Jump to content
3000AD Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Charles Lindsey

National Sales Tax considered

Recommended Posts

Yahoo news link

quote:

NICEVILLE, Fla. (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) said on Tuesday that abolishing the U.S. income tax system and replacing it with a national sales tax was an idea worth considering.

"It's an interesting idea," Bush told an "Ask President Bush" campaign forum here. "You know, I'm not exactly sure how big the national sales tax is going to have to be, but it's the kind of interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously."

Republican economists who speak regularly to the White House have said that the Bush campaign has been mulling the idea of an overhaul of the tax code as part of an agenda for a second term should Bush win reelection.

Some lawmakers have floated ideas of simplifying the tax code by putting in place a "flat" income tax rate or a national sales tax. But those ideas have so far not gained much traction in Congress. Opponents say such a system would not be in the best interests of the poor and the middle class who would pay the same tax rate as the wealthy even though they have less disposable income.


It's short so I copied the whole thing. Be sure to click on the message board. Interesting thoughts all around.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Well if that would happen 1st of all it would create a MASSIVE job boom as more and more global corporations move to make the U.S. their headquarters, plus the ensuing surge in spending would also create tons of jobs, so any negative effects of the poor paying the same as the wealthy would be negated by the positive effects of more jobs.

Think about it, most poeple spend all the money they have and if they had an extra $400.00 a month, they would probably buy a new car, house, boat, whatever.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sigh.

Ok so instead of taxing you at the front side (your paycheck) they tax you at the back side (POS [point of sale hehe not what we are used to pos meaning]).

quote:

Think about it,

I'm trying

quote:

most poeple spend all the money they have and if they had an extra $400.00 a month, they would probably buy a new car, house, boat, whatever.


The fatal flaw in that argument is that you are discounting the national tax that would suddenly be added to those items you just mentioned. Depends on how much they want.

Without a starting a huge argument suffice it to say if I pay less taxes then it is great. If I wind up paying more then not so good.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

National sales tax = totally idiotic.

It would hit the poor HARD, as they spend a much greater percentage of their income on necessities like groceries, then the middle or upper classes. 10% of $50 is a lot more, when you've only got $15,000, compared to $50,000.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No good. I pay a 5% state sales tax already, in order to make up for the fed income tax paid by all in my state, the sales tax would have to at least double. I also currently do not pay a sales tax on food, if the national sales tax added a tax to food then I cannot see how this could possibly help me.

Is there a place to learn more about the proposed tax?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Put sales tax in the word/phrase box

HR 25 is a bill that is proposed. Not much learning unless you can read the legalese.

Everyone is right. Even Darkling. It's just not a magic wand. It would be great to bring home ALL my money but then everything would cost more at the register. Hmmmmmmmm.

Alabama taxes food. I'm jealous of states that don't but it's not terrible.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Actually, my opinion, I'm both for and against it

For it - Because it'll make EVERYONE pay taxes (including the rich) and will put most lawyers out of a job, it'll also make it so that people won't ahve to file income tax reports

Againt it - Because everything will go up in price

There are always advantage's and disadvantage's to these thigns.. a lot of time's you just have to sacrifice something for the greater good

My greater good is that I won't have to file income tax reports, or rather my father won't. I see him up all night sometime's getting stuff together

I may work right now, but i don't have to file these thing's until I get a place of my own, and quite frankly I don't have the money for that (house's here cost an arm and a leg, and sometime's a head to,but that's natural since it IS Nevada)

So, for honestly, i'm both for and against it. When more information is released then I'll be able to make a better decision, cause right now it's scant information, can't exactly make an absolute decision since most of the fact's are still being hidden

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

White House backs away from statement

He wasn't considering it. He was only considering considering it.

quote:

For it - Because it'll make EVERYONE pay taxes (including the rich) and will put most lawyers out of a job, it'll also make it so that people won't ahve to file income tax reports


That's several of the FOR arguments. Everyone will pay. Tax cheaters will not be able to avoid it (finally) and since the rich buy more expensive toys they would pay more tax.

I wouldn't think lawyers would lose work so much as tax preparers.

quote:

Againt it - Because everything will go up in price

True but you'll have ALL your money. Again it depends on how much they want.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

National Sales tax.....YUCK!!!

