RE: General Ideas for a Tax System

RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

DesideriScuri -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 6:27:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster Guys, read my lips! No more income taxes! No more taxes on profit! No more fees to create a company! No more fees for the bureaucracy of the state! No more taxes per employee! No more VAT! I would not be more business-friendly! What would be taxed? No global generalities, please. Give me some examples. Don't go with the "tax property" stuff, either. You won't define "property," so we'll never be able to reach any agreement on that (defining terms is conducive to discussion in that it sets the framework; using terms that have different meanings to different peoples is not conducive to good discussion). We've corresponded. We've had good discussions, or so I thought. I have no problem doing that here, but the ideas you're putting across are a bit to nebulous, imo.

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 8:14:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: And what about work ethic and motivation? If i knew that no matter how hard I worked I wasn't going to get anything different from what the lazy guy who did just enough was going to get Why does this bother you? Why does how much someone else makes offend you? Each worker, in this scenario, has the choice of working as much or as little as they choose. ok I choose to work as little as possible Me too

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 8:29:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx Yet, the utilities have to get the okay to raise rates. PUCO holds the power to allow or prevent rate hikes. Those are the standard protocols that come with being a govt. sanctioned monopoly quote: Thanks for catching up, Thompson! I responed to a post that expressed total ignorance of how the puc works, a post that begged for someone to disabuse the poster of his ignorance. I did so with factual data and now am accused of finally catching up. [8\|] quote: Most likely, First Energy buys as much fuels as they can, so they can produce as much as possible, considering they can sell their excess on the open market. quote: Most likely????Is that like guess?Wouldn't factual knowledge be more usefull? quote: Pot... kettle... In a discussion about "first energy"your opinions are opinions. In a discussion about "first energy" and the way the puc controls it my statements have been fact. So instead of "pot...kettle" we more rightly have the ignorant being disabused of their ignorance and having a case of sore butt because of it.

SpanishMatMaster -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 8:31:02 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 quote: ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 So in your utopia I stopped reading here. Reformulate your answer without sarcasms if you want me to read it. Best regards. I was not sarcastic Stop reading here. You were, I am not proposing any kind of "utopia", I am not telling that all problems of mankind would be resolved and you could not have possibly understood this. "utopia: a place of ideal perfection especially in laws, government, and social conditions" So, stop using sarcasm and reformulate your point if you want me to read and answer. Thank you.

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 8:36:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: cordeliasub quote: If I work harder than you do should I be entitled to more air than you? If I work harder than you do should I be entitled to more happiness than you? If I work harder than you do should I be entitled to more sleep than you? If I work harder than you do should I be entitled to shit more than you? If I work harder than you do should I be entitled to piss more than you? If my point is not clear I can make this list longer. Um....if you do not know the difference between air and piss and a wage someone works for, I am not quite sure how to explain it. I clearly know the difference. That you think I do not would seem to indicate you do not understand the meaning of my post. quote: My point is.....this idea of there being some magical consensus about how much is "enough" for everyone else to make is....ridiculous. Which is a contradiction of your post to which I responded quote: There will never be a consensus, and who gets to decide? Agreed quote: The bottom line is that there is a segment of people who wants to make success borne of hard work and self-motivation Perhaps a list of when this has hapened. quote: some sort of greedy moral failure. Please show me that part of my post I cannot remember writing anything like that.

SpanishMatMaster -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 8:37:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri What would be taxed? No global generalities, please. Give me some examples. Hello, Desideri. Please remember that the name of the thread is "general ideas". quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I have no problem doing that here, but the ideas you're putting across are a bit to nebulous, imo. I really do not think so. Imagine that I propose a song championship where all countries vote per telephone the best song of all presented. And you tell me that the proposal is not concrete enough and I should give you an example of winning song. The situation is pretty much similar: I am proposing a criteria to choose what to tax or not, which will give different results in different situations and with different opinions of the population on certain things. And you demand from me a concrete potential result of the process to judge the whole process? I do not think that this is a good idea. But ok, I will do what you say, with one condition - we move outside the US and go to Germany. A society I know better and whose economy I know better, so that I can guess better which would be the result of applying the strategy defended. Fair enough? Here is my example: artificial production of CO2. In Germany. Take in account that it is already taxed. All I am proposing is an increase of the amount, in this concrete example. Concrete enough, or should I give some numbers? (I would have to investigate, but I will if you demand it).

