Fair Tax

wkmac

Well-Known Member
When it comes to taxation, IMO there will never be a perfect tax system. Someone in the economic scale will pay more and someone will pay less and this even applies to non-progressive tax systems as well as the fair tax. It also applies IMO to people who draw more from various gov't systems and people who draw less if little at all based on what they pay for what they get directly in return.

About the closest you could ever come to a perfect tax system (if there really is such a thing) IMO would be an excise tax similar to the gas tax you pay at the gas pump. Don't use the road and you never pay the tax or in other words, you volunteer to use the gov't service ie the roads so you pay the tax for that service. Nobody forces you in or out, so the choice is up to you. Corporations want gov't money and intervention when they get in trouble? Make the corporations pay the tax to fund such adventures. Gov't in a sense becomes a type of public cafeteria in which you only pay for what you get!

The excise tax like the gas tax is not a perfect system either as some claim the newer high mileage vehicles aren't paying their fair share verses other vehicles and now that debate is starting to heat up. One idea is to charge a tax based on miles driven rather than paying at the pump. I also think this has caused central gov't planning to temper automakers from going harder into high mileage and non-petro conveyance vehicles as the lessened tax revenue implications in the case of gov't would have those infamous unintended consequences. Same reason gov't is intervening in the economy with inflationary programs as the economy shrinks under deflationary forces. This deflation and it's effect on GDP value undermines the whole Keynesian public debt ideal as well as effects gov't tax revenues in a time gov't refuses to cut costs and shrink when economic laws are screaming for this to be done in both the public and private space!

The Fair Tax also has a "potential consequence" to reinflate the very bubble that got us where we are now and push the bust farther down the road to an even worse inevitiblity which to be honest is no different than what gov't is trying to do now with the idea they can manage it all later! The truth is, we need to re-balance our economic houses both personal and public and this means cutting costs, saving money and re-allocating resources to more productive means in society.

Be an anarchist by Spending Less on Everything!
:happy-very:
 

UPSNewbie

Well-Known Member
I forgot one very important area that needs to be taxed NOW to help the state tax issues but also would need to be taxed under the cunsumption tax system.

INTERNET SALES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

When I did my taxes in Jan., it asked if I bought anything over state lines and used in OK.

Does every state do this?
 

brett636

Well-Known Member
When I did my taxes in Jan., it asked if I bought anything over state lines and used in OK.

Does every state do this?

My state does this, but out of the many many taxes I have prepared for other people not one has bought an item outside of state lines. Go figure! :surprised:
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
I get it now !.... Like Sbbarros pizza/resturant at the Mall.....pay by the pound...:spaghetti: ..... Food court fight ! :clubbing:


Think about it this way D, how many wars would we fight in the name of multi-national imperialism if the trans-national corporations were the only ones who had to foot the entire bill?

Then again, maybe you really are for the mercantile wars after all and the only reason you spoke out against them from 2000' to 2008' was because the guy in the top slot had an "R" after his name instead of a "D"! This does explain your silence now as Obama continues the same exact policy course by channeling Bush here, here and here . Even the Iraqi's are figuring out Obama and acting restless as a result!

What if 4/5ths if not more of the military budget was paid for entirely by trans-national corp. profits and less than 1/5th of the budget was paid for by average taxpayers to actually defend the homeland? Even the anti-state, anarchist I am could actually live with that small amount of gov't! I say small because the corporations would bail before paying for all those war costs themselves.

Even Ron Paul speaking last year to the Future of Freedom Foundation went over his plan to close nearly 800 foreign military bases and massive cuts to the military budget that would create such a surplus that not only could we pay down debt but more than just make social security solvent, it could fully fund social security with the idea of letting people get out if they choose but still actually saving the plan for those that paid in. You know, in all the talk of change, I never heard Obama once tell his plan of fully funding SS and Ron's the evil maniac who's going to end all living life as we know it! If you want proof of Ron's plan oddly enough given to a room full of evil libertarian, anti-state types.

