quote:

I keep coming to the conclusion that such a thing hammers the poor while the rich pay considerably less.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

I know. You prefer debt.

I prefer cutting the defense budget and pulling out of the numerous wars we are in.. I prefer cutting out the "wars" on every other thing they can make up to justify endless spending on. I prefer government reform to a point that it doesn't benefit the pockets and or companies to dump obscene amounts of money to buy their way. I prefer closing all of the loopholes that would keep the rich from paying their fair share. (You can say VAT will do some of that but most likely larger companies will find a way around paying that too).

A lot we can do to work on the debt..I'm sure there's many more I haven't listed just as I'm sure none will be implemented.

Any independent analyst will tell you the same thing....to reduce the debt, we will need to do ALL of these things:

*cut defense spending
*adjust Social Security
*adjust Medicaid/Medicare
*cut spending
*raise taxes

Anyone pretending otherwise is pushing an agenda.

quote:

Just how do you figure that? Who buys more?

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Uh-huh.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ok well to me, tax & borrow are the same since in the end its gonna be taxpayers that pay (one way or the other)...
I also think the borrow and waste ship has sailed, given the debt already...

The difference is....with the borrowing we have the debt.

and the debt has been there for a very, very long time... its nothing new. They just keep adding more tax (to pay the increased interest on more debt) to increase the borrowing which increases the debt...
when what they need to do is cut waste, cut favors to buddies and banks, etc, and actually act in the best interests of the country and make it solvent once again.

Exactly wrong. The opposite is true.

The massive debt is new, starting under Reagan, who quadrupled it, then after slowing with Clinton, taking off under Bush II and now Obama. But it's NOT from adding more taxes, but rather, from continually cutting taxes, which necessitates borrowing, which increases the debt.

If your assertion were correct, we'd be paying it down. Your assertion that taxes cause interest is absurd.

Did you expect that we'd cut our way to paying it down? You could eliminate ALL taxes, but that's STILL gonna leave the debt to be paid. How did you figure that would happen?

quote:

*cut defense spending
*adjust Social Security
*adjust Medicaid/Medicare
*cut spending
*raise taxes

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ok well to me, tax & borrow are the same since in the end its gonna be taxpayers that pay (one way or the other)...
I also think the borrow and waste ship has sailed, given the debt already...

The difference is....with the borrowing we have the debt.

and the debt has been there for a very, very long time... its nothing new. They just keep adding more tax (to pay the increased interest on more debt) to increase the borrowing which increases the debt...
when what they need to do is cut waste, cut favors to buddies and banks, etc, and actually act in the best interests of the country and make it solvent once again.

Exactly wrong. The opposite is true.

The massive debt is new, starting under Reagan, who quadrupled it, then after slowing with Clinton, taking off under Bush II and now Obama. But it's NOT from adding more taxes, but rather, from continually cutting taxes, which necessitates borrowing, which increases the debt.

If your assertion were correct, we'd be paying it down. Your assertion that taxes cause interest is absurd.

Did you expect that we'd cut our way to paying it down? You could eliminate ALL taxes, but that's STILL gonna leave the debt to be paid. How did you figure that would happen?

30 years of govt spending is a very long time to me.
Do you seriously think that the $ from a tax increase would be used to pay down the debt??? no, would be used to finance more debt instead. Increasing tax is just the govt way of getting a credit card increase to spend more money it doesnt have.

The expensive war in Iraq was not necessary, imo, neither is this thing with Gadaffi, the bank, insurance and big biz bailouts, neither is a lot of other wasteful govt spending. If it were not for those trillion dollar boondoggles, the govt would be in much better shape. Taxpayers just want the $ they pay to be spent in a prudent manner, when its not then no, they dont want more tax.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

Just how do you figure that? Who buys more?

Who does buy more?

About the only way a poor man is ever going to get a fair shake in life is to get out of the system. Put yourself into a position of not having to pay taxes, be supported by the government in as little a way as humanly possible for each person.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

Any independent analyst will tell you the same thing....to reduce the debt, we will need to do ALL of these things:

*cut defense spending
*adjust Social Security
*adjust Medicaid/Medicare
*cut spending
*raise taxes

Anyone pretending otherwise is pushing an agenda.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: Icarys

quote:

Just how do you figure that? Who buys more?

Who does buy more?

About the only way a poor man is ever going to get a fair shake in life is to get out of the system. Put yourself into a position of not having to pay taxes, be supported by the government in as little a way as humanly possible for each person.

Huh?

