Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
Logo
Search Members FAQ Portal
  • Navigation
  • Our Hoosier Board
  • →
  • Other
  • →
  • Politics
  • →
  • Aaronk a question
Welcome to Our Hoosier Board!

Most of the posters here have been around for nearly a decade now. You'll find their knowledge and insight to be second to none. We have a really strong community and value everyone's opinions.

Feel free to jump into any thread and voice your opinion with conviction. We love heated debates and even some fanbase ribbing from time to time. We pride ourselves on the lack of moderation needed to make this board successful.

Please remember that we have been around many years and have an astute ability to tell the difference between an immature, childish, trash-talking troll and a passionate fan voicing his or her opinion. It is at the discretion of Jazen and myself whether any moderating actions should be taken at any given time. It's a very, very rare thing. In other words, no worries....you'll be fine!

Cheers,
sirbrianwilson

Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Aaronk a question
Tweet Topic Started: Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM (310 Views)
boilergrad01 Sep 27 2008, 08:27 PM Post #16
Working on the last 5
Posts:
10,098
Group:
Members
Member
#135
Joined:
February 9, 2008
AaronK,

I think i have stated this before but i agree the fair tax is decent tax plan. I feel that it is a little to high because states would then need a sales only tax and so would cities. Indiana is already at what 6% plus local sales tax. I think in Indy at hotles it gets as high as 12% add that to the fair tax and it is pretty high. I do see how with no personal income tax and capital gains tax it would create wealth. if you spent $200,000 a year and pai $40,000 in taxes that would be alot better than what we pay now. The tax might also force peole to live within their means reduce the credit crisis we are currently in. Plus the revenues would be huge and that would only encourage more spending. Does the tax extend to property purchases.
Nothing beats an Astronaut
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Sep 27 2008, 08:42 PM Post #17
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 08:27 PM
AaronK,

I think i have stated this before but i agree the fair tax is decent tax plan. I feel that it is a little to high because states would then need a sales only tax and so would cities. Indiana is already at what 6% plus local sales tax. I think in Indy at hotles it gets as high as 12% add that to the fair tax and it is pretty high. I do see how with no personal income tax and capital gains tax it would create wealth. if you spent $200,000 a year and pai $40,000 in taxes that would be alot better than what we pay now. The tax might also force peole to live within their means reduce the credit crisis we are currently in. Plus the revenues would be huge and that would only encourage more spending. Does the tax extend to property purchases.
BG, there would be no sales tax on property purchases. It is a retail tax, and property is not included in that. The tax seems high to you when you add state taxes, because you are basing that on our current economic standards. Without an oppressive income tax, there would be much much more wealth available, more jobs available (because of the attractiveness to foreign investment, amongst other reasons), and should ultimately lead to an actual decrease in government spending which would consequently decrease the rate in the future. If a side affect is that some people chose to curb their discretionary spending, save more, and ultimately decrease the general burden created through over spending and the consequential bankruptcy, then so be it. That's a good thing!!!
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
enemydeservesnomercy Sep 27 2008, 09:36 PM Post #18
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,464
Group:
Members
Member
#10
Joined:
February 4, 2008
aaronk2727
Sep 27 2008, 08:07 PM
Boiler, to answer your original question, yes I feel that our current (or any) progressive tax system discourages success, and decreases ambition and drive, 2 major contributing elements to the rapid rise of this nation to begin with. I have spoken out on here countless times for The FairTax, which has more benefits than we could even imagine for EVERY American citizen.

To the rest of you on this thread. $300,000/year is definitely a lot of money, and absolutely allows someone to live comfortably. Unfortunately, you guys are missing the point. There is no dollar amount that a person earns that makes it "OK" to take it from him/her against his will and distribute/waste it as you see fit.

Should we send buses into the ghettos of America, round up the criminals and drop them off at all the gated communities to burglarize the homes? By the reasoning that I am hearing on here, that should be OK because the ghetto folds are the ones who "need" it, and the gated community folks can "afford to lose it" right?

There is just no constitutional or moral justification for the Robin Hood theory that many of you seem to be advocating.

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
...aaronk, come on man, your analogies tip the absurd...i, honestly, can barely acknowledge it...

...i equate the fair tax to universal healthcare...except only more dangerous because you are talking about what to do with ALL of the country's money instead of just a PORTION of it...it is just too big of a change for an economy in the state that we are currently in...

