[martin14]

DanSC DanSC:

DrCaleb DrCaleb:

I'd be all for a flat rate tax system.

It sounds like a great idea, but that's what Russia has now.

So do a lot of other East Europe countries, and it works.

They have made some other changes as well,
and they have more money from a flat rate than the previous.

[BeaverFever]

I don't think enough time has passed to judge Russia or any of the former Iron Curtain countries as an unqualified success...still lots of poverty, corruption and deficient services over there.

If you impose a flat tax of x%, you will never have a number that is affordable to lower classes AND still generates enough reveneue from the upper classes to fund our service requirements.

[martin14]

As long as you think the rich actually pay taxes.......

And let's face it, our current system isnt working too well.

[Pseudonym]

Anyone remember how we got the Alternative Minimum Tax?

I don't think we can solve the fundamental issues with our tax code by raising rates and picking on the rich. I would like some simple fundamental principle to form the basis for the tax system, rather than a perserve hodgepodge of incentive, disincentives, and behavioral controls.

[Bruce_the_vii]

BartSimpson BartSimpson:

I'd give Warren Buffet more credit if he simply agitated to revoke all of the tax breaks and deductions he takes so people like himself could simply pay what's due.

Forgive me, but in all of this manoeuvering by Buffet I suspect at the end of the day he's plotting to pay less taxes at the end of it than he does right now.

That a boy bart, Warren Buffett want to pay less tax. It's not like if the economy went into prolonged recession that he'd earn less on his investments, no he wants to pay less tax. A invest genius you are not.

[Lemmy]

martin14 martin14:

Lemmy Lemmy:

John Stuart Mill wrote, in 1858: "As a government out to make no distinction of persons or classes in the strengths of their claims on it, whatever sacrifices it requires from them should be made to bear as nearly as possible with the same pressure upon all...equality of taxation, therefore, as a maxim of politics, means equality of sacrifice."

Same pressure = flat tax rate.

No, no, no, no. You didn't read all the way to the end of the sentence. You missed the part about "equality of sacrifice". A 30% tax on someone making $1,000,000/year is not an equal sacrifice as a a 30% tax on someone making $50,000/year.

[Brenda]

Absolutely true, Lemmy!!

[Lemmy]

Thomas Paine on progressive taxes: "Admitting that any annual sum, say, for in­stance, a thousand pounds, is necessary to support a family, consequently the second thousand is in the nature of a luxury, the third still more so, and by proceeding on we shall arrive at a sum that may not improperly be called a prohibitable luxury. It would be impolitic to set bounds to property acquired by in­dustry, and therefore it is right to place the prohibition beyond the probable acquisition to which industry can extend; but there ought to be a limit to property or the accumulation of it by bequest." He then proposed a system of graduated taxes upon incomes. The object of such a tax in Paine's mind was twofold: It would first of all eliminate those arduous duties imposed on the poor by the rich which has been screened too much, and secondly it would break up the large estates and return their substance to all the heirs and heiresses which "hitherto the Aris­tocracy have quartered . . . upon the public in useless posts, places and offices."

[Macguyver]

Lemmy Lemmy:

No, no, no, no. You didn't read all the way to the end of the sentence. You missed the part about "equality of sacrifice". A 30% tax on someone making $1,000,000/year is not an equal sacrifice as a a 30% tax on someone making $50,000/year.

So what would be an "equal sacrifice"?

[Lemmy]

Macguyver Macguyver:

So what would be an "equal sacrifice"?

Some sort of progressive tax where the wealthy actually support the maintenance of the society from which they have most benefited. Or did you want me to actually generate a bracketed federal income-tax schedule? If you were asking the latter, how were you planning to compensate me for my research services and expenses?

[Macguyver]

After the revoloution you can be my Minister of Finance.

[peck420]

There is no such thing as equal sacrifice.

Even with equal wages.

You could be a family of 4 with a mortgage and an income of $50,000 (total).

I could be a single person with no mortgage and an income of $50,000 (total).

Would it be fair to tax us the same? Would it be equal? We have equal incomes, but my bare cost of living is substanially lower.

Under 'equality of sacrifice' I should be taxed more to represent the extra burden you have with your family and mortgage.

The closest we will ever be to 'equal' is a flat tax, but I don't think flat taxes are all that sustainable. Alberta would probably be hurting badly with flat tax if we didn't have the oil revenues to make up the difference. (Yes, my views have changed...more research has led me to more uncertainty and more questions.)

[Macguyver]

Seriously though, I agree. If you make $50K or more you pay one rate no matter how rich you are or where your money comes from.

If there is any room for movement for the rich, let's make it based on the overall state of the economy and the unemployment numbers. If the country is working and the real unemployment rate is low, then tax breaks. If, like today, the economy sucks and the masses are suffering, then the rich can either create jobs or pay more taxes. That way when the GOP crys about "taxing the job creators" we can say "well , let see some jobs then".

[Macguyver]

peck420 peck420:

There is no such thing as equal sacrifice.

Even with equal wages.

You could be a family of 4 with a mortgage and an income of $50,000 (total).

I could be a single person with no mortgage and an income of $50,000 (total).

Would it be fair to tax us the same? Would it be equal? We have equal incomes, but my bare cost of living is substanially lower.

Under 'equality of sacrifice' I should be taxed more to represent the extra burden you have with your family and mortgage.

The closest we will ever be to 'equal' is a flat tax, but I don't think flat taxes are all that sustainable. Alberta would probably be hurting badly with flat tax if we didn't have the oil revenues to make up the difference. (Yes, my views have changed...more research has led me to more uncertainty and more questions.)

As a single guy with no kids I do not have the tax break that a family of 6 would have.

[peck420]

With tax breaks it wouldn't really be a 'flat tax' anymore would it.

I am just trying to illustrate that it is almost impossible to make a system that is 'equal' or 'fair'.

We should stick to a system that provides the services we need with a tax that does not kill the average person. Add in allowances for lower end earners and additional costs for higher end earners...but I think we already have a system close to this in Canada...just need to close a couple of unneccessary loopholes/writeoff areas.