Look....I started this trip as a starving artist. I lived for a year without heat or running water.

But I know the difference between playing victim and working to achieve tangible results.

Today I'm quite well off and I help others achieve their goals. But start from the victim point, and no one can help. All the excuses and justifications are in place.

This thread well illustrates this. Some of the claims here are flat out absurd, defying simple mathematics. Several posters clearly have no clue what a VAT is or how it works...but they know they're against it, whatever it is. And the consensus here is that we're all screwed anyway and there's nothing anyone can do.

Well...with that perspective....you're right. And you'll continue to be right until you're tired of sabotaging yourself.

The fault, Dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
I wont tell you where I got the information from.  

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ORIGINAL: tj444

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

quote:

ok well to me, tax & borrow are the same since in the end its gonna be taxpayers that pay (one way or the other)...
I also think the borrow and waste ship has sailed, given the debt already...

The difference is....with the borrowing we have the debt.

and the debt has been there for a very, very long time... its nothing new. They just keep adding more tax (to pay the increased interest on more debt) to increase the borrowing which increases the debt...
when what they need to do is cut waste, cut favors to buddies and banks, etc, and actually act in the best interests of the country and make it solvent once again.

Exactly wrong. The opposite is true.

The massive debt is new, starting under Reagan, who quadrupled it, then after slowing with Clinton, taking off under Bush II and now Obama. But it's NOT from adding more taxes, but rather, from continually cutting taxes, which necessitates borrowing, which increases the debt.

If your assertion were correct, we'd be paying it down. Your assertion that taxes cause interest is absurd.

Did you expect that we'd cut our way to paying it down? You could eliminate ALL taxes, but that's STILL gonna leave the debt to be paid. How did you figure that would happen?

30 years of govt spending is a very long time to me.
Do you seriously think that the $ from a tax increase would be used to pay down the debt??? no, would be used to finance more debt instead. Increasing tax is just the govt way of getting a credit card increase to spend more money it doesnt have.

The expensive war in Iraq was not necessary, imo, neither is this thing with Gadaffi, the bank, insurance and big biz bailouts, neither is a lot of other wasteful govt spending. If it were not for those trillion dollar boondoggles, the govt would be in much better shape. Taxpayers just want the $ they pay to be spent in a prudent manner, when its not then no, they dont want more tax.

quote:

Huh?

Look....I started this trip as a starving artist. I lived for a year without heat or running water.

But I know the difference between playing victim and working to achieve tangible results.

Today I'm quite well off and I help others achieve their goals. But start from the victim point, and no one can help. All the excuses and justifications are in place.

This thread well illustrates this. Some of the claims here are flat out absurd, defying simple mathematics. Several posters clearly have no clue what a VAT is or how it works...but they know they're against it, whatever it is. And the consensus here is that we're all screwed anyway and there's nothing anyone can do.

Well...with that perspective....you're right. And you'll continue to be right until you're tired of sabotaging yourself.

The fault, Dear Brutus, lies not in our stars, but in ourselves.

quote:

ORIGINAL: lockedaway
A vat tax was proposed by that miserable whore Nancy Pelosi.  Is there any other information you need to know that it would be bad for you?

quote:

ORIGINAL: lockedaway
A federal sales tax is an idea whose time may have come...if it is implemented with a flat tax.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Musicmystery

I have long favored a VAT tax. If it's in exchange for cutting other taxes, I'm fine with that too.

It solves a number of problems, including tax lost on illegal sales, and "levels the playing field" across the economy.

It's regressive, but it also taxes based on purchases, and spreads the "burden" to those with money to spend.

quote:

ORIGINAL: pahunkboy
Candor about taxes is rare in Washington, so when House Speaker Nancy Pelosi admits that Democrats may have to impose a huge new tax on the middle class to fund their spending ambitions, believe her. Speaking with PBS's Charlie Rose on Monday, Mrs. Pelosi mused publicly about the rising possibility of enacting a value-added tax, or VAT, as part of broader tax reform. "Somewhere along the way, a value-added tax plays into this," she said. "Of course, we want to take down the health-care cost, that's one part of it. But in the scheme of things, I think it's fair to look at a value-added tax as well." The allure of a VAT for politicians is that it applies to every level of production or service, rakes in piles of money, and is largely hidden from those who ultimately pay it—namely, consumers. With a $9 trillion 10-year budget deficit, $4 trillion in spending in fiscal 2010 alone, and a $1 trillion (at a minimum) health-care entitleme

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB10001424052748703298004574457512007010416.html