DesideriScuri -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 10:09:21 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster Imagine that I propose a song championship where all countries vote per telephone the best song of all presented. And you tell me that the proposal is not concrete enough and I should give you an example of winning song. That is nothing more than a popularity contest. And, personally, I disagree that what we tax and what we don't tax, should be nothing more than a popularity contest. quote: The situation is pretty much similar: I am proposing a criteria to choose what to tax or not, which will give different results in different situations and with different opinions of the population on certain things. And you demand from me a concrete potential result of the process to judge the whole process? I do not think that this is a good idea. Not necessarily a concrete potential result, but more concrete than nebulous would be awesome. quote: But ok, I will do what you say, with one condition - we move outside the US and go to Germany. A society I know better and whose economy I know better, so that I can guess better which would be the result of applying the strategy defended. Fair enough? Here is my example: artificial production of CO2. In Germany. Take in account that it is already taxed. All I am proposing is an increase of the amount, in this concrete example. Concrete enough, or should I give some numbers? (I would have to investigate, but I will if you demand it). See, now? This is a great example. You want to decrease artificial CO2 production. Tax the batshit out of it, if that is the choice of Germany's Citizenry. But, each country gets to decide for themselves. Now, to take it to an extreme conclusion, what happens if Germany's economy is depressed because of the increased taxation of artificial CO2 production (and what, exactly, counts as artificial will have to be fleshed out before the taxes can be levied)? What happens if the German economy is depressed because no one else decides to tax artificial CO2 production (hence the "extreme" part)? Now, you will also get into more grey areas, too. Why is the process is creating the artificial CO2? You can't just tax emissions. Business isn't creating emissions just to create emissions. In keeping with your choice of Germany (and this is also going to be not a perfect example due to current German Government goals), let's just talk about power generation. Germany relies on nuke power plants to some extent (for now anyway), right? Taxing emissions is also taxing power generation, which, I'm sure you don't really want to decrease. If there is no other suitable option for power production to replace the CO2 producing generation, you are then taxing a positive (power generation). Take it to another extreme conclusion. You want to tax artificial CO2 production from power generation. What happens when the producers don't want to pay the tax? They either sell, or they close up shop, right? What do you do when they all decide to close up shop. What are you going to do then? Even if it takes 2 years to wind down everything in an environmentally friendly way, what will Germans do for power? There isn't enough power production (you have a shitload of capacity from wind turbines that could cover, if you could come close to capacity, but there simply isn't enough wind in enough places to get there) that wouldn't have to pay those taxes. What happens at that point? I get what you are saying at a general idea level. I get it, but I'm saying it's not that simple. Moving back to the US, I support a consumption tax. There would be no income tax. Income being a positive that we want to increase, it wouldn't be taxed. If we changed that to a consumption tax, those who consume more (which would likely be those with higher incomes, no?) pay more. What happens when consumption takes a nosedive and you no longer have enough money coming in to support the level of government you have? I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority.

eulero83 -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 10:58:33 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster So, stop using sarcasm and reformulate your point if you want me to read and answer. Thank you. if your tax reform will be applied there won't be pubblic services provided or any kind of welfare could be suppoerted, 'cos you named just a few things to put a tax on, this means taxes will be high or worth nothing as no service will be guaranteed. I come from from one of the country that taxes property (cars, real estate, televisions...) with profits, incomes, energy, sold goods, and almost anything else, and by the way economy IS collapsing. The problem with taxing only "the rich people" is that there are just a few really rich persons, so when proposal like your are applied there are many middelclass families that discover to be rich when taxes are collected. It's the same every time socialist area governament tried to impose new taxes they use the words "don't warry only big incomes/assets/real estate properties will be considered" so most of people think "I'm not rich so I agree" and in the end of the year they discover their house is big, the money they are saving for retirement are many, and their cars are luxurious, so next election most vote for a liberal governament. My point was another by the way, you said "we must tax what we want to discourage" than "we must not discourage profit" and than "we must tax property" this is a loop 'cos I don't see the point in making profit if it's not to have property so if I'm discouraged in collecting property I just won't work for profit, but save my time for resting or having fun, and aslo accepting more responsibility on my workplace, or study years for a better paid job, as the whole point of doing this is owning more properties and as you said society will punish me for owning more than average people do. The whole thing I read in your OP is not a strawman but a childish and naive way to adapt socialism to a free market economy that usually gives more problems than a planned economy, and as you can see from the ammount of prostitutes and underpaid workers moving to germany from eastern europe, this just doesn't work fine.