...to be honest, i'm not crazy about either tax plan (obama's or mccain's)...i think they both have flaws...again, i would be voting for the lesser of two evils as i feel obama's would better address needs that are direct and current to our country's economy...you call it the robin hood theory and i can't disagree with you, but you know what in calling it that you are partially admitting that the rich are greedy and can part with some of their wealth to help jumpstart this economy and help the people who have immediate needs...honestly, what are the immediate needs of the wealthy?...please tell me...do they really need a tax CUT like they would receive in mccain's plan?...could the lower/middle class use the cuts?...YOU BETCHA...we would see immediate results in the economy with these breaks...
do you realize how much just a few hundre, not to mention a few thousand dollars could help someone who lives paycheck to paycheck...which is 95% of this country...95% AARON!...are you telling me that if 95% of this country suddenly has a thousand extra dollars in their pocket to spend it's not going to jumpstart this economy?...

...the fair tax just scares me...i would be willing to slowly evolve to a semblance of the fair tax after a few years in a plan similar to obama's...
"The possibilities of basketball as seen here were a revelation to me. Basketball may have been invented in Massachusetts, but it was made for Indiana."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 Sep 27 2008, 10:45 PM Post #19
Member Avatar
The guy picked last in gym class
Posts:
43,829
Group:
Members
Member
#181
Joined:
February 20, 2008
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM
So with the increase in payroll taxes and the over 250,000 tax increase would i actually take home less money than if I made 235,000? I feel that would be the case. How in America where the dream is to become successful as one desires could someone be punished by making money?
People in this country have an incredibly naive view of the tax system. Not trying to take this out on bg, but this kind of comment I hear all the time and it is grounded somewhere besides reality.

The simple answer:

No, you would not take home less at if you earned $250,000 than if you made $235,000.

The tax rates are based on levels, but just because you would reach a certain tax bracket DOES NOT mean that all of your money is taxed at that rate....it is only the portion of your pay that is above that amount that gets taxed at the higher rate.

For a simplistic example, let's say that all money $249,000 and under was taxed at 20% and that the $249,001 and up tax bracket was 35%. That DOES NOT mean that if you make more than $249,000 that all of your money is taxed at 35%....the first $249,000 would be taxed at 20% and the extra $1,000 would be the only amount taxed at the 35% rate.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
troubleatiu Sep 27 2008, 11:36 PM Post #20
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
3,218
Group:
Members
Member
#21
Joined:
February 5, 2008
brumdog44
Sep 27 2008, 10:45 PM
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM
So with the increase in payroll taxes and the over 250,000 tax increase would i actually take home less money than if I made 235,000? I feel that would be the case. How in America where the dream is to become successful as one desires could someone be punished by making money?
People in this country have an incredibly naive view of the tax system. Not trying to take this out on bg, but this kind of comment I hear all the time and it is grounded somewhere besides reality.

The simple answer:

No, you would not take home less at if you earned $250,000 than if you made $235,000.

The tax rates are based on levels, but just because you would reach a certain tax bracket DOES NOT mean that all of your money is taxed at that rate....it is only the portion of your pay that is above that amount that gets taxed at the higher rate.

For a simplistic example, let's say that all money $249,000 and under was taxed at 20% and that the $249,001 and up tax bracket was 35%. That DOES NOT mean that if you make more than $249,000 that all of your money is taxed at 35%....the first $249,000 would be taxed at 20% and the extra $1,000 would be the only amount taxed at the 35% rate.
my heart bleeds for him, you know that right? my wife and i TOGETHER make less than $70,000/year and i have never once lamented that fact on here. i have stated it, only to prove money aint shit to me, :rofl: (nor is it to the US government.) im really, really, sorry for his luck.
so, if you're so "poor" how do you understand the economy? its all where your values lie. money dont mean shit to me. im not going under, no matter what happens because IM NOT IN FUCKING DEBT. i owe 8 more years on my house at 6.8% (fixed) and thats all i owe. see ya on the other side.
Posted Image
"The illegal we do immediately. The unconstitutional takes a little longer."--Henry Kissinger
"What luck for rulers that men do not think."- Adolph Hitler
"Terrorists don't want your freedoms--they want your life. It's dictators and tyrants who want your freedoms."-author unidentified
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
brumdog44 Sep 27 2008, 11:55 PM Post #21
Member Avatar
The guy picked last in gym class
Posts:
43,829
Group:
Members
Member
#181
Joined:
February 20, 2008
troubleatiu
Sep 27 2008, 11:36 PM
brumdog44
Sep 27 2008, 10:45 PM
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM
So with the increase in payroll taxes and the over 250,000 tax increase would i actually take home less money than if I made 235,000? I feel that would be the case. How in America where the dream is to become successful as one desires could someone be punished by making money?
People in this country have an incredibly naive view of the tax system. Not trying to take this out on bg, but this kind of comment I hear all the time and it is grounded somewhere besides reality.

