quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I can't agree with it. Sorry.

I'm a flat tax advocate, same rate for every single citizen.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I can't agree with it. Sorry.

I'm a flat tax advocate, same rate for every single citizen.

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I can't agree with it. Sorry.

I'm a flat tax advocate, same rate for every single citizen.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I can't agree with it. Sorry.

I'm a flat tax advocate, same rate for every single citizen.

Same here.


Progressive taxation with the guise of “because they can afford it” ends up being class warfare and wealth transfer.

As far as realpolitik goes it’s doable, but I’m against it.

quote:

Originally posted by jeffeosso:
https://www.cnn.com/2025/05/09...hy-house-republicans

Don't worry, Steve, you aren't impacted

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I can't agree with it. Sorry.

I'm a flat tax advocate, same rate for every single citizen.

Same here.

Progressive taxation with the guise of “because they can afford it” ends up being class warfare and wealth transfer.

As far as realpolitik goes it’s doable, but I’m against it.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
As one who has some records of taxation in the 50’s and 60’s at higher income levels, do you really know what folks were paying?

I am pretty sure that my great grandfather and grandfather were not “the exception” back then. With deductions and various accounting practices used then, I don’t think they ever paid 10% tax rate overall. They were well within the top 1% back then. (Yes, my family’s fortunes have fallen considerably since then). While their top marginal rate should have been north of 70%, they never got close to what I pay now for a much lower place in the income earner levels.

Somehow despite this, we were able to afford one of the largest militaries ever built, dramatically enlarged public infrastructure and generally avoided large public debt as a percentage of GDP.

As it is now, despite much higher rates, the moguls at the top, like Gates, Bezos, and Buffett pay way less percentage of income than folks like I do, and yet your answer is a drumbeat of “raise tax rates”….

The professional class is now paying way more than before. Small business pays more of the total bill. Fewer and fewer people contribute to the government (because of this idea that they can’t afford to pay), and the folks at the elite levels get to manipulate their money in ways that keeps them from paying.

I don’t think raising tax rates on folks making $2.5 milllion is going to do anything except make the left’s class warriors feel better and the government will continue to drop the money needed be surcharged and inflation will drive more folks in the upper middle and lower upper classes into these punitive tax rates.

And yes, Lheym tax rates and policy are the realm of congress… until the people say no more.

That so many of the ultra rich support these tax increases shows they have no concern they will actually pay much of anything… they know they will keep carve outs for themselves.

If everyone pays a proportionate amount we will finally have the electorate at all levels as interested in spending because their taxes will be proportional to it.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:
As one who has some records of taxation in the 50’s and 60’s at higher income levels, do you really know what folks were paying?

I am pretty sure that my great grandfather and grandfather were not “the exception” back then. With deductions and various accounting practices used then, I don’t think they ever paid 10% tax rate overall. They were well within the top 1% back then. (Yes, my family’s fortunes have fallen considerably since then). While their top marginal rate should have been north of 70%, they never got close to what I pay now for a much lower place in the income earner levels.

Somehow despite this, we were able to afford one of the largest militaries ever built, dramatically enlarged public infrastructure and generally avoided large public debt as a percentage of GDP.

As it is now, despite much higher rates, the moguls at the top, like Gates, Bezos, and Buffett pay way less percentage of income than folks like I do, and yet your answer is a drumbeat of “raise tax rates”….

The professional class is now paying way more than before. Small business pays more of the total bill. Fewer and fewer people contribute to the government (because of this idea that they can’t afford to pay), and the folks at the elite levels get to manipulate their money in ways that keeps them from paying.

I don’t think raising tax rates on folks making $2.5 milllion is going to do anything except make the left’s class warriors feel better and the government will continue to drop the money needed be surcharged and inflation will drive more folks in the upper middle and lower upper classes into these punitive tax rates.

And yes, Lheym tax rates and policy are the realm of congress… until the people say no more.

That so many of the ultra rich support these tax increases shows they have no concern they will actually pay much of anything… they know they will keep carve outs for themselves.

If everyone pays a proportionate amount we will finally have the electorate at all levels as interested in spending because their taxes will be proportional to it.

The problem is it is the folks at the top who the least. The answer is for the moguls to lay along with us percentage wise.

quote:

Originally posted by Saeed:
Hahahaha!

Broken promises!

Didn't he say he was going to lower taxes?

The MAGA FUCKWIT is in total confusion!

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:
He's never going to increase taxes and he knows it will never happen under his watch. He's paying it lip service to endear himself to the blue-collar folks that adore him for reasons unknown.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:
I can't agree with it. Sorry.

I'm a flat tax advocate, same rate for every single citizen.

Same here.


Progressive taxation with the guise of “because they can afford it” ends up being class warfare and wealth transfer.

As far as realpolitik goes it’s doable, but I’m against it.

I oppose both of hit. As Trump said to HRC, “Fix the tax code, but you won’t. “

I doubt this Congress and President will either, but I watch.