Wanna reccommend a book to you to read. It's called "Blowback" by Chalmers Johnson. Wanna know why our manufacturing base was shipped off shore? And no it wasn't to avoid union jobs or excessive gov't regulations. Why did our car production/car buying go to Japan and other Far East Auto Intrests? What's the driving force behind multi-national globalization? Cartelization and monopoly? Read the book!
 

diesel96

Well-Known Member
Think about it this way D, how many wars would we fight in the name of multi-national imperialism if the trans-national corporations were the only ones who had to foot the entire bill?


Then again, maybe you really are for the mercantile wars after all and the only reason you spoke out against them from 2000' to 2008' was because the guy in the top slot had an "R" after his name instead of a "D"! This does explain your silence now as Obama continues the same exact policy course by channeling Bush here, here and here . Even the Iraqi's are figuring out Obama and acting restless as a result!

What if 4/5ths if not more of the military budget was paid for entirely by trans-national corp. profits and less than 1/5th of the budget was paid for by average taxpayers to actually defend the homeland? Even the anti-state, anarchist I am could actually live with that small amount of gov't! I say small because the corporations would bail before paying for all those war costs themselves.

Even Ron Paul speaking last year to the Future of Freedom Foundation went over his plan to close nearly 800 foreign military bases and massive cuts to the military budget that would create such a surplus that not only could we pay down debt but more than just make social security solvent, it could fully fund social security with the idea of letting people get out if they choose but still actually saving the plan for those that paid in. You know, in all the talk of change, I never heard Obama once tell his plan of fully funding SS and Ron's the evil maniac who's going to end all living life as we know it! If you want proof of Ron's plan oddly enough given to a room full of evil libertarian, anti-state types.

Wanna reccommend a book to you to read. It's called "Blowback" by Chalmers Johnson. Wanna know why our manufacturing base was shipped off shore? And no it wasn't to avoid union jobs or excessive gov't regulations. Why did our car production/car buying go to Japan and other Far East Auto Intrests? What's the driving force behind multi-national globalization? Cartelization and monopoly? Read the book!

Hypo-theticals....I'm sorry, but assumptions made in order to test empirical consequences results in the silent treatment. Lets be honest, half of your threads posted on BC end up with no response. I don't know why, maybe you command essay-torical answers with links, illustrations and authors....Kind of like the boring Professor at school you admired but didn't quite agree with. :teacher:
I'm not a fan of hypo-theticals but lets assume Ron Paul’s politics been popular in the 1940s, Germany would control the world. Had they been popular during the Cold War, most of the world would be under Communist rule. Had they existed during the 1990s, Iraq for sure would have weapons of mass destruction, and the Serbs in Bosnia would be completely wiped out. Intervention is sometimes a necessary commodity in American politics based on TRUE threats to our soveigntry and pure evil genocidal madmen. Never should intervention be based on lies, commodities, and or Trans Nat'l Corp or Military Ind Complex advancements.

But Wkmac, I do credit you for opening my eyes a little wider as far as "blowback" effect, intervention, privacy, torturing.....and so far after 3 and 1/2 months Obama has been reluctant to pull a 180' from the Bush Adm. But I feel he has left the door partially and more transparently open. Just might need some poking and proding by those who put him in office. If you notice there are some in the house , senate and media voicing their concerns already...
on torture --- Countdown with Keith OlbermannCountdown with Keith Olbermann
on wire tapping--- Countdown with Keith OlbermannCountdown with Keith Olbermann

Sorry to hijack this thread folks, back to fair tax !
 

wkmac

Well-Known Member
Hypo-theticals....I'm sorry, but assumptions made in order to test empirical consequences results in the silent treatment. Lets be honest, half of your threads posted on BC end up with no response. I don't know why, maybe you command essay-torical answers with links, illustrations and authors....Kind of like the boring Professor at school you admired but didn't quite agree with. :teacher:
I'm not a fan of hypo-theticals but lets assume Ron Paul’s politics been popular in the 1940s, Germany would control the world. Had they been popular during the Cold War, most of the world would be under Communist rule. Had they existed during the 1990s, Iraq for sure would have weapons of mass destruction, and the Serbs in Bosnia would be completely wiped out. Intervention is sometimes a necessary commodity in American politics based on TRUE threats to our soveigntry and pure evil genocidal madmen. Never should intervention be based on lies, commodities, and or Trans Nat'l Corp or Military Ind Complex advancements.