eulero83 -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 11:25:45 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri See, now? This is a great example. You want to decrease artificial CO2 production. Tax the batshit out of it, if that is the choice of Germany's Citizenry. But, each country gets to decide for themselves. Now, to take it to an extreme conclusion, what happens if Germany's economy is depressed because of the increased taxation of artificial CO2 production (and what, exactly, counts as artificial will have to be fleshed out before the taxes can be levied)? What happens if the German economy is depressed because no one else decides to tax artificial CO2 production (hence the "extreme" part)? Now, you will also get into more grey areas, too. Why is the process is creating the artificial CO2? You can't just tax emissions. Business isn't creating emissions just to create emissions. In keeping with your choice of Germany (and this is also going to be not a perfect example due to current German Government goals), let's just talk about power generation. Germany relies on nuke power plants to some extent (for now anyway), right? Taxing emissions is also taxing power generation, which, I'm sure you don't really want to decrease. If there is no other suitable option for power production to replace the CO2 producing generation, you are then taxing a positive (power generation). Take it to another extreme conclusion. You want to tax artificial CO2 production from power generation. What happens when the producers don't want to pay the tax? They either sell, or they close up shop, right? What do you do when they all decide to close up shop. What are you going to do then? Even if it takes 2 years to wind down everything in an environmentally friendly way, what will Germans do for power? There isn't enough power production (you have a shitload of capacity from wind turbines that could cover, if you could come close to capacity, but there simply isn't enough wind in enough places to get there) that wouldn't have to pay those taxes. What happens at that point? I get what you are saying at a general idea level. I get it, but I'm saying it's not that simple. Moving back to the US, I support a consumption tax. There would be no income tax. Income being a positive that we want to increase, it wouldn't be taxed. If we changed that to a consumption tax, those who consume more (which would likely be those with higher incomes, no?) pay more. What happens when consumption takes a nosedive and you no longer have enough money coming in to support the level of government you have? I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority. I totally quote this, it's like what happened in Italy with retirement contribution: during the '70s worker union fought to have a retributive and not a contributive retirement support, so any worker would pay taxes on his income and when 55 years old (or after 35 years of contribution) he stops working and recive a montly check based on his last 3 year's average income and not based on how many money he collected in during his working life, this was proposed as something fair and a conquest of working class, so popular and supported by consensus, in the last 20 years average life's length incrised and birth rate decreased so that this welfare system was supported creating a debit with active workers to support retired people, with € birth public debit can't raise over a certain percentage of GIP without the possibility produce currency, so this produced the collapse of italian welfare in the last 3 years and my generation will probably never have a retirement check but will pay for all the people that today are older then 60.

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 11:32:14 AM)
quote: I support a consumption tax. There would be no income tax. Income being a positive that we want to increase, it wouldn't be taxed. If we changed that to a consumption tax, those who consume more (which would likely be those with higher incomes, no?) pay more. Does this consumption tax apply to everything one buys including investment purchases ? quote: What happens when consumption takes a nosedive and you no longer have enough money coming in to support the level of government you have? Prima facia evidence that a consumption tax is stupid? quote: I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority. "Tyranny of the majority[8\|] Is that some sort of faux news code speak for democracy? Is there something intrinsically flawed with the concept of democracy? Only someone who desires tyranny of the minority would oppose tyranny of the majority.

eulero83 -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 12:28:54 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority. "Tyranny of the majority[8\|] Is that some sort of faux news code speak for democracy? Is there something intrinsically flawed with the concept of democracy? Only someone who desires tyranny of the minority would oppose tyranny of the majority. Actually democracy has nothing to do with "decision by majority" it means people among a nation elect trusted person among themselves to decide about what costitution gives them the right to decide about. Criteria in decisions can be different in different situation, for example in my country any emendament to the costitution needs 2/3 of consent in parlament and confirmation with a pubblic pool.