Nah, this is what we need to have happen.

A: Withholding, forget about it, on November 15th, you HAVE to write a check to Uncle Sam for the FULL amount.

B: Change the tax date from April 15th, which is the farthest from the elections that they could get, and move it RIGHT on November 15th. Wanna see taxes go down?

C: Flat tax, forget this if you make such and such an amount, you pay this percentage etc. Flat 10%, no matter how much you make. But that would take the Democrats main weapon of class warfare away from them, so it would NEVER happen.

YOu wanna know why our taxes are so friking high, because most people are clueless as to how much taxes they actually pay. They see the amount on their check, and that's all they pay attention to, they don't see the withholding, the SSI, the Medicare etc, etc ad nauseum, they don't see the taxes on their phone bill, they just pay it, they don't see the excise tax on their tires, they just pay it.

Pitiful, but if you make them write a check on November 15th, then you will see a LOT of politicians NOT getting reelected.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jag for President 2008!!! Why not? This election is like pin the tale on the j'kass.

Oh wait! That loooks like I am calling him one. What I mean is...not having a career in president stuff behind you!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

quote:

Originally posted by echo:

Jag for President 2008!!! Why not? This election is like pin the tale on the j'kass.

Oh wait! That loooks like I am calling him one. What I mean is...not having a career in president stuff behind you!

Ouch, now that hurt.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

A radio talk show had Georgia representative Linden on. He wants 22 - 23% on goods AND services. He talked a good game about how hidden in the cost of everything is 22% taxes anyway so remove all the hidden stuff and take 22% off the top. 22% sounds kinda steep in addition to local taxes.

And he talked about a poverty level where you would get a check every month up to x amount of $ to cover the necessities.

Still don't know. And after thinking about I decided you wouldn't get ALL your money. Pensions (if you are lucky enough to have one) and healthcare would probably still be deducted.

Flat tax sounds interesting too.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

id be for it.

simply because i prefer to be taxed on the things I BUY than straight off my paycheck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Kartoffel:

National sales tax = totally idiotic.

It would hit the poor HARD, as they spend a much greater percentage of their income on necessities like groceries, then the middle or upper classes. 10% of $50 is a lot more, when you've only got $15,000, compared to $50,000.

Most of the proposals that I've seen would exempt Groceries from any tax.

However Rest Easy, there is no way that we would ever have a National Sales tax and I'll tell you why.

The current system allows for a lot of Manipulation, Huge companies like IBM, GE, GM, Ford and many other multi-billion dollare companies pay BILLIONS in taxes, many of them have special pages written especially for them that gives them a percentage off here and there that amounts to millions of dollars. Of course, congress doesn't give this kind of special treatment for free, they charge them anywhere from 10 to 25 cents on the dollare for these special pages in the tax code that they recieve back from the companies in the forms of political contributions, perks and special privelages. This is one of the reasons why every year 70 to 80% of the people who are in power get re-elected, no one can afford to run against these congressman with their multi-million dollar re-election warchests. The current tax code is the seat of congressional and political power and the last time I checked there aren't too many people in power willing to give up that power. It would truly take an act of God for something like this to actually make it to becoming a law.

P.S. one of the things you guys seem to forget is that Savings would no longer be taxed at all under this type of system, Japan has shown us that a country with a high rate of savings can become an economic powerhouse in a very short period of time. Imagine this country with a significantly higher savings rate, our interest rates would be GUARANTEED to stay low, keeping econimic growth at extremely high rates without rekindling inflation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Tac:

id be for it.

simply because i prefer to be taxed on the things I BUY than straight off my paycheck.

Agree'd

I'd also like to see the rich TAXED instead of them swindling themselves out of it..

quote:

one of the things you guys seem to forget is that Savings would no longer be taxed at all under this type of system, Japan has shown us that a country with a high rate of savings can become an economic powerhouse in a very short period of time. Imagine this country with a significantly higher savings rate, our interest rates would be GUARANTEED to stay low, keeping econimic growth at extremely high rates without rekindling inflation.


