From: Rally2xs on
On Oct 30, 6:11 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > or afair tax.
>
> Thats what a progressive income tax is.
>
> > Afair taxwould allow people to decide how much taxes they pay, by deciding how many things they buy.
>
> Even sillier with those on the lowest incomes that dont get to do that.
>
> > If they decide to do without, or keep making do with something older, they would pay fewer taxes.
>
> Even sillier with those on the lowest incomes that dont get to do that.

Have you read about the fair tax? The poor don't even pay it. Even
better, they 1) Get to keep every cent they make and 2) Experience
about a 22% discount over what they're paying now for goods and
services manufactured, mined, or grown in this country.

It's WAY better than the supposed "progressive" income tax. It's
actually a subsidy for the poor. Nobody ever pays the full fair tax
rate (23% the 1st year, close to that subsequent years) buy Bill Gates
might pay maybe 22.999999999%.

With the fair tax, we could bring prosperity back to the USA - the
prosperity that the income tax has been choking out of the country for
the last 50 years or so.
From: Rod Speed on
Rally2xs wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed....(a)gmail.com> wrote

>>> or afair tax.

>> Thats what a progressive income tax is.

>>> Afair taxwould allow people to decide how much taxes
>>> they pay, by deciding how many things they buy.

>> Even sillier with those on the lowest incomes that dont get to do that.

>>> If they decide to do without, or keep making do
>>> with something older, they would pay fewer taxes.

>> Even sillier with those on the lowest incomes that dont get to do that.

> Have you read about the fair tax?

Yep.

> The poor don't even pay it.

Depends on what you call the poor.

> Even better, they 1) Get to keep every cent they make and
> 2) Experience about a 22% discount over what they're paying now for
> goods and services manufactured, mined, or grown in this country.

Not even possible to raise the amount currently raised in taxes that way.

And it only applys to federal income tax anyway, doesnt do a damned thing about the
very substantial property taxes that most USians pay directly or indirectly in their rent etc.

> It's WAY better than the supposed "progressive" income tax.

Nope. And there is nothing supposed about the progressive
income tax that all modern first and second world countrys have.

> It's actually a subsidy for the poor.

Why should those who choose to be poor by not bothering to work be subsidised ?

> Nobody ever pays the full fair tax rate (23% the 1st year, close to that
> subsequent years) buy Bill Gates might pay maybe 22.999999999%.

Bill Gates is completely irrelevant to real world tax regimes.

> With the fair tax, we could bring prosperity back to the USA

Nope, far too many would choose to be poor and bludge off everyone else.

> - the prosperity that the income tax has been choking out of the country for the last 50 years or so.

Mindlessly silly. Prosperity hasnt been anything even remotely resembling choked off.


From: JonquilJan on
I am least frugal with my cats. I have taken in a feral cat, after months
of trying to tame her, and she was pregnant at the time. I buy the best I
can for her and her offspring as far as food and litter and toys.

They are my family.

JonquilJan

Learn something new every day
As long as you are learning, you are living
When you stop learning, you start dying


From: Rally2xs on
On Oct 31, 4:35 pm, "Rod Speed" <rod.speed....(a)gmail.com> wrote:
> Rally2xs wrote
>
> > Rod Speed <rod.speed....(a)gmail.com> wrote
> >>> or afair tax.
> >> Thats what a progressive income tax is.
> >>> Afair taxwould allow people to decide how much taxes
> >>> they pay, by deciding how many things they buy.
> >> Even sillier with those on the lowest incomes that dont get to do that..
> >>> If they decide to do without, or keep making do
> >>> with something older, they would pay fewer taxes.
> >> Even sillier with those on the lowest incomes that dont get to do that..
> > Have you read about thefair tax?
>
> Yep.
>
> > The poor don't even pay it.
>
> Depends on what you call the poor.

poor <= poverty level.

> > Even better, they 1) Get to keep every cent they make and
> > 2) Experience about a 22% discount over what they're paying now for
> > goods and services manufactured, mined, or grown in this country.
>
> Not even possible to raise the amount currently raised in taxes that way.

Well, that's rather off-handed. People with PHD's after their names
say we can. What makes you think we can't?

> And it only applys to federal income tax anyway, doesnt do a damned thing about the
> very substantial property taxes that most USians pay directly or indirectly in their rent etc.

Nope, but the poperty tax is not what's driving jobs overseas. The
income tax is. Getting rid of the corporate income tax will be a
large factor in keeping jobs here, and gettng the ones that left to
return.

> > It's WAY better than the supposed "progressive" income tax.
>
> Nope. And there is nothing supposed about the progressive
> income tax that all modern first and second world countrys have.

Is. And the income tax is not as progressive as the Fair Tax. That
is, unless you want to use the tax system to really stick it to the
rich. The Fair Tax is not good for punishing anyone.

> > It's actually a subsidy for the poor.
>
> Why should those who choose to be poor by not bothering to work be subsidised ?

They are working, most of 'em, they just don't make jack squat for
wages in this idiot "service economy."

> > Nobody ever pays the fullfair taxrate (23% the 1st year, close to that
> > subsequent years) buy Bill Gates might pay maybe 22.999999999%.
>
> Bill Gates is completely irrelevant to real world tax regimes.

Well, its the Democrats that always start whining about "The Rich"
every time anyone talks about the Fair Tax, and I can't think of
anyone richer, so used him. But anyway, the poverty level for a
family of 4 is about $26,000, so a family of 4 making $52,000 only
pays 1/2 the fair tax rate, effectively, as a maximum. If they buy
anything used, they pay even less. A family of 4 at $78,000 pays only
2/3rds the Fair Tax rate. Etc. Its a _very_ progressive tax.

>
> > With thefair tax, we could bring prosperity back to the USA
>
> Nope, far too many would choose to be poor and bludge off everyone else.

And I say they wouldn't.

There's tons of ex-factory workers that would work like dogs if they
could just get a job that they know how to do. Bring factories back,
and there's people that will get some ladders and hand tools and plumb
and wire it up faster than you can say Jack Robinson. Just don't
expect 'em to "retrain" to do prostate specific antigen tests in a
laboratory, 'cuz it ain't gonna happen. That's just not who they are.

If we don't get back jobs where people can work with their hands,
instead of having to have this elite workforce that can do calculus
and program computers and such, we're going to have a permanent
underclass in this country. That's bad for them 'cuz poverty sucks
and it's bad for us because we end up supporting them to at least a
certain extent. It drags the whole country down.

> > - the prosperity that the income tax has been choking out of the country for the last 50 years or so.
>
> Mindlessly silly. Prosperity hasnt been anything even remotely resembling choked off.

Not by a long shot. Prosperity is flagging and getting worse. The
last big thing that allowed Americans to earn a big income was the
software development that went overseas about 10 years ago. Go to
your Borders Bookstore or Barnes and Noble books. Find the computer
section. Pitiful, isn't it? There AREN'T any big-paying jobs even
for the intellectually elite, unles they've got a masters or better.
Back in the 60's, a man could be prosperous all by himself while
working a factory job, supporting his family while his wife stayed
home. Now it takes both husband and wife working, and sometimes one
or more working two jobs, to be able to live that way. And that isn't
even comparable, since the family in the 60's had more leisure time.
Hard to take a family vacation from 2 or 3 jobs at once.

From: me on
"Rod Speed" <rod.speed.aaa(a)gmail.com> wrote:

>Yes, you chose the wrong field. That isnt true of the medical services industry.

So would you recommend a person to get into healthcare
now days Rod?

Bottom line...where ARE the jobs in the USA say in two
years? Healthcare, engineering, etc?