Well, I boned my taxes...

[MikeSTI]

...

[Kevin M]

Originally Posted by sperry

Eh? People will buy less stuff? Think of it this way: prices go up 15-20%, your income goes up 15-20%... proceed with life as usual.

It's the psychological aspect of it- Your groceries would cost 20% more, your CAR would cost 20% more, etc... people would spend less (even though they technically have more money).

[sperry]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

no because in the worse case I would end up spending more with a flat tax
12,000*.10% = 13,200*2=26,400> 12,000*2=24,000-2,000=22,000
and it kind of works that way up the scale like haveing a mortgage gets me into the next tax index down so I save 3% or so on my taxable income
IRA's are also another good tax shealter its just knowing how the system works and trying to get the most out of it instead of the many people that just fill out the EZ forum

I'm having problems understanding your math.

12,000*.10% = 12,000 * (.10/100) = 12. What's the 13,200*2?

And even if you meant 10%, not .10%

12,000 * 10% = 12,000 * (10/100) = 1200

So let me try to illustrate my pointwith my own math:

Let's say you make $50,000/yr. With the current tax scheme, most people end up paying between 15% and 20% in that tax bracket after all their finagling with deductions, etc, right? On average, that's $8,750. (50,000 * 0.175)

Now let's look at a flat 10% tax: 50,000 * 0.1 = $5000.

That's $3750 per year right back into your pocket.

Now let's look at a giant corperation. Let's say they make $100 million a year. After all their finagling they probably end up paying a whopping 4% in taxes. That's $100,000,000 * .04 = $4 million. With a flat tax they no longer get to put their money in tax shelters, and get exemptions and all that crap. They pay the 10% just like everone else, that's $10 million.

Of course the corperations will have to pass this additional cost on to the public as increased prices, but it's not a massive increase... only 6% compared to the 7.5% more money you've got in your pocket.

The real benefit comes from not having a complicated tax system. No complicated filing, your employer just sends off 10% of your money, or you write a check once a year. Fewer audits, and fewer people cheating on their taxes.

Now I don't claim that the numbers above are really accurate. I don't have real data on how much people make/pay, but they should illustrate my point. Will there be people paying more under a flat tax? Probably, but I'll bet the majority of people paying more will be in the upper-middle to filthy-rich classes... and that's like what 5% of Americans? Most people will feel tax relief, and many in the middle-class like you and I will end up paying just about the same as we're paying right now.

[tysonK]

Originally Posted by sperry

Now I don't claim that the numbers above are really accurate. I don't have real data on how much people make/pay, but they should illustrate my point. Will there be people paying more under a flat tax? Probably, but I'll bet the majority of people paying more will be in the upper-middle to filthy-rich classes... and that's like what 5% of Americans? Most people will feel tax relief, and many in the middle-class like you and I will end up paying just about the same as we're paying right now.

Which is why it would never pass as a law. We may be able to out vote them but we can't outspend them in the lobby.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by tysonK

Which is why it would never pass as a law. We may be able to out vote them but we can't outspend them in the lobby.

Hey, whattya know, it's the root of the issue!

That's why our cable TV sucks, why cell phone plans are retarded, why energy costs so much, why most cars are still powered by oil, why we're at war with terrorists, why the poor get poorer and the rich get richer, why racism still exists, why gay marriage is even an issue, etc, etc, etc. This country is run by old, fat, rich, self-centered, greedy, white men. Fuck that.

[Kevin M]

Yes. I will make certain I am an old. white, self-centered non-fat man.

[Nick Koan]

Originally Posted by sperry

Now I don't claim that the numbers above are really accurate. I don't have real data on how much people make/pay, but they should illustrate my point. Will there be people paying more under a flat tax? Probably, but I'll bet the majority of people paying more will be in the upper-middle to filthy-rich classes... and that's like what 5% of Americans? Most people will feel tax relief, and many in the middle-class like you and I will end up paying just about the same as we're paying right now.

No, actually. I think its pretty much been proven that a flat tax will cause poor people to pay more taxes (as under $15,000 pays less then 10%) while the rich (6 figures a year) are paying closer to 25%-35% (and I think I may be a little conservative on these numbers too).

Assuming that flat tax rate would be 10%, the government would lose lots of money (15% to 25% from a 6 figure salary) and not make up very much from the lower class (5% extra from those that make less then $15k). Of course, this is assuming that the people and corporations making over 6 figures a year in this country pay there taxes honestly. Yes, there are more poor in this country then rich. Looks like about 30% of the population makes under $15k a year. About 14% make over $100k. But since we are dealing with percents here, 15% of $100k >> (5% of 15k) * 2

A flat tax would hurt the government financially, increase taxes for the poor and decrease taxes for the rich. Besides, if a flat tax was ever passed, I don't think it would take long for rich corporations/individuals to find a way to finagle out of paying their fair share, thus making a flat tax bad for the government and bad for people lower then middle class.