Jtex is in record sooting Labor Value Theory if we want to talk about Marxist class warfare. Taxation is not. It is what Congress exists to do.

quote:

If everyone pays a proportionate amount we will finally have the electorate at all levels as interested in spending because their taxes will be proportional to it.

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
I was a CPA before I went to law school and spent the first few years of my practice doing Federal Tax Law. What I'm seeing here is a dispute over the wisdom of an income tax vs. a consumption tax. I still like thinking about tax theory, but have never thought an income tax was the way to go. It discourages production. The income tax was instituted to help fund WWI and was supposed to be temporary, but no tax is ever temp0rary. We also have consumption taxes in the US in terms of sales taxes, and tariffs. Consumption taxes are a lot more fair and are progressive taxes in that the more someone spends, the more they pay. Like a VAT. Rich people will spend money, so they will be taxed by a consumption tax. Now there need to be some exemptions for basics, like basic food and shelter, but perhaps not for T-bone steaks and fine wine. The problem with a progressive income tax is it discourages people from being productive and making more money, which discourages stimulating the economy. You want people to start businesses, hire people and make money, so they can spend money. The US tax system is counterproductive. The US is also one of the only countries that taxes US citizens on their worldwide income, as opposed to only US sourced income. That presents a whole another issue.

But bottom line is, who starts businesses, hire workers and stimulate the economy? Mostly rich people. If the marginal tax rate gets to a point where there is less than half of a return to those investors, they will never take the risk. We really should not raise the marginal income tax rate for corporations and high income individuals for the good of the economy. Frankly, we should ditch the income tax entirely and go to a consumption based tax scheme, like a VAT.

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
I was a CPA before I went to law school and spent the first few years of my practice doing Federal Tax Law. What I'm seeing here is a dispute over the wisdom of an income tax vs. a consumption tax. I still like thinking about tax theory, but have never thought an income tax was the way to go. It discourages production. The income tax was instituted to help fund WWI and was supposed to be temporary, but no tax is ever temp0rary. We also have consumption taxes in the US in terms of sales taxes, and tariffs. Consumption taxes are a lot more fair and are progressive taxes in that the more someone spends, the more they pay. Like a VAT. Rich people will spend money, so they will be taxed by a consumption tax. Now there need to be some exemptions for basics, like basic food and shelter, but perhaps not for T-bone steaks and fine wine. The problem with a progressive income tax is it discourages people from being productive and making more money, which discourages stimulating the economy. You want people to start businesses, hire people and make money, so they can spend money. The US tax system is counterproductive. The US is also one of the only countries that taxes US citizens on their worldwide income, as opposed to only US sourced income. That presents a whole another issue.

But bottom line is, who starts businesses, hire workers and stimulate the economy? Mostly rich people. If the marginal tax rate gets to a point where there is less than half of a return to those investors, they will never take the risk. We really should not raise the marginal income tax rate for corporations and high income individuals for the good of the economy. Frankly, we should ditch the income tax entirely and go to a consumption based tax scheme, like a VAT.

I love these arguments and my response is always "my god, how have we survived?"

And, the rich people never have a response. Other than, "how can we keep our money?"

Get over it. Pay your fair share and STFU.

Lavaca, you made a bazillion dollars in your insurance defense practice. Enjoy it.

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Let's see. This magical flat tax asks the poor to pay more and the rich to pay less. That's not class warfare?

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
I was a CPA before I went to law school and spent the first few years of my practice doing Federal Tax Law. What I'm seeing here is a dispute over the wisdom of an income tax vs. a consumption tax. I still like thinking about tax theory, but have never thought an income tax was the way to go. It discourages production. The income tax was instituted to help fund WWI and was supposed to be temporary, but no tax is ever temp0rary. We also have consumption taxes in the US in terms of sales taxes, and tariffs. Consumption taxes are a lot more fair and are progressive taxes in that the more someone spends, the more they pay. Like a VAT. Rich people will spend money, so they will be taxed by a consumption tax. Now there need to be some exemptions for basics, like basic food and shelter, but perhaps not for T-bone steaks and fine wine. The problem with a progressive income tax is it discourages people from being productive and making more money, which discourages stimulating the economy. You want people to start businesses, hire people and make money, so they can spend money. The US tax system is counterproductive. The US is also one of the only countries that taxes US citizens on their worldwide income, as opposed to only US sourced income. That presents a whole another issue.

But bottom line is, who starts businesses, hire workers and stimulate the economy? Mostly rich people. If the marginal tax rate gets to a point where there is less than half of a return to those investors, they will never take the risk. We really should not raise the marginal income tax rate for corporations and high income individuals for the good of the economy. Frankly, we should ditch the income tax entirely and go to a consumption based tax scheme, like a VAT.

I love these arguments and my response is always "my god, how have we survived?"

And, the rich people never have a response. Other than, "how can we keep our money?"

Get over it. Pay your fair share and STFU.

