My Problem with the "Fair" tax.

[Ben Kenobi]

Most Feudal societies taxed less than 50 percent, fwiw.

[PLATO]

Although I am fairly conservative in most fiscal areas, I am somewhat progressive when it comes to taxes.

Personally, I have always been a proponent of the following (although I have never seen this plan anywhere else):

1.) Set a level at 4 times the "poverty rate" and that income is exempt from federal income tax.
2.) Set the tax rate above that every year to fully fund the budget.

U.S. Census Bureau Poverty Thresholds, 2012


Size of Family Unit

Poverty Threshold

One person (unrelated individual) $11,720
Under age 65 11,945
Age 65 or older 11,011
Two people 14,937
Householder under age 65 15,450
Householder age 65 or older 13,892
Three people 18,284
Four people 23,492
Five people 27,827
Six people 31,471
Seven people 35,743
Eight people 39,688
Nine people or more 47,297
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Weighted Average Poverty Thresholds, 2012, released in September 2013

That gives everyone an exemption for a "living wage" and fully funds the budget. Rate is flat above this amount.

[PLATO]

JM

[Dinner]

BTW, you need to be completely dead above your shoulders if you think a flat tax is a good idea.

Honestly, what a stupid notion

In order to make it revenue neutral you would have to set it so high it would mean a tax increase for like 75% of the population. The part of the population who can least afford to pay.

So really all this is about is getting still more tax breaks for the rich and pretending that is fair even though really it would effectively mean the rich paying a lower tax rate than everyone else.

[Dinner]

Double post. What is up with poly's servers where double posts are suddenly back?

[Dinner]

This might be nitpicking but the top 1% have 20% of the income not 75%.

Ok, maybe it was the top 10 or 20 percentage. It has been a while since I read the break down.

[Ben Kenobi]

1.) Set a level at 4 times the "poverty rate" and that income is exempt from federal income tax.
2.) Set the tax rate above that every year to fully fund the budget.

There's not enough money out there to fund the government on exemption at 4x times the poverty rate.

[Ben Kenobi]

In order to make it revenue neutral you would have to set it so high it would mean a tax increase for like 75% of the population. The part of the population who can least afford to pay.

Only if you assume that the government should stay the same size that it is now. Most flax taxers want something around 10 percent for everyone (which would actually reduce taxes for most people), with the concomitant decrease in the government payrolls.

Personally I'd couple a flat tax, with elimination of payroll taxes. Punishing people for working is a crappy way of doing business. We want to encourage people to work.

[Kidlicious]

Economics isn't a religion, Kidicious. Why shouldn't it be about my self-interest? I'm a teacher - students come here if their parents can afford to do so, but they can't afford to do so if they are taxed out of their eyeballs. So, lower the taxes and I keep my job.

So you don't believe in a fair economic system but you are religious, and you don't mind people calling a tax fair, even though it's not?

[Kidlicious]

Payroll taxes have the poor paying far more of what they earn than any flat tax. The poor are already being taxed to the gills, but it's only the working poor, so that's ok.

No. I've been working poor most of my life. You're spreading misinformation, not to mention the fact that families get the EIC. I used to prepare taxes btw.

[Kidlicious]

Although I am fairly conservative in most fiscal areas, I am somewhat progressive when it comes to taxes.

Personally, I have always been a proponent of the following (although I have never seen this plan anywhere else):

1.) Set a level at 4 times the "poverty rate" and that income is exempt from federal income tax.
2.) Set the tax rate above that every year to fully fund the budget.



That gives everyone an exemption for a "living wage" and fully funds the budget. Rate is flat above this amount.

So why would you bother working toward getting a raise? Your plan would make people take home less money after they got a raise past the threshold. This is already happening with Obamacare.

[onodera]

"People poorer than me are lazy losers, people richer than me are idle rich. The former shouldn't get any of my taxes, and the latter will find a loophole to avoid paying theirs. Your 'progressive' tax will only hurt honest workers like me."

[giblets]

Please don't quote Ben without quote tags.

[PLATO]

So why would you bother working toward getting a raise? Your plan would make people take home less money after they got a raise past the threshold. This is already happening with Obamacare.

No...The amount of #1 would always be exempt regardless of what you make. Getting a raise above this amount would only mean that the amount above # 1 would be subject to tax.

[PLATO]

JM