[MikeSTI]

...

[tysonK]

Well Mike I can see your point on some of the tax issues, sure having kids and being married does foster the economy by creating a larger consumer base. This in turn would yield more money going into the GDP and henceforth growing the American economy.

Near the end you state your theories on big corporations getting tax breaks. You would support them in their efforts to hurdle the US tax system. You sympathize with them based on the utility you receive from their products. I actually do nor see companies as getting bigger meaning that they will improve the quality of their products and make life better. Microsoft is a perfect example of a large company holding back technology. Walmart is a good example of large company getting so big they can afford to exploit workers and still make a profit in the face of legal fines. The economies of scale of car manufactures for example is something we can all relate to. The companies are so large and set in production they can only create limited and standard vehicles in which progress is very limited. Monopolies are nothing we have to worry about; as they are illegal. I know I mentioned Microsoft before and you might think they are a monopoly. But they are in a business in which the entry is very costly. Most companies plan is to make a normal profit. When company cannot produce a normal profit they close the doors. Competition as I see it is only a consumer dream. Companies know who is doing what and how much they are making so they don’t really need to compete they are out for themselves. You may have heard the term Oligopoly (omg I am economics nerd). Well they are the car, insurance, oil, and other such companies where they rule the market. I am much more worried that they will ruin the quality of products and not monopolies seizing hold because other companies go out of business due to taxes.

I argue that small companies help society innovate the most and would hope they receive the largest decreases in tax burdens.

[MikeSTI]

Originally Posted by tysonK

I argue that small companies help society innovate the most and would hope they receive the largest decreases in tax burdens.

me too

[sperry]

Alright, so I'm talking out of my ass when it comes to taxes... like I said, I really don't know the numbers.

My beef with the tax system is that it's way more complicated than it should be. I'm not saying that it's really hard to do my taxes, and to be honest I don't feel like my taxes are too high. What bothers me is that I have to jump through hoops in order for the gov't to take my money, and once they've got it, I feel like it's being wasted because the bloat of our gov't sucks money and accomplishes nothing but maintaining the status quo, which is namely "those in power stay in power, and those who are rich make more money".

As far as your recomendation to "get married and have kids" in order to lower my taxes... well, that's just rediculous. I'm not saying you got a family to lower your taxes, because there are many great reasons to have a family aside from the tax break. My point is that everyone *knows* kids and a family are expensive. Why should you get off paying your share of the nations taxes because you have children, or a house, or a wife? How are kids a benefit to the economy when jobs in this country are being shipped over-seas and unemployement is up? Right now, America is price cutting itself right out of the world economy (remember that thread we had on WalMart?) Having the additional cost burden of children means *less* money to spend on premium goods and services that have higher markups. The cost of children force people to bargain hunt, which means places like WalMart thrive on the low price bottom line, which forces more jobs overseas, which means less money for the people that work and live here, which means even more need to bargain hunt.... and so on.

I'm not saying that families are bad... I fully intend on having my own someday. I'm just saying a tax break for having a family is like giving more money to welfare cases because they've got kids. It seems like a compassionate thing to do, but in the long run it just promotes wellfare mothers into having more kids, thus perpetuating the situation.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by sperry

... and to be honest I don't feel like my taxes are too high.

Shit, I do. And I don't even pay as much tax as I used to now that I make less than I did at my last job. Those people are so goddamned wasteful they don't deserve what they get from us right now, believe you me - I've worked for the government and seen the type of BS that goes on.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

...other wise why sould this country do anything for you your not helping them further the economy are you?

As for that, well... Scott buys so much crap every year that he does more for the economy than most of us put together.

[MikeSTI]

Originally Posted by AtomicLabMonkey

As for that, well... Scott buys so much crap every year that he does more for the economy than most of us put together.

but do the goods he buys say "MADE IN THE USA" if not and this goes for all of us including me where not doing are job to insure American job security, we will become a service only economy.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

I own my business and to think I employ 18 people and support there families with those jobs I should see some reward for my drive to be a business owner, its the only thing that weights out all the strugals of haveing a start up company, the idea that I would create a company that one day could employ 1000's of people and I would make nothing because I'm taxed equally to everyone else doesnt seem fair. I should just go fight for a job so someone else can deal with the burdon, I mean if I cant make more money on my own whats my drive?

That didn't make much sense to me, on a couple different levels.

1st, it sounded to me like you basically just said that being taxed equally to everyone else isn't fair - that because you own a business and make some money, you should pay lower taxes than everyone else. WTH is that?