Lavaca, you made a bazillion dollars in your insurance defense practice. Enjoy it.

Tell us Mike? What's a fair share?

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
I was a CPA before I went to law school and spent the first few years of my practice doing Federal Tax Law. What I'm seeing here is a dispute over the wisdom of an income tax vs. a consumption tax. I still like thinking about tax theory, but have never thought an income tax was the way to go. It discourages production. The income tax was instituted to help fund WWI and was supposed to be temporary, but no tax is ever temp0rary. We also have consumption taxes in the US in terms of sales taxes, and tariffs. Consumption taxes are a lot more fair and are progressive taxes in that the more someone spends, the more they pay. Like a VAT. Rich people will spend money, so they will be taxed by a consumption tax. Now there need to be some exemptions for basics, like basic food and shelter, but perhaps not for T-bone steaks and fine wine. The problem with a progressive income tax is it discourages people from being productive and making more money, which discourages stimulating the economy. You want people to start businesses, hire people and make money, so they can spend money. The US tax system is counterproductive. The US is also one of the only countries that taxes US citizens on their worldwide income, as opposed to only US sourced income. That presents a whole another issue.

But bottom line is, who starts businesses, hire workers and stimulate the economy? Mostly rich people. If the marginal tax rate gets to a point where there is less than half of a return to those investors, they will never take the risk. We really should not raise the marginal income tax rate for corporations and high income individuals for the good of the economy. Frankly, we should ditch the income tax entirely and go to a consumption based tax scheme, like a VAT.

I love these arguments and my response is always "my god, how have we survived?"

And, the rich people never have a response. Other than, "how can we keep our money?"

Get over it. Pay your fair share and STFU.

Lavaca, you made a bazillion dollars in your insurance defense practice. Enjoy it.

Tell us Mike? What's a fair share?

More than single digits for the uber investment class.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
I understand a flat tax perfectly well, that is why I don't support it. It is just another gift to the wealthy. The top tax rate is just about 1/2 of what it was in 1980. I'm not fooled in the least as to what the GOP has been doing, moving the burden of funding the government on to the middle and lower tax brackets. Anybody paying attention can see what has been happening. That is one of the many reasons that I do not support tariffs.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
And that burden is what caused two destructive revolutions in the past.

quote:

Originally posted by crbutler:

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:
And that burden is what caused two destructive revolutions in the past.

Which two are you talking about?

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:

quote:

Originally posted by Bill/Oregon:
Let's see. This magical flat tax asks the poor to pay more and the rich to pay less. That's not class warfare?

It is broad based consumption tax, it hurts those on the bottom the the most and does a good job of hurting the middle class as well, just like tariffs do.

quote:

Originally posted by LHeym500:

quote:

Originally posted by JTEX:

quote:

Originally posted by Mike Mitchell:

quote:

Originally posted by lavaca:
I was a CPA before I went to law school and spent the first few years of my practice doing Federal Tax Law. What I'm seeing here is a dispute over the wisdom of an income tax vs. a consumption tax. I still like thinking about tax theory, but have never thought an income tax was the way to go. It discourages production. The income tax was instituted to help fund WWI and was supposed to be temporary, but no tax is ever temp0rary. We also have consumption taxes in the US in terms of sales taxes, and tariffs. Consumption taxes are a lot more fair and are progressive taxes in that the more someone spends, the more they pay. Like a VAT. Rich people will spend money, so they will be taxed by a consumption tax. Now there need to be some exemptions for basics, like basic food and shelter, but perhaps not for T-bone steaks and fine wine. The problem with a progressive income tax is it discourages people from being productive and making more money, which discourages stimulating the economy. You want people to start businesses, hire people and make money, so they can spend money. The US tax system is counterproductive. The US is also one of the only countries that taxes US citizens on their worldwide income, as opposed to only US sourced income. That presents a whole another issue.

But bottom line is, who starts businesses, hire workers and stimulate the economy? Mostly rich people. If the marginal tax rate gets to a point where there is less than half of a return to those investors, they will never take the risk. We really should not raise the marginal income tax rate for corporations and high income individuals for the good of the economy. Frankly, we should ditch the income tax entirely and go to a consumption based tax scheme, like a VAT.

I love these arguments and my response is always "my god, how have we survived?"

And, the rich people never have a response. Other than, "how can we keep our money?"

Get over it. Pay your fair share and STFU.

Lavaca, you made a bazillion dollars in your insurance defense practice. Enjoy it.

Tell us Mike? What's a fair share?

More than single digits for the uber investment class.

quote:

Originally posted by Steve Bertram:
I understand a flat tax perfectly well, that is why I don't support it. It is just another gift to the wealthy. The top tax rate is just about 1/2 of what it was in 1980. I'm not fooled in the least as to what the GOP has been doing, moving the burden of funding the government on to the middle and lower tax brackets. Anybody paying attention can see what has been happening. That is one of the many reasons that I do not support tariffs.