.

Deductions:
To put it simply, a vast majority of people benefit and in some cases depend on these. To eliminate these deductions would amount to a massive tax increase on the middle and lower classes, which we know is not a good thing to do in a sluggish economy. I do however support limiting the availability of deductions to incomes under 500,000$.

Requiring companies to take taxes out:
Unless you are working as an independent contractor (1099), I believe this is already the case; hence the W2 you fill out upon accepting a job.

Increased user fees:
This works(ish) on a state level, but there aren't enough user fees collected by the federal government to make up for the revenue free fall that would occur under 15% flat tax system.

I would prefer a flatter, but ultimately progressive system:

>1,000,000$ - 30%-35% <- no deductions allowed for this bracket.
500,000$-1,000,000$ - 20-25% <- no deductions allowed for this bracket.
100,000$-500,000$/year - 20-25%
<100,000$/year - 10%-15%
(i used ranges because I'm not an well versed economist nor do I have access to CBO analysis, obviously the lower ends of these ranges would be preferable).

I would also abolish the "Capital Gains" tax system and begin treating it as income, subjecting it to the above bracket system.

Certainly not perfect, but flatter and equally as fair.

[courts]

you think that we should eliminate childcare tax credit and essentially tax the poor more? thats pretty crazy pants

[🐒Gods of Prosperity🔱🐲💸]

The way to have a tax policy that incentivizes investment as opposed to regular income isn't to raise taxes absurdly high on both - it is to have a lower tax rate for investment income as opposed to regular income.  

[Grumpier Than Thou]

Shua's right.

[The world will shine with light in our nightmare]

I already said I don't want a tax rate of 90%.

Y'know what... I'm just gonna stop repeating myself.

[So rightwing that I broke the Political Compass!]

The assumption that investment means jobs is out of date- much investment nowadays is in machines so that a business can shrug off the cost of employees. Not to mention outsourcing. And FYI such investment would be best facilitated by reducing corporate taxes, not capital gains taxes(the latter is only paid at the point of withdrawal after all, while corporate taxes are paid for the entirety of an investments duration)

Senator Scott: Taxes were nowhere near as high as the 90% headline rate makes them seem. Taxation as a percentage of GDP in that period ranged from 14.4% to 20.4%(the variation having more to do with typical economic turbulence then with policy). In the past decade they've ranged from 15.4% to 19.5%... almost exactly the same.

(source:http://www.taxpolicycenter.org/taxfacts/displayafact.cfm?Docid=205)

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

you think that we should eliminate childcare tax credit and essentially tax the poor more? thats pretty crazy pants

No one thinks that so I hope no one puts words into anyone's mouth for political benefits. I'm saying tax everyone the same. Universal tax care

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

The Flat Tax:
Taxes should be flatter, but a universal rate comes with complications. For starters the flat tax would have to be 21-22% to be revenue neutral. A flat rate lower than that would leave the government supremely underfunded and/or explode the deficit. Secondly, a flat rate disproportionately affects low income people, who can not live so easily on only 80% of their gross income. Furthermore, to propose such a thing is to ignore the fact that most of America's wealthiest already pay a ~15% rate through "Capital Gains" rates and deductions.

Deductions:
To put it simply, a vast majority of people benefit and in some cases depend on these. To eliminate these deductions would amount to a massive tax increase on the middle and lower classes, which we know is not a good thing to do in a sluggish economy. I do however support limiting the availability of deductions to incomes under 500,000$.

Requiring companies to take taxes out:
Unless you are working as an independent contractor (1099), I believe this is already the case; hence the W2 you fill out upon accepting a job.

Increased user fees:
This works(ish) on a state level, but there aren't enough user fees collected by the federal government to make up for the revenue free fall that would occur under 15% flat tax system.

I would prefer a flatter, but ultimately progressive system:

>1,000,000$ - 30%-35% <- no deductions allowed for this bracket.
500,000$-1,000,000$ - 20-25% <- no deductions allowed for this bracket.
100,000$-500,000$/year - 20-25%
<100,000$/year - 10%-15%
(i used ranges because I'm not an well versed economist nor do I have access to CBO analysis, obviously the lower ends of these ranges would be preferable).

I would also abolish the "Capital Gains" tax system and begin treating it as income, subjecting it to the above bracket system.

Certainly not perfect, but flatter and equally as fair.

You're right about people not being able to live on just 80% of their income but 15% is an ideal tax rate. With taxes being lower the economy will have more jobs added in the long run which will make up for the loss of revenue in the near future. If the government can't support programs based on what is coming in then the government should be limited. Rather than raising taxes to meet the demands of the government I think we should be limiting the government to meet the demands of the people. Part of my plan wouldn't only be to grow the economy but also to simplify the tax code. If we just tax people at 15% and get rid of the capital gains tax and deductions that benefit the wealthiest then things would basically break even anyways. I think we basically agree when it comes to capital gains taxes. You're also right about the user fees at the federal level but states should be taking care of that on their own. What you're saying is pretty much what I was saying. If states have to raise taxes because the government can't throw out a freebone, then that's the result of a limited government. Where I work hardly any taxes get taken out and as a result I owed almost $200 this year. Your tax brackets are better than what we have. I prefer a flat and simple system where everyone pays 15%, there are no deductions or tax credits, and companies take taxes out. It's much simpler for the average individual and much simpler for our government. I'd say we agree more than we don't but do have differences.

[courts]

you think that we should eliminate childcare tax credit and essentially tax the poor more? thats pretty crazy pants

No one thinks that so I hope no one puts words into anyone's mouth for political benefits. I'm saying tax everyone the same. Universal tax care

you just said you support eliminating all deductions and a 15% flat tax rate for everyone so...

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

you think that we should eliminate childcare tax credit and essentially tax the poor more? thats pretty crazy pants

No one thinks that so I hope no one puts words into anyone's mouth for political benefits. I'm saying tax everyone the same. Universal tax care

you just said you support eliminating all deductions and a 15% flat tax rate for everyone so...

Yes I said 15% for everyone and eliminating all deductions. What are you saying?

[courts]

so you want the poor to pay more and childcare tax deduction to be eliminated then.

[Darius_Addicus_Gaius]

so you want the poor to pay more and childcare tax deduction to be eliminated then.

Spin it into whatever you want. 15% would be what people pay in taxes. We all pay the same each paycheck and keep the rest. I'm not trying to politicize this issue. I think that things would really turn around for the economy if this happened and the poor would be able to afford 15% of their income in taxes.