1%'ers pay 24% of Federal Taxes

[Amberchgo]

There are softer forms of coercion.

Like, say, using the unfair business advantage you've acquired through bribing elected officials to lower your prices to the point that you can undercut your competitors, moving into new territory, and using that advantage to put competitors out of business--thereby creating a situation where people HAVE to work for you if they don't want to starve because you're now the only game in town.

See also: organized crime, operations of

Walmart's Operating Profit Margin is 6%
The Fed's "Operating Profit" on a gallon of gas is 17%

The Walmart is sooooo evil.

 

[Setanta84]

If Walmart is bribing elected officials, then why isn't aren't the Feds bringing charges?

Because current campaign finance law makes bribery legal and the revolving door means the people who worked for Wal-Mart and other corporations yesterday make and enforce policy today?

 

[dolf]

read the OP
read this
those with 48% of the wealth only pay 24% of the taxes.
oh how they suffer

 

[unregistered]

 

[Sean Renaud]

Explain to us how the wealth was "distributed" to them.

Facts, not opinion.

It doesn't matter how it was distributed to them. The fact is it has created an imbalance.

 

[Amberchgo]

It will never happen. It takes too much power away from the federal government. Besides, what would we do with all those IRS employees?

Could be just the opposite.

The states leave in ALL the current taxes and add the VAT tax. Puts the Federal Govt more in charge as they collect the cash and divvy out to their friends.

 

[Sean Renaud]

The fact is state governments today are a stupid idea. They made sense in a world connected by horse back not in a world connected by phones and internet.

 

[KingOrfeo]

Because current campaign finance law makes bribery legal and the revolving door means the people who worked for Wal-Mart and other corporations yesterday make and enforce policy today?

Well, only if you mean those who "worked for" them as executives or lobbyists. You will not find your local Wal-Mart greeter in Congress or in high federal executive or judicial office any time soon.

 

[KingOrfeo]

The fact is state governments today are a stupid idea. They made sense in a world connected by horse back not in a world connected by phones and internet.

"America’s state governments are too big to be democratic and too small to be efficient. Given an adequate tax base, public services like public schools and hospitals, utilities and first responders are best carried out by cities and counties. Most infrastructure is either local or regional or national. Civil rights, including workers’ rights, should be handled at the federal level, to eliminate local pockets of tyranny and exploitation. Social insurance systems are most efficient and equitable when they are purely national, like Social Security and Medicare, and inefficient and inequitable when they are clumsily divided among the federal government and the states, like unemployment insurance, Medicaid and Obamacare.

"So what are state governments particularly good at? Nothing, really. They interfere in local government, cripple the federal government, shake down lobbyists and waste taxpayer money."

-- Michael Lind

 

[DooleyDarter]

It will never happen. It takes too much power away from the federal government. Besides, what would we do with all those IRS employees?

Not to mention tax attorneys and accountants

 

[Setanta84]

You guys are aware that a national sales tax would be insanely and stupidly regressive since the rich don't buy goods and services in proportion to their wealth, right?

You're essentially arguing we should transfer the entire tax burden to the poor, working, and middle classes--and I don't think any of you are millionaires or billionaires . . .

 

[unregistered]

 

[DooleyDarter]

You guys are aware that a national sales tax would be insanely and stupidly regressive since the rich don't buy goods and services in proportion to their wealth, right?

You're essentially arguing we should transfer the entire tax burden to the poor, working, and middle classes--and I don't think any of you are millionaires or billionaires . . .

My take on the sales tax is it bring folks into the system who now pay zero income taxes.

 

[Sean Renaud]

You guys are aware that a national sales tax would be insanely and stupidly regressive since the rich don't buy goods and services in proportion to their wealth, right?

You're essentially arguing we should transfer the entire tax burden to the poor, working, and middle classes--and I don't think any of you are millionaires or billionaires . . .

They understand, they don't care.

I said a flat tax.

The size of a flat tax able to run a country would be crippling to the poor and would require an expansion of social services.

My take on the sales tax is it bring folks into the system who now pay zero income taxes.

Except it makes no sense to do that.

 

[DooleyDarter]

They understand, they don't care.



The size of a flat tax able to run a country would be crippling to the poor and would require an expansion of social services.



Except it makes no sense to do that.

and why is that? I know the lefties rail about the rich not paying their fair share, what about the folks who have income and pay nothing?

 

[Sean Renaud]

[/B]

and why is that? I know the lefties rail about the rich not paying their fair share, what about the folks who have income and pay nothing?

Those people are receiving benefits. What sense does it make to take taxes from them and then turn around and give them benefits?

 

[richard_daily]

The flat tax is about those 49% of the population who pay nothing towards the support of their nation but demand the same rights as those who do. That means you, asshole.

It's actually YOU. The guy who lives off of government welfare and the work of others... pension, medicare, and VA benefits... all socialist welfare for veteman.

 

[possum123]

I am all for a national sales tax. It will bring all of those folks who are not paying taxes into the system.

I like that also. That way everyone has a chance to pay as much or as less as they want.
It should be a set % with assurance the politicians could not raise it.
Taxes paid on an item only once.
Even the drug dealers and thiefs would have to pay then.

 

[richard_daily]

Richard is still stinging from the confession of LadyF, who posted about catching him masturbating over the phone with Karen Kraft, who some believe is the alleged "Ken." He's been desperately trying to ascribe his behavior to others on Lit, because misery loves company. Pay him no mind.

Says that guy who cybered "karen"... Have you cybered "amberinchicago" too?

 

[possum123]

It will never happen. It takes too much power away from the federal government. Besides, what would we do with all those IRS employees?

Send them all home and save the govt. that much more.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I like that also. That way everyone has a chance to pay as much or as less as they want.
It should be a set % with assurance the politicians could not raise it.
Taxes paid on an item only once.
Even the drug dealers and thiefs would have to pay then.

The problem is the rich wouldn't pay as much as they should.

 

[DooleyDarter]

Those people are receiving benefits. What sense does it make to take taxes from them and then turn around and give them benefits?

I wasn't referring to those people, I am referring to the folks who are working illegal or under the table. Like the drug dealers, prostitutes, house keeper and landscapers who get paid under the table. The contractors who give you a discount to pay them cash when they do something at your house, etc.. if you think that is a small amount of people you are not looking at it very closely.

 

[possum123]

You guys are aware that a national sales tax would be insanely and stupidly regressive since the rich don't buy goods and services in proportion to their wealth, right?

You're essentially arguing we should transfer the entire tax burden to the poor, working, and middle classes--and I don't think any of you are millionaires or billionaires . . .

You are aware of how much more the rich spend than the poor?
Big fancy cars, airplanes, and yachts don't come cheap and not many poor people spend money in them.

 

[Sean Renaud]

I wasn't referring to those people, I am referring to the folks who are working illegal or under the table. Like the drug dealers, prostitutes, house keeper and landscapers who get paid under the table. The contractors who give you a discount to pay them cash when they do something at your house, etc.. if you think that is a small amount of people you are not looking at it very closely.

First most of those people would still fall under what I said but they are still a small amount of people. Lets start with every single illegal and use the old number (that was disproven in the census) of 20 million. Then lets double that. 40 million. A country of 330 million that accounts for maybe 10% and that's with a very generous math.

 

[richard_daily]

Walmart's Operating Profit Margin is 6%
The Fed's "Operating Profit" on a gallon of gas is 17%

The Walmart is sooooo evil.

The federal government provides infrastructure and services... walmart provides nothing for the public good, and instead use their profits to help build up communist china.

Of course, that's ok with a good capitalist like yourself.