HeIsHim
Posts: 5
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: joether
quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
You remind me of Kramer in the coffee/lawsuit episode. You are not even communicating any logical thought pattern. It's like a brain dump of everything you are feeling about Rand Paul, and libertarians.
I did say that was the simple version, did I not? Like science, one loses much of the 'good information' when things are (an I hate saying this as the way it'll be perceived), dumb down to explain a very complicate and/or complex understanding of a subject matter. Why do your think not a single economist worth their weight in anti-matter (i.e. antihydrogen) does not support any of the flat tax ideas?. Why not gold? Because gold costs $38/gram (source 1, as of June 29th, 2015 @ 18:38 EST), and anti matter costs $62.5 trillion (source 2).
SOURCE 1
SOURCE 2
You wanted technical, right?
Fortunately anti-matter does not stay stable in our dimension. Since 250 pounds of anti matter would destroy the whole planet! Would solve any further need to have tax code....
quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
Sure, most flat tax schemes don't pan out.
No, none of them do! All of them are very loose with hard data and numbers. Depending on the plan, either only a skeleton structure exists or a incomplete formula is given that requires guess work to make sense. Each of them have 'concepts' that allows the poor not to pay as much in taxes; however, flat tax codes help the rich get richer. And who pays for the majority of the budget? The Middle Class....
I recall Mr. Cain's 'flat tax' plan of 9% from 2008. After I did the number crunching, my tax rate was 49%. Yeah, cus I just like paying 1/2 of my gross income to the US Government.....
I'll stick with the current code, because I understand how it works.
quote:
ORIGINAL: MasterJaguar01
The bottom line, is... Either the numbers work, or they don't. The rest is irrelevant.
Do you want to find out the plan doesnt work, the economy dies a horrible death, unemployment is 22-34%, people losing their life savings, homes, cars, and even lives? Bankruptcies are more the norm between US Citizens than anything else they do together? Our currency not to mention our triple A bond rating sinks, and hyper inflation goes through the roof? World economies explode soon after and the world descends into total anarchy.
And 'no', I'm not making any of this up to frighten or scare you out of the idea of a 'flat tax' rate. There is reality and the bullshit, people like Mr. Paul spew forth onto an audience that does not fully understood 'what' and 'how' it will all happen. Yes, Mr. Paul likes to bitch about the federal government not operating responsibly. His 'idea' is not responsible; therefore by logic, shouldn't he be beating himself down over his own plan? Since he is part of that very government?
Do you want to find out the plan is not only stupid but very dangerous to the nation? Before he's elected to office or afterward?
You get plus ten points for mentioning anti-matter--since it is so relevant in regards to a discussion on taxes. Ten additional points for describing how the world will descend into total anarchy.
Suppose that government tax collections are reduced by half of what they are today, what kind of implications do you think it will have on the U.S. economy?
But before you answer that, let me ask you, has government spending ever exceeded its revenue? If you answered yes, you are in tune with reality--if no, you may want to continue talking about anti-matter when discussing taxes. The U.S. government has recorded chronic deficits, as much as hundreds of billions of Dollars annually, with the current tax system.
Let us assume that tax collections are down by half, while government spending continues unabated, all that will be produced is a much bigger deficit. Is that a problem? Absolutely. But given the past years in government spending--it is the norm. Yet, all the fears that you expressed, have not materialized.
But that is if tax collections go down by half. In reality, a flat-tax system that would reduce taxes as greatly as Paul has proposed, would stimulate the economy greatly. It is more money that individuals and firms can spend because the government did not collect, that means greater consumption and investment spending, which translates to a bigger economy. Proportionally, any percent collected on a bigger economy is more than a percent collected on a smaller economy. Sure, the economy may not grow large enough to where a lower tax-rate means more in tax collection, but that's not the point, the point is a bigger economy where people have more money to spend on themselves and their businesses.
Furthermore, any discussion on any tax system is meaningless if government spending is not also addressed.
< Message edited by HeIsHim -- 7/1/2015 2:35:01 AM >
|
RE: Rand Paul's Tax Plan - 
Profile
.gif){kind=avatar}
New Messages
No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages
Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages
Locked w/o New Messages
Post New Thread