2nd, you seem to be assuming that a flat tax means you wouldn't ever make any money than everyone else. Umm... no. If you're raking in 300 thousand dollars income every year from your business and you have to give up 10% as a flat tax, that's $30,000 gone. That leaves you $270,000 disposable income. That's a hell of a lot more than the guy making 50,000 every year who ends up with $45,000 disposable income after his flat 10% tax. Somehow I think you still win.

[Kevin M]

The problem with a flat tax is simple. You would either drastically raise taxes on the lower and middle classes, or cripple the federal budget. And of course, taxes on the wealthy would decrease. As has been discussed here before, the system we use is certainly flawed, but the basic principles of tax brackets based on income are fair in the eyes of the vast majority of citizens. Most wealthy taxpayers would love to pay fewer taxes, but surprisingly few of them disagree with the idea of paying a higher percentage than those who don't make a lot of money.

[MikeSTI]

...

[MikeSTI]

...

[MikeSTI]

opps

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

ok let me explain this too the slow people. because you all went to college and got your degrees, you planed on working for someone to have this degree as your job application, there for setting your self up to hate the guy making 300 thousand that employed you at 50 thousand! This I know is a rude sterio type but WTF this topic is old.

Okay, I don't really know who that post was directed to since it rambled all over the place. I'm not really trying to argue the merits of a flat tax one way or the other here, since I don't have a definite opinion on the subject. I was simply pointing out things I didn't understand or agree with about what you said earlier.

[AtomicLabMonkey]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

almost forgot in CA. if you make 300K a year you taxed at like 52% so with out deduction you would only take home 144K donesnt that sound fair the the guy who's only taxed on 50K at 20%?

Complete sentences and punctuation, dude - I'm literally having a hard time understanding what you're saying in this thread.

[sperry]

Originally Posted by MikeSTI

ok let me explain this too the slow people. because you all went to college and got your degrees, you planed on working for someone to have this degree as your job application, there for setting your self up to hate the guy making 300 thousand that employed you at 50 thousand! This I know is a rude sterio type but WTF this topic is old.

Um... what is all that rambling? You're insulting people that got degrees and don't own their own company? I know I didn't "go to college so I could work for a company and be pissed at someone that makes more money than I do"... that's rediculous! I went to college to learn something... (you know like how to spell words like "struggles" "having" "therefore" "yourself" "burden" "stereo" "business" "owner" "employees" "benefits" "housing" "breatherlizers", as well as the differences between "their" "there" "they're", and "where" and "we're", and "to" and "too". ) I went to college because it's a good way to learn about more complicated and specific subjects than you'd get in high school, to have new life experiences, to meet new people and to get away from my family out on my own. Not to mention that in this day and age, unless you're lucky, without a college degree of some sort you're likely to end up washing bathrooms or serving frys. (BTW: I recognize that insulting someones spelling is pretty lame, but my point is that if you're going to post on and on about how much better you are than college graduates, you should at least spell your insults correctly. )

Also, I don't work for a big company because I'm a sell-out, or don't have the drive to run my own business. I do it because it's an easier way to make money right out of the box rather than take the risks you mentioned. This way, after I've put in my 5 years, and played my cards right I'll have half a million dollars in the bank with which to start my race team, or buy house or to start a family. Good for you for wanting to run your own business, but it's not the only way to do things. In fact, my goals *are* to own my own business, namely some sort of race team or race shop. I just have enough sense to know that if I tried it now it'd fail! I'm going to need a bunch of money in the bank, and a lot more experience in the business before I can try it on my own and succeed, so for now I'm biding my time, and saving my money and working a good paying 8 to 5 job, while spending my spare time trying to learn more about what it takes to put together a race team.

Now, getting back to the whole tax issue... I'm still at a loss as to why you think your risks deserve a tax break. You make money just like everyone else, so you should pay taxes just like everyone else. You take the risks because you want the greater rewards, right? That's the trade off. You don't go into a casino and get better odds because you're going to be betting more money than the guy next to you. Besides, IIRC there *are* tax breaks for small businesses! What's missing are the *higher* taxes for the businesses that finalyl succeed. You mention that someone that makes $300k/yr gets taxed 52%. That may be the bracket rate, but I guarentee you they're not paying that much. Not after putting their money in real-estate, or stock purchases and all the loop-holes they can find. Eventually that $300k is more like $50k that their paying taxes on, meanwhile the other $250k is invested out of the reach of the gov't and making them more income. It's people like that the tax laws are tailor made for, because it's people like that that made the tax laws!

Perhaps a flat tax isn't a good solution, but it would be fair. I still think a national sales tax is the best idea, but again this isn't an area I have expertice in.

[MikeSTI]

...

[MattR]

This thread hurts

[MikeSTI]

it needs love