Never thought of that... hmm that IS interesting

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by Kalshion:

Actually, my opinion, I'm both for and against it

For it - Because it'll make EVERYONE pay taxes (including the rich) and will put most lawyers out of a job, it'll also make it so that people won't ahve to file income tax reports

Againt it - Because everything will go up in price

There are always advantage's and disadvantage's to these thigns.. a lot of time's you just have to sacrifice something for the greater good

My greater good is that I won't have to file income tax reports, or rather my father won't. I see him up all night sometime's getting stuff together

I may work right now, but i don't have to file these thing's until I get a place of my own, and quite frankly I don't have the money for that (house's here cost an arm and a leg, and sometime's a head to,but that's natural since it IS Nevada)

So, for honestly, i'm both for and against it. When more information is released then I'll be able to make a better decision, cause right now it's scant information, can't exactly make an absolute decision since most of the fact's are still being hidden

My company currently spends aproximatly 1/3 of our profits on Taxes so the truth is that if I didn't have to pay all this money in taxes I could afford to lower prices, so if I lower my prices by about 10% plus you are getting about 15% more in income, then who cares that the Government is charging 11% sales taxes? Or even 20% if they decided to also include Social Security and Medicare in there (which would mean an additional 19% reduction in what we currently pay in taxes - 9.5 percent from me (as emmployer) and 9.5% from you (as employee). So let's recap, If social Security & Medicare is included, I as an employer would save aproximately 42% off my profits, since profits are aproximatly 25% of revenue, this would mean that I would be able to lop 10% off my price and still make more money. You would end up bringing home 25% more Cash, so if I had to pay 20% off the top, and I eat half of that you would see a 10% rise in prices, so your net gain would be 15%.

Let me say that again. You would have 15% MORE cash than what you started off with.

Even if I kept my prices the same, you would still end up with 5% more.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

quote:

Originally posted by nomad:

A similar tax exists already in the EU since long ago. Look at:


Not at all a fair comparison, 1st of all, the VAT tax, taxes everything at all levels of production, whenever you add value, such as taking raw Iron and making it into a car, you pay a tax on that. Second IN ADDITION to charging the VAT tax, they ALSO charge an income tax. The net effect is that Europe has an average tax rate of well over 50% and in some countries it hits 70%!!! It's no wonder Europe has an unemployment rate that is double ours, the employers over there have to give almost everything they make to the EU, leaving them with no spare cash to hire more employees.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't forget that VAT is an indirect tax charged at the point of sale, currently at 17.5%. In the UK we have income tax and national insurance as direct taxation which, depending on how much you earn follows a band between 10-40% for income tax and a flat rate of about 11% (I think) for national insurance. The scale is sliding as well and you get a tax allowance which is a portion of your earnings that suffers no tax. Added to that TAX is a local council tax,also direct, which is set independantly by the local council. Currently for us that works out at about another 3% in tax. Over all we currently pay about 37% in direct taxation. Vat is also paid but only on products bought, and food, childrens's clothes etc are VAT free. Don't forget as well that we have a well established Health Care system which provides excellent health services to all, practically free, including drugs (not heroin etc by the way and only the relative wealthy pay for these and even then it's a nominal amount at that!) Furthermore we have a well developed social security system which seeks to ensure that everyone is cared for. Its flawed and doesn't always work effectively with a lot of scroungers wringing the system or acting in a fraudulent manner. But my understanding is that its better than you'll find in America, Medicare not withstanding.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Kalsh one thing you have to take into account is that the 'rich' are taxed 'less' because its they who create the vast majority of jobs.

If I earn 10 grand a year and someone else earns 10 million a year, and if we both are taxed...say, 10% (to use an easy number)... the chances of me using my money to invest or create jobs is nonexistent. Th e guy earning 10 mill, if taxed the same 10% would likely tend to hoard his money outside the country rather than spend it in the above mentioned jobs or stocks and stuff.

Thats why the 'rich' usually get more tax breaks plus a lot of other types of tax breaks when they actually use the money to make new jobs.

So now you know. If you win the lottery you better find a swiss bank quick, fund the development of 'BC3000AD: Tac's Edition' & open a few more mcdonalds in France.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

I always hate it when they start discussing a sales tax "instead of" and income tax.