But Wkmac, I do credit you for opening my eyes a little wider as far as "blowback" effect, intervention, privacy, torturing.....and so far after 3 and 1/2 months Obama has been reluctant to pull a 180' from the Bush Adm. But I feel he has left the door partially and more transparently open. Just might need some poking and proding by those who put him in office. If you notice there are some in the house , senate and media voicing their concerns already...
on torture --- Countdown with Keith OlbermannCountdown with Keith Olbermann
on wire tapping--- Countdown with Keith OlbermannCountdown with Keith Olbermann

Sorry to hijack this thread folks, back to fair tax !

D,

I'll just respond by posting the remarks of textynn to an article concerning President Obama and his position on torture.

While Bush was president I was afraid of my government. This was an administration that lied its way into war. Killed a million Iraqi citizens. Beefed up the homeland police force into something that looked like StarWArs and openly showed pictures of people getting tazared just for asking questions that politicians didn't like. For example when Kerry was asked if he was in a Secret Society. Which he should have just said no or yes to. When I saw what happened to a person that asked a question that was considered taboo and then held down by 6 police men who then tazared him after they had him rendered, I was afraid. When I saw that Palosi said impeachment was off the table even though we knew the country had been lied to about the circumstances of the war in Iraq, I knew that my country was really controlled by invisible rulers that did not answer to law. When i saw that the same people in the Bush administration were enriching themselves in the war and were war profiteers and controlled the country at the same time I was afraid. I voted for Obama because I thought he wanted to end this kind of evil monarchy whose grasp has been secured by our own taxpayer homeland security. Now Obama seems to be acting in the same manner..Hopefully, the world will stand up and pass judgment and then Obama will be forced to acknowledge these people as war criminals.

Sometimes standing up involves being an admitted real pain in the arse and pushing people to look in places they don't want too. My generation forgot the lessons we learned from our Vietnam and then Watergate years and sadly turned around and allowed it all to happen again so to speak. Bush doubled down on the debt and advanced the lunacy of Empire and now Obama is following in his tracks for the most part. Tip of the hat to President Obama for his recent moves relating to Cuba however and that is a hopeful sign.

President Bush came into office much like President Obama having said many similar things. Good things that in general principle most people agree with. However, Presidents are figureheads who become trapped inside a bubble of other people's making who want to benefit themselves rather than the country ie the people and it goes for both sides. The only way for any President to know what the people really want is for us to pop that bubble.

I'll just leave it at that!
:peaceful:
 

UPSNewbie

Well-Known Member
D,

I'll just respond by posting the remarks of textynn to an article concerning President Obama and his position on torture.



Sometimes standing up involves being an admitted real pain in the arse and pushing people to look in places they don't want too. My generation forgot the lessons we learned from our Vietnam and then Watergate years and sadly turned around and allowed it all to happen again so to speak. Bush doubled down on the debt and advanced the lunacy of Empire and now Obama is following in his tracks for the most part. Tip of the hat to President Obama for his recent moves relating to Cuba however and that is a hopeful sign.

President Bush came into office much like President Obama having said many similar things. Good things that in general principle most people agree with. However, Presidents are figureheads who become trapped inside a bubble of other people's making who want to benefit themselves rather than the country ie the people and it goes for both sides. The only way for any President to know what the people really want is for us to pop that bubble.

I'll just leave it at that!
:peaceful:


According to a few unnamed posters here, that fact is "just disgusting."

...
 
Top