Energy jobs--this oughta be good.
Energy jobs--this oughta be good.I hear the hamster suit and giant wheel stocks are going to skyrocket soon...
It will be more subsidized,make work crap funneling money into certain states as payoffs.Jobs, flobs- it will be another fiasco.
They will likely be required to give non productive "jobs" to union ranks.
Jobs, flobs- it will be another fiasco.
His healthcare is deadmeat just like he is-- same smell :loser:
It will be more subsidized,make work crap funneling money into certain states as payoffs.
They will likely be required to give non productive "jobs" to union ranks.
Meanwhile, we already flipped one Representative; let's see how many more we can flip, starting now. That means ramping up the telephone calls, the letters, the faxes, the emails, the personal visits, the Tea Party demonstrations, townhalls, whatever it takes to make it clear to every member of the Democrat party that the only correct side of history is the right side, our side.
No... we did NOT flip anyone. Changing the three letters after your name does not make you a conservative... He's still a lib.
No, he's not.
Energy jobs--this oughta be good.
The first one worked so well.
ha
Another trillion in monopoly money coming right up! up ours....
The first one worked so well.
ha
Another trillion in monopoly money coming right up! up ours....
Yeah, shit.I double that dear sir as long as you mean at the next presidential election. The man has done nothing and I use the term man lightly for I was taught by father that a man is only as good as his word and this elected official is nothing more than a liar so what kind of man is that. Not a man by any definition I know of. :bow:
unfortunately, they all worship at the alter of Keynes.
A tax bill could be written in one paragrap: the new corporate tax rate is now 10% with the capital gains tax rates being adjusted to 10% as well. Permanently. Healthcare will now be duductable to the employee rather than the employer and FICA taxes will be cut from ~15% to 5%.
Done.
Ok, and what does the tax apply to?
why have a corp income tax rate above 0%? any taxes the corps pay come in the form of "embedded taxes" the consumers pay in the form of higher prices.
Since SCOTUS allotted the (or some of) rights of the individual to the corporation. Therefore it makes a certain amount of sense to tax them as such. Drop taxes alltogether (which, BTW, I AM in favor of doing), then we must treat all corporations as we (are supposed to) treat non-profits today: no political interaction/posturing/etc.
Does that though make sense? I'm still kind of workign through it.
No... we did NOT flip anyone. Changing the three letters after your name does not make you a conservative... He's still a lib.
Hey Sailor, lookin for a good deal on a used windmill? You can check it out at the Kittery dump, low hours, seldom used. Producer went bankrupt before issuing refund. This unit can be yours CHEAP !! Town fathers (and a mother or two) will be eternally grateful for the bailout.
Don Quixote, RA
Cervantes Equipment Sales, LLC
:lmao:
The only fairtax is a flat tax without all the crap around it. The "prebate" is the most retarded thing I ever hear.
Fairtax is still progressive, those who pay nothing still get "refunds" blah blah .... pointless to switch to that, IMO.
But thats off topic.
0% taxes for everybody is a better idea, or at least as low as possible.
Cut the spending.
To see this, consider Bill Gates, whom we'll assume earns $100 million/year, and Joe Shmo, whom we'll assume earns $30,000 a year. The utility of Bill Gates' 100 millionth dollar is, I think all will agree, substantially less than the utility of Joe's thirty thousandth dollar.
No, I cannot determine that. Bill Gates could employ thousands, Shmo ain't giving nobody a job. Bill Gates could fund pioneering research on newer and cheaper sources of energy, underwrite a private mission to Mars or any number of things. It is not the governments job to determine whose dollar is more useful.
I think we need to get back to basics.
Money belongs to him/her that earns it. Not to government. I don't think government should own anything, I really don't. Definitely not a portion of future earnings. Obviously this is all my opinion and all that, I'm not saying we'll ever have the kind of government we should have.
The only fairtax is a flat tax without all the crap around it. The "prebate" is the most retarded thing I ever hear.
Fairtax is still progressive, those who pay nothing still get "refunds" blah blah .... pointless to switch to that, IMO.
But thats off topic.
0% taxes for everybody is a better idea, or at least as low as possible.
Cut the spending.
Do we really want to get into this discussion tonight?
This is one of Rebel's favorite topics.
It's a great topic, but a fair tax is only fair if there aren't special-interest exceptions.