DesideriScuri -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 12:52:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I support a consumption tax. There would be no income tax. Income being a positive that we want to increase, it wouldn't be taxed. If we changed that to a consumption tax, those who consume more (which would likely be those with higher incomes, no?) pay more. Does this consumption tax apply to everything one buys including investment purchases ? quote: I support a consumption tax on everything that is currently taxed under our sales tax scheme. Which does mean that foods that are currently tax free would remain so. If there are taxes to be paid on investment purchases now, then, yes, it would apply to those. quote: quote: What happens when consumption takes a nosedive and you no longer have enough money coming in to support the level of government you have? Prima facia evidence that a consumption tax is stupid? Actually, it's evidence that you support a large size and scope of government. The answer to the question is that you you reduce the size of government to meet the revenues produced. Completely unlike what we have in the US. Did you know that under the Paul Ryan budget plan passed by the House of Representatives in 2011 or 2012 capped spending at the level of the previous year's revenues. Neat how that shit doesn't ever get talked about and doesn't see the light of day in the Senate. But, I digress... quote: quote: I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority. "Tyranny of the majority[8\|] Is that some sort of faux news code speak for democracy? Is there something intrinsically flawed with the concept of democracy? Only someone who desires tyranny of the minority would oppose tyranny of the majority. It's great living in a democracy, innit?

eulero83 -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 1:01:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster Here is my example: artificial production of CO2. In Germany. Take in account that it is already taxed. All I am proposing is an increase of the amount, in this concrete example. Concrete enough, or should I give some numbers? (I would have to investigate, but I will if you demand it). I try to think what could happen by an example: a steelworks in Dresden's area is taxed more for it's CO2 production, this increses producion costs and CEO rises prices in order to keep the same profit, even if the company produces high quality laminate profiles, there is no material difference with italian or french cheaper production so orders decrease, steelworks's owner invested a lot of money and has no intention to loose part of his profit so he could sell the company and live without money problem for the rest of his life, but in this economical situation no new investor are ready to spend milions for a reduced profit, so owner and CEO decide to stop production in Sachsen and move the factory in Teplice just a few km from Dresden in Czech Republic, selling land in germany at a higher price than the one they'll buy in czech rep. and paying workers a lower wage due to the cheaper costs of life company will amortise the relocation in just a few years and with schengen traty no customs duties can be applied, pollution in Sachsen doesn't decrease as mountains around the border are low and rivers in Treplice go directly in Elbe river, but Germany doesn't collect any taxes from the steelwork company to cover healt care costs and some of the german workers that refused to move in Czech Repubblic to keep their job at a lower wage are unemployed increasing welfare costs.

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 2:45:15 PM)
quote: Does this consumption tax apply to everything one buys including investment purchases ? : I quote: support a consumption tax on everything that is currently taxed under our sales tax scheme. So now a consumption tax is not a consumption tax but rather our current sales tax minus income tax. Do we now raise the sales tax to make up for the income tax no longer collected? Since the "big ticket" items that the rich would purchase, like say a couple of thousand shares of ibm, would not be taxed this would clearly not be a consumption tax but simply another scheeme to try an con the not rich into paying for the rich. quote: Which does mean that foods that are currently tax free would remain so. If there are taxes to be paid on investment purchases now, then, yes, it would apply to those. I am tryng to imagine someone creating an ideal tax plan. Would that person take the time to study who paid taxes and on what before opening their mouth about the possible solutions? If they did then they would not look like a goddam fool with both feet in their mouth.