The same thing happened in California, they decided that they would bring in the sales tax slowly, and then "phase out" the income tax.

Guess what? Niether happened, instead they instituted a sales tax, and KEPT the income tax as well.

Ain't that nice?

Whenever a politican says "instead of" I get scared, because it actually means, "in addition to"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Even though the U.S. spends Billions on Defense, it still only amounts to around 4% of GDP, about the same as what the UK spends. The difference is that the US has an economy that is many times greater than that of European country's. Also remember that in the U.S., someone is considered "Poor" if they make less than 18K a year. (though it may be more since the last time I checked was a couple of years ago). In most country's you're poor if you can't afford to buy basics; Food, Clothing, Housing. In the U.S. you're poor if you can't afford premium Cable. Problem is, you guys think you can afford to have 12% of your population unemployed and living off the government, but you can't Eventually something's got to give. Everyone talks about our "massive" deficits here in the U.S., but again, it's only about 5% of GDP, in many EU countries it's 15, 20 even 40% of GDP, so one way or another, it won't last. You don't have as many immigrants as the U.S. does to help soften the blow of the Elderly living longer, so you guys will get hit many times harder than we will, soon as your aging population combines with the number of unemployed, your socialistic system will collapse, just as the Soviets did. Sorry.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest

Darkling,

I do so love someone that knows history.

The Europeans are so proud of their system, and yet it is going to be their downfall.

Because such a system cannot be selfsupporting, nor sustainable.

Sooner or later the system collapses due to it's own weight.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes you are correct, ALL the EU Countries combined APPROACH total U.S. output, but hey, as you said, Europeans have been around for a LONG time, they should be way ahead of us, not catching up to us.

As for Germany, are you sure you want to make that comparison? According to the World Fact Book per capita GDP in Germany is $27,600.00 VS in the U.S. it's $37,800.00, I don't know about you, but I'd rather my country be generating more revenue, than worry so much about where we are getting it from, sure the U.S. doesn't Export as much as it imports, but part of that is that we generate SO MUCH MORE income than other countries that we can buy more than anyone else can.

Now, as for Child poverty (% defined as the share of the children living in the households with income below 50% of the national median):

The Median houshold income in the U.S. is $53,100 for 2003, so half of that is $26,550.

As reported by the Federal Statistical Office (of Germany), the average net income of households in Germany amounted to EUR 32,100 for 2002, but since their Economy Contracted by about 1% it might be less now and in Current exchange Rates (not sure what they were in 2002) your looking at aprox $38000, so half of that is $19000.

One thing I don't understand though is how Germany can have a budget of less than Half the U.S. budget (800 Billion vs 1.9 Trillion) When their tax rates are higher than they are in the U.S. so something about the World Fact Book is screwey.

My whole point about the "Poverty as defined by" thing is that's not REAL poverty, that's like saying that my Employees are poor because they make 25% of my income, I assure you that they ARE NOT poor, they make more than the national average, but you can't define someone as poor just simply becuase they make less than you, you define someone as poor if they have no disposable income, or worse if they can't afford basics.

One last thing, when I was 17 I was hit by a car, I had no health insurance and, Guess what, they didn't leave me on the road to die. Our increadibly expensive health care system, took care of all the surgury's, even the cosmetic ones so my face didn't look like hamburger, and they took care of the therapy I would need for the next 2 years. Yes when all was said and done they handed me a bill for over $150,000.00. I sat down with them and explained that I couldn't afford to pay it, the PIP insurance on the guys car that hit me only covered $10,000.00. So what happened, did they throw me in jail? NO, they settled for 6 cents on the dollar and wrote the rest off, I STILL got the healthcare that I needed. Considering the fact that Europe has very few Trauma centers, I'm VERY lucky that I wasn't there when this happened to me because I would most likely have died.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh and one last thing about Germany, Germany was the one that Built most of Saddam's Bunkers at a cost of Billions to Saddam. While they were busy taking his Cash, they complained that the U.S. was causing poverty in Iraq with the Trade embargo. They could have said to Saddam, hey why don't you spend these Billions on the dying Iraqi children, but of course, they were too busy counting the Billions they were making.

What was it that you said about the U.S.? Hmm, Oh yes "money at all costs" that's what it was.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×