The simple answer:

No, you would not take home less at if you earned $250,000 than if you made $235,000.

The tax rates are based on levels, but just because you would reach a certain tax bracket DOES NOT mean that all of your money is taxed at that rate....it is only the portion of your pay that is above that amount that gets taxed at the higher rate.

For a simplistic example, let's say that all money $249,000 and under was taxed at 20% and that the $249,001 and up tax bracket was 35%. That DOES NOT mean that if you make more than $249,000 that all of your money is taxed at 35%....the first $249,000 would be taxed at 20% and the extra $1,000 would be the only amount taxed at the 35% rate.
my heart bleeds for him, you know that right? my wife and i TOGETHER make less than $70,000/year and i have never once lamented that fact on here. i have stated it, only to prove money aint shit to me, :rofl: (nor is it to the US government.) im really, really, sorry for his luck.
so, if you're so "poor" how do you understand the economy? its all where your values lie. money dont mean shit to me. im not going under, no matter what happens because IM NOT IN FUCKING DEBT. i owe 8 more years on my house at 6.8% (fixed) and thats all i owe. see ya on the other side.
I understand the tax code because I've had to teach in to business math students. It sure as heck isn't because of the money we earn...we make a little bit less than you and your wife.

You are certainly right about the importance of money. Four years ago our neighbor (37 year old guy, turned out he was a heavy drug addict and liked to get high and set things on fire) burnt our house down....basically watched us leave the house then threw a molotov cocktail through our window and called the fire department after it started. Later discovered the SOB even cut the outside hose before he did it. He was arrested that night (admitted he liked to start fires and 'watch the fire trucks come'). House was totalled and forced our family to live four months with our in-laws in very tight spaces. We ended up just selling the property and buying elsewhere, but the whole event put some serious psychological scars on our son who was only four at the time.

Certainly put things into perspective.
Edited by brumdog44, Sep 27 2008, 11:56 PM.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Sep 27 2008, 11:57 PM Post #22
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
enemydeservesnomercy
Sep 27 2008, 09:36 PM
aaronk2727
Sep 27 2008, 08:07 PM
Boiler, to answer your original question, yes I feel that our current (or any) progressive tax system discourages success, and decreases ambition and drive, 2 major contributing elements to the rapid rise of this nation to begin with. I have spoken out on here countless times for The FairTax, which has more benefits than we could even imagine for EVERY American citizen.

To the rest of you on this thread. $300,000/year is definitely a lot of money, and absolutely allows someone to live comfortably. Unfortunately, you guys are missing the point. There is no dollar amount that a person earns that makes it "OK" to take it from him/her against his will and distribute/waste it as you see fit.

Should we send buses into the ghettos of America, round up the criminals and drop them off at all the gated communities to burglarize the homes? By the reasoning that I am hearing on here, that should be OK because the ghetto folds are the ones who "need" it, and the gated community folks can "afford to lose it" right?

There is just no constitutional or moral justification for the Robin Hood theory that many of you seem to be advocating.

http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer
...aaronk, come on man, your analogies tip the absurd...i, honestly, can barely acknowledge it...

...i equate the fair tax to universal healthcare...except only more dangerous because you are talking about what to do with ALL of the country's money instead of just a PORTION of it...it is just too big of a change for an economy in the state that we are currently in...

...to be honest, i'm not crazy about either tax plan (obama's or mccain's)...i think they both have flaws...again, i would be voting for the lesser of two evils as i feel obama's would better address needs that are direct and current to our country's economy...you call it the robin hood theory and i can't disagree with you, but you know what in calling it that you are partially admitting that the rich are greedy and can part with some of their wealth to help jumpstart this economy and help the people who have immediate needs...honestly, what are the immediate needs of the wealthy?...please tell me...do they really need a tax CUT like they would receive in mccain's plan?...could the lower/middle class use the cuts?...YOU BETCHA...we would see immediate results in the economy with these breaks...
do you realize how much just a few hundre, not to mention a few thousand dollars could help someone who lives paycheck to paycheck...which is 95% of this country...95% AARON!...are you telling me that if 95% of this country suddenly has a thousand extra dollars in their pocket to spend it's not going to jumpstart this economy?...