Under the Fairtax, the only way to pay nothing is to buy nothing that is new, not even food. Kinda difficult to eat used food. The "prebate" is meant to cover basic living expenses. Is it progressive? Yes, in a sense: those who have more money can spend more money to buy stuff, therefore they will spend more money on the tax on that stuff. But it would allow people to decide what their tax burden would be, rather than being told what they have to pay.
The word Fairtax is an oxymoron! They are always trying to get us with semantics.
The only fairtax is a flat tax without all the crap around it. The "prebate" is the most retarded thing I ever hear.
Fairtax is still progressive, those who pay nothing still get "refunds" blah blah .... pointless to switch to that, IMO.
But thats off topic.
0% taxes for everybody is a better idea, or at least as low as possible.
Cut the spending.
No, I cannot determine that. Bill Gates could employ thousands, Shmo ain't giving nobody a job. Bill Gates could fund pioneering research on newer and cheaper sources of energy, underwrite a private mission to Mars or any number of things. It is not the ANYONES right to determine whose dollar is more useful.
I think we need to get back to basics.
Money belongs to him/her that earns it. Not to government. I don't think government should own anything, I really don't. Definitely not a portion of future earnings. Obviously this is all my opinion and all that, I'm not saying we'll ever have the kind of government we should have.
Agreed. Spot on. All the prebates do is help keep the IRS in charge.
The Fairtax would eliminate the IRS, as it would not be needed. The prebates would be distributed via EFT by direct deposit, and would be tied to the cost of living. Dems may try to increase the prebate, but the effect of that would be lower net tax revenues, since everyone gets the same amount. For those of you who have questions about it, read "The Fairtax Book (http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Book-Saying-Goodbye-Income/dp/B000UENRO2/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261720073&sr=1-2)" or "Fairtax: Answering the Critics (http://www.amazon.com/FairTax-Answering-Critics-Neal-Boortz/dp/B0027CSNOO/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1261720073&sr=1-1)".
Energy jobs--this oughta be good.
I'm assuming you're going to explain this position. So I'll wait for you to back it up.The term "fair" is subjective!
The term "fair" is subjective!
How about zero tax? That's my resolution. The government ran before 1913 without any income tax. How about they put out bonds that people want to invest in because they will yield a legitimate return. How about the government run itself like a business that profits from intelligent choices.
IMHO-Any Taxation is theft. If the Fair Tax is implemented, we would still have the income tax. We would then have both…. if the national government eliminated all income taxes it would still be taking in way too much money, enough for a very bloated government.
The 16th Amendment needs to be repealed along with any income taxes.
The answer is simply, excise taxes, tariffs, duties, import fees, and etc. The income tax only accounts for about 40% of revenues, and if we reduced spending to 1997 levels, we could eliminate the income tax and replace it with nothing. That's how much the Federal Gov't has grown, 40% over the last 11 or so years. If we got the gov't back to Constitutional limits, they'd have a fabulous surplus just on the excise, tariffs, duties, and fees.
Any direct tax is an attack on the sovereignty of the individual, if we are taxed a % of income, by implication; the citizen is obligated to disclose his income to the government, thereby making it public information. Even a poll tax leads to abominations like mandatory federal ID, which is the same as personal registration.
My basic premise if that I do not trust the government one iota and do not trust what they label fair. Nothing that they do is fair, it only becomes suspicious to me.
PS- most of these posts show me how people are pre-conditioned to accepting taxation. What is scaring me here- is that some of you are getting all excited over any tax..... No matter what they decide to call it :banghead:
Except the premise that the "fair tax" is such labeled by the gov't is completely inaccurate.
Ok, this will be my last post on this in this thread. If someone wishes to discuss further, we can start a thread in economics.
The Fairtax is not now, nor has it ever been, something that the Federal gov't has proposed. It is a proposal that was developed by a group of private citizens who hired several leading economists and told them "If you could start a taxation system from a blank sheet of paper, how would you do it?" It has been endorsed as better for the economy in terms of incentivizing work and disincentivizing illegal activity by over 200 economists at many different institutions. Part of the legislation to enact the Fairtax abolishes income taxes, although an amendment to repeal the 16th would be necessary to keep it from coming back.
Except the premise that the "fair tax" is such labeled by the gov't is completely inaccurate.I reread my post over and over and I cannot find the part that you are alluding to. I never said who the author of the fairtax was. I know that it is Americans for Fair Taxation. That was not my point. Actually, it is not the point at all.