Here's why we need tax reform

I was watching a tax reform summit on CSPAN this morning...did you know 70% of the people in the US actually take more tax money out than they pay into the system? 70%! Wonder why we have so much debt & deficits? In addition to BO's 3+ year spending spree, only 30% of us are participating in suppoorting the country. Now, if we can get those 70% making a contribution imagine how much better off we'd all be!!

 

Does that include things like farm subsidies, educational grants, pensions, etc? Or is that just tax credits, refunds, etc?

 

Flat Tax
"Unlike the current system, a flat tax is simple, fair, and good for growth. Instead of the 893 forms required by the current system, a flat tax would use only two postcard-sized forms: one for labor income and the other for business and capital income. Unlike the current system, which discriminates based on the source, use, and level of income, a flat tax treats all taxpayers equally, fulfilling the "equal justice under law" principle etched above the main entrance to the U.S. Supreme Court building. And unlike the current system, which punishes people for contributing to the nation's wealth, a flat tax would lower marginal tax rates and eliminate the tax bias against saving and investment, thus ensuring better economic performance in a competitive global economy."
http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2005/07/a-brief-guide-to-the-flat-tax

Sorry about the copy and paste David but it said it a whole lot better then I could.

 

People getting more money back than they contributed...the idea being, taxes are collected to fund the government not to serve as an annual bonus for 70% of the population.

 

What percentage relates to the Jr. tax cuts?

 

I give up, what is that percentage?

 

I don't know, I haven't looked into it but ...if it's currently at 70% with the Jr. tax cuts, it's reasonable to assume that without those tax cuts the percentage would be lower.

 

If you haven't "looked into it" how would you know? Regardless who you want to blame (there is enough blame to go around) does it seem fair that only 30% of the people are funding the gov't while 70% are taking the funds designed to pay for the operation of the country?

 

How did you miss this?:

Now, that is an assumption, but it's a reasonable one. If you have evidence that contradicts that reasonable assumption then post it.

Is that the federal goverment you are talking about? I'm assuming you are not talking about State government here. Isn't it true that you don't want to fund the federal government with taxes? Raise the tax rate and the percentage of people "supporting the country" would increase.

 

Jr spent money like a liberal democrat on crack. Obama who is said to be a democrat and spends money faster then they can print it is following the same foriegn policy plan as Jr. So tell me what difference is there between them and how stupid or naive sheep were the people who screamed that Jr was a conservative, a neo-conservative and/or a right winger.

 

Thanks Andy. That's one of the funniest lines I've seen here in some time.

...is probably a Republican. All one has to do here is read the threads and what people say about him to determine that.

 

Thank you.

 

I haven't been saying there is any difference between the two, I've been addressing the basic math of David's post. He says 70% are not "supporting the country." I'm asking if that number includes Jr.'s tax cuts (that Obama extended btw). I'm pointing out that it's reasonable to assume that without the tax cuts, a higher percentage of people would be "supporting the country." I also added that if the goal is to increase the number of people "supporting the country", which appears to be David's cause, raising taxes is what would have to happen.

 

What makes you so sure your assumption is reasonable? Since you posted it, what evidence do you have that it's reasonable?

Another lie? With some of these things you are posting I really have to wonder if you so lacking in comprehension skills or you simply get a perverse thrill (up you leg) by telling bold-faced liars. So are you stupid or a liar? Which is it?

 

Actually, what's true is that you can't admit when you're wrong, which is often. That, as well as your rabid partisanship, means you have no credibility in your posts. As you once said, you're the "poster boy for hardcore Republicans"...that pretty much says it all. So prove me wrong "poster boy."

 

I have never denied being partisan, you dip...I have seen the stupidity of the left & the damage liberalism they has caused, so I am unapologetically partisan.
...but I now see we are up to 4 bold-faced lies because I have never called myself the "poster boy for hardcore Republicans", do I need to ask you to prove that one too? I'm thinking you may want to cool your jets a bit on the lies because two can play that game.

 

Think I can't? They ARE your words, you know. I guess when you spew out tons of bs all the time you can't remember what some of that bs is. FYI, you can easily find the reference yourself, "poster boy."

 

Hey, IQless, better check out what moen has to say about you in another thread!

 

He's back?

 

Unfortunately, he never left.