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 2:49:14 PM)
quote: "Tyranny of the majority Is that some sort of faux news code speak for democracy? Is there something intrinsically flawed with the concept of democracy? Only someone who desires tyranny of the minority would oppose tyranny of the majority. quote: It's great living in a democracy, innit? For those who did not get the memmo...the u.s. is a republic...so is n.korea

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 2:50:28 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority. "Tyranny of the majority[8\|] Is that some sort of faux news code speak for democracy? Is there something intrinsically flawed with the concept of democracy? Only someone who desires tyranny of the minority would oppose tyranny of the majority. Actually democracy has nothing to do with "decision by majority" it means people among a nation elect trusted person among themselves to decide about what costitution gives them the right to. That is called a republic.

eulero83 -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 3:09:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: ORIGINAL: eulero83 quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: I completely agree that we should aim to only tax those things that we want to decrease. Relying on "consensus" or "majority rules" is just going to end up being either not having enough to tax, or tyranny of the majority. "Tyranny of the majority[8\|] Is that some sort of faux news code speak for democracy? Is there something intrinsically flawed with the concept of democracy? Only someone who desires tyranny of the minority would oppose tyranny of the majority. Actually democracy has nothing to do with "decision by majority" it means people among a nation elect trusted person among themselves to decide about what costitution gives them the right to. That is called a republic. A repubblic is a kind of state structure, democracy is the principle a repubblic is built on. In great britan there are many democratic istitution (most of them) even if it's a kingdom.

thompsonx -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 3:11:11 PM)
quote: quote: quote: What happens when consumption takes a nosedive and you no longer have enough money coming in to support the level of government you have? Prima facia evidence that a consumption tax is stupid? quote: Actually, it's evidence that you support a large size and scope of government. That would be an asanine evaluation based on both ignorance and perconcieved notions. quote: The answer to the question is that you you reduce the size of government to meet the revenues produced. Or one could stop the war in the sandbox. quote: Completely unlike what we have in the US. Since, as pointed out, that does not exist in the u.s. how do we explane the u.s being the most powerful economy in the world?

BamaD -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 3:15:08 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: SpanishMatMaster quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri What would be taxed? No global generalities, please. Give me some examples. Hello, Desideri. Please remember that the name of the thread is "general ideas". quote: ORIGINAL: DesideriScuri I have no problem doing that here, but the ideas you're putting across are a bit to nebulous, imo. I really do not think so. Imagine that I propose a song championship where all countries vote per telephone the best song of all presented. And you tell me that the proposal is not concrete enough and I should give you an example of winning song. The situation is pretty much similar: I am proposing a criteria to choose what to tax or not, which will give different results in different situations and with different opinions of the population on certain things. And you demand from me a concrete potential result of the process to judge the whole process? I do not think that this is a good idea. But ok, I will do what you say, with one condition - we move outside the US and go to Germany. A society I know better and whose economy I know better, so that I can guess better which would be the result of applying the strategy defended. Fair enough? Here is my example: artificial production of CO2. In Germany. Take in account that it is already taxed. All I am proposing is an increase of the amount, in this concrete example. Concrete enough, or should I give some numbers? (I would have to investigate, but I will if you demand it). The purpose of taxation in to finance the government your general ideas would subvert it to social engineering based on the values of whoever is in power at the moment, are you by any chance an admitted socialist?

DesideriScuri -> RE: General Ideas for a Tax System (5/20/2013 3:24:30 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: thompsonx quote: Does this consumption tax apply to everything one buys including investment purchases ?/quote] quote: I support a consumption tax on everything that is currently taxed under our sales tax scheme. So now a consumption tax is not a consumption tax but rather our current sales tax minus income tax. Do we now raise the sales tax to make up for the income tax no longer collected? As a matter of fact, yes, yes it would. I believe the numbers are somewhere between 17 and 23%, depending on what plan you look into. quote: Since the "big ticket" items that the rich would purchase, like say a couple of thousand shares of ibm, would not be taxed this would clearly not be a consumption tax but simply another scheeme to try an con the not rich into paying for the rich. Yeah, because it's the poor people who are driving the sales of boats, personal aircraft and expensive cars. [8\|] quote: quote: Which does mean that foods that are currently tax free would remain so. If there are taxes to be paid on investment purchases now, then, yes, it would apply to those. I am tryng to imagine someone creating an ideal tax plan. Would that person take the time to study who paid taxes and on what before opening their mouth about the possible solutions? If they did then they would not look like a goddam fool with both feet in their mouth. Check a mirror lately?

Page: << < prev 2 3 [4] 5 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

4.589844E-02