People Who Piss Me Off: Libertarians

[james&olya 1,121]

republicans/libertarians are nothing but dumb and greedy.

Now you have gone too far!

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

Nothing worth watching here, this video is just a bunch of generalizing in order to get a thumbs up from the usual narrow minded lefties that think republicans/libertarians are nothing but dumb and greedy.

It is regressive. Yes, regressive. There, the argument is over, it is regressive.

[Mr. Big Dog 10,747]

http://www.investorwords.com/4138/regressive_tax.html

Fair Tax is not regressive by ANY definition.

It is regressive by the very definition you posted a link to.

regressive tax

Definition

A tax that takes a larger percentage of the income of low-income people than of high-income people.

Consumption taxes regressive. Sales taxes are regressive. It's really not that hard to understand - try to follow along here:

Family making $60K a year spends, well, $60K a year. Say that you tax all their consumption at 23%. That's close to $14K worth of taxes. Say you rebate the taxes on the existential minimum which may be $40K a year. So that family would see a rebate of $9K (23% of $40K). That leaves total tax paid of $5K ($14K - $9K). Effective tax rate for said family would be 8.3%.

Now, a family making $600K a years spends, say, $150K a year. That comes to $34.5K in taxes. Of course, they also get their $9K rebate. Everything said and done, this family has spent $25.5K in taxes. Effective tax rate for this family is 4.5%.

The more you make, the less you pay relative to your income. That's the very definition of a regressive tax.

[Gary and Alla 3,694]

It is regressive by the very definition you posted a link to.

Consumption taxes regressive. Sales taxes are regressive. It's really not that hard to understand - try to follow along here:

Family making $60K a year spends, well, $60K a year. Say that you tax all their consumption at 23%. That's close to $14K worth of taxes. Say you rebate the taxes on the existential minimum which may be $40K a year. So that family would see a rebate of $9K (23% of $40K). That leaves total tax paid of $5K ($14K - $9K). Effective tax rate for said family would be 8.3%.

Now, a family making $600K a years spends, say, $150K a year. That comes to $34.5K in taxes. Of course, they also get their $9K rebate. Everything said and done, this family has spent $25.5K in taxes. Effective tax rate for this family is 4.5%.

The more you make, the less you pay relative to your income. That's the very definition of a regressive tax.

No it is not. I gave you a link and there are many others if you click on that one. That is NOT the definition. If you prefer to remain ignorant that is your business. In case any liberal wonders why I do not usually provide links...this is why. Show you the truth and you ignore it. Why bother?

A regressive tax is one that taxes a person at a lower rate as his income increases. The fair tax RATE is identical for all. It is not regressive, nor is it progressive. You simply invent an example of a person spending part of their income vs. a person spending all their income. Nice, but you cannot change the facts to fit a cracked theory. You arbitrarily say one family spends all income and another spends 25% That is a flawed concept completely. I could arbitrarily say the rich family spends all their money. We see plenty of rich people that spend ALL their money. You just arbitrarily picked numbers that fit your theory. EACH family pays exactly the same amount for each dollar spent regardless of the amount they make. Each family gets the same rebate for essentials for each person. One could say, correctly, that the lower income family gets a higher RATE of refund than the wealthy family. It will have more impact on their lifestyle

Lets take your example though and apply it to the current system

The guy making $60,000 per year pays Medicare and SS on ALL his income, the family making $600,000 does not, they essentially have $500,000 FREE of medicare tax and SS. $500,000!!!! And if the family making $600,000 does not have "earned income" such as making his money from investments rather than a salary he pays NO SS or medicare. THAT's regressive. The system plans for a lower rate to be paid by higher income people. While it is not true Warren Buffet's secretary "pays more tax" than Warren Buffet, she does pay a higher RATE. That's regressive

The system allows far more deductions and credits for the family earning $600,000 than for the family earning $60,000 who pretty much just has to muddle through with whatever is left after withholding. The rich family invests it in tax free shelters, hides it off shore, puts it in retirment funds, medical savings accounts and lots of other things one can do with that much disposable income. Their rate is going to be MUCH lower.

The fair tax takes the politics and the lies out of the tax system and provides for funding the government. Period. No games, no peter pays paul, no "you get this free and the rich guy pays" and then the rich guy hides his funds and we all pay with a Government credit card.

THAT is why politicians do not like the fair tax. Protect the agenda.

Other advantages...collection of money from people earning cash and avoiding tax. Collection of income from tourists or anyone that spends a dollar in the US, making the US the greatest tax haven for business to create jobs in the world. Elimination of the majority of the IRS and the multibillion dollar industry of tax compliance/avoidance costs, billions of nonproductive dollars wasted every year to avoid as much tax as possible. They can spend their time on real business issues. Eimnation of special interests need to manipulate tax codes and congress for their benefit. Not good news for the lobbyists. Too bad for them.

[웃 910]

A regressive tax is one that taxes a person at a lower rate as his income increases. The fair tax RATE is identical for all. It is not regressive, nor is it progressive.

" In terms of individual income and wealth, a regressive tax imposes a greater burden (relative to resources) on the poor than on the rich — there is an inverse relationship between the tax rate and the taxpayer's ability to pay as measured by assets, consumption, or income. "

It is the most unfair tax of all (THE FAIR TAX)....Take any "fair taxed" item (a computer, car note, food, gas, etc.)

The dirt poor are hit the hardest on that tax....Then middle class....Then upper-middle....Etc.

How do you not understand that?

If a poor person gets a speeding ticket for $200 they might not be able to pay it...If they make $20,000 a year they are paying a full 1% of their income just to pay that ticket.

A millionaire can pay that ticket 100 times....And then burn $10,000....And then throw another $50,000 in the trash and he is still laughing all the way to the bank...Doesn't hurt him at all...

But it can be devastating to a poor person.

This is called 'common sense'. You should google it.

[_Simpson_ 250]

Now you have gone too far!

-

Edited March 15, 2012 by _Simpson_

[slim 1,530]

Some people need the government.