Welfare State: Handouts Make Up One-Third of U.S. Wages

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

But..but..but..... How will we do our social engineering and wealth redistribution??? We must find ways of taking from those that earn money and giving it to those that don't.

No social engineering. Taxes are a revenue source for the government. I agree we need some form of government and government should do some limited for which they are suited and they need money to do this. But other than being a source of income for the government, taxes should have no purpose.

The FAIR TAX repaces the current system and provides revenue nuetral funding (it is not a tax increase or cut)

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

It is perfectly sufficient to take money from those who have and spend money, rather than from those who earn money. It is much better, in fact. The only problem is, then people might start importing things instead of buying in the US.

Wouldn't matter. If they are purchased in the US they still pay tax on it. The tax would apply to ALL goods and services or any kind (except resale, which would give an advantage to poor people, no tax at Goodwill Stores, garage sales, 2nd hand shops, etc) Unless you go to a foreign country, buy the goods and being them back to the US yourself, you would not save any taxes and even then, there are aloready import limits.

I suggest everyone read "the Fair Tax Book"

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

It is perfectly sufficient to take money from those who have and spend money, rather than from those who earn money. It is much better, in fact. The only problem is, then people might start importing things instead of buying in the US.

The other advantage is you are not "taking" anything. People understnd that there is tax on goods and services. You CHOOSE to spend your money. On Payday you have in your hand ALL the money you have earned. ALL. You will be refunded for the tax you will pay on basic necessities. So you can eat, buy normal clothes, shoes, medical care, etc., TAX FREE. So after woring 40 hours, buying groceries (not filet mignon), your shoes, coat, etc., you still have paid -0- tax. Now, if you choose to buy a boat, you will pay tax on that boat. You know you will pay tax on that boat and the more the boat costs the more tax you pay. You will actually pay tax on every dollar you spend, but will be refunded a portion of that based on an index of the tax on "basic necessities" Each PERSON with a SSN gets the rebate. If you get paid once a month, on the first of the month you have ALL the money you earned PLUS your rebate check for what you will spend for basic neccesities. Now you decide how much to spend. Buy cheap food and you may actually keep that rebate check. Buy your lawnmower at a garage sale and keep that part of the rebate for yourself. Put 10% of your earnings in savings...no tax. Retirement account? No tax. In your mattress...no tax. April is just the middle of the month. No tax returns to file. There is no income tax, what is to report? Businesses will save BILLIONS just in the cost of tax compliance. No W-2s to send. Businesses will have more money for BUSINESS, for buying things, making things and giving jobs to people.

Illegal immingrants will pay the same rate of tax you do. Drug dealers will pay tax, prostitutes will pay tax. Waitresses making tips will pay tax. Tourists will pay tax. Rich people will pay the same rate of tax. No deductions and loopholes for them. No "tax shelters", other than savings which is a tax shelter for everyone. Investment bankers will pay the same rate as their secretaries. Billions of dollars held in off shore accounts and foreign accounts to AVOID being taxed as income...BILLIONS!...will come home to be invested (businesses are exempt from this tax, business do not pay tax, they COLLECT tax) Business will flood into the country, we would have the lowest business tax in the world. -0- %

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

The government should be run like one giant hippie commune, with naked people bathing in plain view, drum circles with maidens gently swaying to the beat, the smell of tofu, and the haze of marijuana smoke everywhere. Peace. Love. Brown rice. Spare change?

[Zero Sum 305]

But..but..but..... How will we do our social engineering and wealth redistribution??? We must find ways of taking from those that earn money and giving it to those that don't.

Wealth redistribution certainly IS the correct term. When 1% of the population makes between 95% and 99% of the nation's money, its not exactly money they'd miss. Is this a blatant endorsement for taking from and giving to? Of course not, just thought I'd point it out before any hissy Socialist-name calling fits were to ensue. A level playing field where people were paid based on their hard work instead of who gave birth to them.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Wealth redistribution certainly IS the correct term. When 1% of the population makes between 95% and 99% of the nation's money, its not exactly money they'd miss. Is this a blatant endorsement for taking from and giving to? Of course not, just thought I'd point it out before any hissy Socialist-name calling fits were to ensue. A level playing field where people were paid based on their hard work instead of who gave birth to them.

Not true.

Edited March 11, 2011 by Some Old Guy

[Zero Sum 305]

It's always been the case.

100 years ago, 50 years ago, 20 years ago, 10 years ago, a year ago.

Share of wealth, not income.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Share of wealth, not income.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

[Obama 2012 1,714]

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

"should" in ones opinion is a lot different than forcing one too.

[Zero Sum 305]

Still not income.

[Zero Sum 305]

And its better to show the true data, not trying to equate a small fragment with larger ones, cause that chart would be even more dramatic if you distributed the numbers accurately. But I'm sure the students in that university class know this, or at least they should.

Are incomes becoming more disparate in this country? Yes or no.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

Spoken by a true anti-capitalist:

In Wealth of Nations, which Adam Smith wrote in 1776, he saw the corporation as a decrepit and ill-conceived institution, a remnant of medieval privilege that was too prone to mismanagement to be useful for any but a handful of contingencies.

http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CD8QzwEwAQ&url=http%3A%2F%2Fbooks.google.com%2Fbooks%3Fid%3DpAeX57zoCg4C%26pg%3DPA57%26sig%3DKWwbZqvMSIxSEJRFNzYBjScl1PU%26hl%3Den&ei=0ZR5TZO1OpCasAOHsbCWAw&usg=AFQjCNFHhkXTJ_O2O0YIyVIU9kpF07KM8A

[JohnSmith2007 353]

"It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."

You know Steven, this is the way we do things in America. If you don't like it you are free to move somewhere else. How about Cuba?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

These are crazy times when the wisdom of Adam Smith is confused as marxist theory.