...the fair tax just scares me...i would be willing to slowly evolve to a semblance of the fair tax after a few years in a plan similar to obama's...
enemy, I am for lowering taxes for EVERYONE, poor included. The fairtax would do just that, while simultaneously creating wealth opportunities for all, including the poor. What is wrong with that? BTW, it isn't a matter of "if" they rich can afford to help out, it is a question of where the constitutional and moral authority is granted to the government to involuntarily take it from them, hold a majority of it in their red tape, and then give the rest back out to largely wasteful spending, leaving very very little to get the thost that actually need it. the only way to really help the poor is to impliment a strategy that creates opportunity for them to help themselves...if they rely on handouts from the government, the majority will remain poor and dependent IMO
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
enemydeservesnomercy Sep 28 2008, 09:07 AM Post #23
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,464
Group:
Members
Member
#10
Joined:
February 4, 2008
...brum, you just scared the shit out of me...our neighbors are selling their house and now i can't do anything but wonder what kind of person will be moving in...you did put things into perspective...you think about things like that happening everyday and never think it will happen to you...i know you said its been awhile but my heart still goes out to you and your family, especially your son...
"The possibilities of basketball as seen here were a revelation to me. Basketball may have been invented in Massachusetts, but it was made for Indiana."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Sep 28 2008, 09:17 AM Post #24
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
enemydeservesnomercy
Sep 28 2008, 09:07 AM
...brum, you just scared the shit out of me...our neighbors are selling their house and now i can't do anything but wonder what kind of person will be moving in...you did put things into perspective...you think about things like that happening everyday and never think it will happen to you...i know you said its been awhile but my heart still goes out to you and your family, especially your son...
I just watched the movie "Lakeview Terrace" this weekend. Don't see that enemy...it will worry you even more about your new neighbors
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
enemydeservesnomercy Sep 28 2008, 09:20 AM Post #25
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,464
Group:
Members
Member
#10
Joined:
February 4, 2008
...i agree with the fact that it has to do with morals to tax the rich more so the lower and middle class get more of a break...but in turn what about the moral question of the rich just making themselves richer and richer and more and more powerful...all while the poor and middle class just continue to spin their wheels, barely keeping their heads above water and in alot of cases drowning...now, are there cases where people are irresponsible with their money...OF COURSE...but you have that in all tax brackets...but that will remain no matter what the tax code is...people will be people but with a tax code similar to obama's at least the government can say they atleast gave the lower classes a chance...

...you call them 'handouts' but i disagree with this...i call it giving them a chance....in the structure that we currently have (and mccain's proposal) the lower and middle class have no chance...and this code WOULD CREATE OPPORTUNITY for them...if they screw it up then that's on them...

...we all call this the land of opportunity...where everybody gets a chance...well my question is how rich do the rich want to get and how poor can the poor get because that is where we currently are...
"The possibilities of basketball as seen here were a revelation to me. Basketball may have been invented in Massachusetts, but it was made for Indiana."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
enemydeservesnomercy Sep 28 2008, 09:21 AM Post #26
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,464
Group:
Members
Member
#10
Joined:
February 4, 2008
aaronk2727
Sep 28 2008, 09:17 AM
enemydeservesnomercy
Sep 28 2008, 09:07 AM
...brum, you just scared the shit out of me...our neighbors are selling their house and now i can't do anything but wonder what kind of person will be moving in...you did put things into perspective...you think about things like that happening everyday and never think it will happen to you...i know you said its been awhile but my heart still goes out to you and your family, especially your son...
I just watched the movie "Lakeview Terrace" this weekend. Don't see that enemy...it will worry you even more about your new neighbors
...hahaha...my neighbor on the other side (has been for the past 5 years) is a police officer and he and i were just talking about the movie yesterday when we were outside doing yardwork...hahaha...
"The possibilities of basketball as seen here were a revelation to me. Basketball may have been invented in Massachusetts, but it was made for Indiana."
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
chops1221 Sep 28 2008, 09:24 AM Post #27
Coach
Posts:
3,802
Group:
Members
Member
#28
Joined:
February 5, 2008
brumdog44
Sep 27 2008, 10:45 PM
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM
So with the increase in payroll taxes and the over 250,000 tax increase would i actually take home less money than if I made 235,000? I feel that would be the case. How in America where the dream is to become successful as one desires could someone be punished by making money?
People in this country have an incredibly naive view of the tax system. Not trying to take this out on bg, but this kind of comment I hear all the time and it is grounded somewhere besides reality.

The simple answer:

No, you would not take home less at if you earned $250,000 than if you made $235,000.

The tax rates are based on levels, but just because you would reach a certain tax bracket DOES NOT mean that all of your money is taxed at that rate....it is only the portion of your pay that is above that amount that gets taxed at the higher rate.

For a simplistic example, let's say that all money $249,000 and under was taxed at 20% and that the $249,001 and up tax bracket was 35%. That DOES NOT mean that if you make more than $249,000 that all of your money is taxed at 35%....the first $249,000 would be taxed at 20% and the extra $1,000 would be the only amount taxed at the 35% rate.
Always good to learn something, thanks Brum.

I'd always heard people say things like what you mentioned, but being a college student with no real income, I had never bothered to look up the truth.
Posted Image
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Sep 28 2008, 09:50 AM Post #28
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
chops1221
Sep 28 2008, 09:24 AM
brumdog44
Sep 27 2008, 10:45 PM
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM
So with the increase in payroll taxes and the over 250,000 tax increase would i actually take home less money than if I made 235,000? I feel that would be the case. How in America where the dream is to become successful as one desires could someone be punished by making money?
People in this country have an incredibly naive view of the tax system. Not trying to take this out on bg, but this kind of comment I hear all the time and it is grounded somewhere besides reality.

The simple answer:

No, you would not take home less at if you earned $250,000 than if you made $235,000.

The tax rates are based on levels, but just because you would reach a certain tax bracket DOES NOT mean that all of your money is taxed at that rate....it is only the portion of your pay that is above that amount that gets taxed at the higher rate.

For a simplistic example, let's say that all money $249,000 and under was taxed at 20% and that the $249,001 and up tax bracket was 35%. That DOES NOT mean that if you make more than $249,000 that all of your money is taxed at 35%....the first $249,000 would be taxed at 20% and the extra $1,000 would be the only amount taxed at the 35% rate.
Always good to learn something, thanks Brum.

I'd always heard people say things like what you mentioned, but being a college student with no real income, I had never bothered to look up the truth.
chops...there is a problem with that. What brum is saying isn't true. when you move up into the next bracket, you are taxed at that new rate back to dollar 1. Brum, I'm not sure where you came up with that, but it is wrong.
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
Mr Gray Sep 28 2008, 11:57 AM Post #29
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
16,503
Group:
Members
Member
#26
Joined:
February 5, 2008
enemydeservesnomercy
Sep 28 2008, 09:20 AM
...i agree with the fact that it has to do with morals to tax the rich more so the lower and middle class get more of a break...but in turn what about the moral question of the rich just making themselves richer and richer and more and more powerful...all while the poor and middle class just continue to spin their wheels, barely keeping their heads above water and in alot of cases drowning...now, are there cases where people are irresponsible with their money...OF COURSE...but you have that in all tax brackets...but that will remain no matter what the tax code is...people will be people but with a tax code similar to obama's at least the government can say they atleast gave the lower classes a chance...

...you call them 'handouts' but i disagree with this...i call it giving them a chance....in the structure that we currently have (and mccain's proposal) the lower and middle class have no chance...and this code WOULD CREATE OPPORTUNITY for them...if they screw it up then that's on them...

...we all call this the land of opportunity...where everybody gets a chance...well my question is how rich do the rich want to get and how poor can the poor get because that is where we currently are...
enemy, we could go two different directions with this discussion. 1) welfare and entitlements 2) taxation/fairtax. They are actually seperate issues. We could argue all day whether welfare entitlements are a handout as I call them or a handup as you and Obama would describe them. I would prefer that we save that for another day, and discuss the tax issue if you don't mind.

The FairTax doesn't create additional taxation for the poor, nor does it remove any of their entitlements, welfare, medicare, medicaid, WIC, social security...etc etc. The FairTax creates a better economic environment for every citizen to prosper, rich and poor. Our current progessive (Obama-like) tax system encourages the rich to move resources oversees and utlizes loopholes in the tax code. For example, the wealthy rarely earn "wages" as they typically have their finances set up to receive income from capital gains and dividents, which are only taxed at 15%. They also move money directly to offshore accounts, as well as indirectly move money oversees by setting up factories and offices in offshore tax havens. This doesn't benefit the American economic system in any way.

Under the FairTax, the rich will have to pay because it is based on their domestic expenditures, including no cap on their social security funding. Currently you only get SS tax on $97,500 of your income, which is proportinately low for those earning high 6 or 7 figures. If the rich choose to hoard their money in savings accounts instead fo spending in and paying tax, that also helps out the economy, because it give the banks additional capital to loan. The banks are forced to bring in as much as they loan out, so if they end up with a surplus of savings, they will have to lower interest rates to loan money to businesses, which will in turn use that capital to invest in infrastructure = create jobs. Win-win.

In a survey last year, 500 large overseas companies were asked what they would do if America eliminated corporate income tax and instead earned tax revenue based on consumption. 80% of those companies (400 of them) said that they would build plants/factories in the United states within months. The other 20% said that they would actually relocate their entire business here. Job creation = domestic wealth opportunities for ALL blue collar, white collar and everyone in between.

Please remember also, that this FairTax system has a built in tax prebate based on the size of a family to cover all taxes paid on necessities. This will ensure that those families who are struggling and are currently not paying income taxes at all (at least directly.....Harvard concluded that we all pay an additional 22% of products and services as an offset to corporate taxes), will still not be paying any taxes so long as they are struggling and just purchasing necessities (no different than their current state). The difference is though, that they will have a little more money in their paycheck every week and additional job opportunities and upward mobility (see above).

I could go on and on, but I would like for you to digest this a little bit and let me know what objections or questions you may have to this tax structure.
Posted Image
The body knows what fighters don't: how to protect itself. A neck can only twist so far. Twist it just a hair more and the body says, "Hey, I'll take it from here because you obviously don't know what you're doing... Lie down now, rest, and we'll talk about this when you regain your senses." It's called the knockout mechanism.
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
yawnzzz Sep 28 2008, 01:48 PM Post #30
Member Avatar
Coach
Posts:
4,964
Group:
Members
Member
#58
Joined:
February 6, 2008
aaronk2727
Sep 28 2008, 09:50 AM
chops1221
Sep 28 2008, 09:24 AM
brumdog44
Sep 27 2008, 10:45 PM
boilergrad01
Sep 27 2008, 11:46 AM
So with the increase in payroll taxes and the over 250,000 tax increase would i actually take home less money than if I made 235,000? I feel that would be the case. How in America where the dream is to become successful as one desires could someone be punished by making money?
People in this country have an incredibly naive view of the tax system. Not trying to take this out on bg, but this kind of comment I hear all the time and it is grounded somewhere besides reality.

The simple answer:

No, you would not take home less at if you earned $250,000 than if you made $235,000.

The tax rates are based on levels, but just because you would reach a certain tax bracket DOES NOT mean that all of your money is taxed at that rate....it is only the portion of your pay that is above that amount that gets taxed at the higher rate.

For a simplistic example, let's say that all money $249,000 and under was taxed at 20% and that the $249,001 and up tax bracket was 35%. That DOES NOT mean that if you make more than $249,000 that all of your money is taxed at 35%....the first $249,000 would be taxed at 20% and the extra $1,000 would be the only amount taxed at the 35% rate.
Always good to learn something, thanks Brum.

I'd always heard people say things like what you mentioned, but being a college student with no real income, I had never bothered to look up the truth.
chops...there is a problem with that. What brum is saying isn't true. when you move up into the next bracket, you are taxed at that new rate back to dollar 1. Brum, I'm not sure where you came up with that, but it is wrong.
Aaron, Brum is correct.

Here's a good calculator:
http://www.moneychimp.com/features/tax_brackets.htm
Offline Profile Quote Post Goto Top
 
1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous)
ZetaBoards - Free Forum Hosting
Create a free forum in seconds.
Learn More · Sign-up Now
Go to Next Page
« Previous Topic · Politics · Next Topic »
Add Reply
  • Pages:
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3

Track Topic · E-mail Topic Time: 2:36 PM Jul 11
Hosted for free by ZetaBoards · Privacy Policy