The only way to end corruption at the IRS is to

[RobDownSouth]

And AJ proceeds with his usual avalanche of quotes he's pasted literally hundreds of times.... Conversation over.

He was getting his situational Native American ass kicked once again over the so-called Fair Tax....it's a defensive mechanism for him.

 

[mercury14]

He was getting his situational Native American ass kicked once again over the so-called Fair Tax....it's a defensive mechanism for him.

The flat tax would be a tax increase for like half the country, possibly more. Therefore AJ is pro-higher taxes.

The CBO's latest deficit forecast cited the increase in capital gains taxes as one of the primary reasons the deficit is shrinking much faster than expected, thus destroying the conservative narrative that tax hikes don't lead to greater revenues.

 

[kbate]

Step 1) Reattach capital gains taxes to the income tax like it's been for most of our history. Monetary gain and market value have proven to be perfectly fine when there's just one rate for all kinds of income.

Step 2) Use the increased revenue to then lower everyone's income tax rate by an amount that will keep things revenue-neutral.


Sound good?

Step 1) Eliminate the Income tax like it was for most of our history - they ran together for 8 years, not for "most of our history".

Step 2) wonder why the increased revenue didn't happen.

Since you seem to want historic taxation.

 

[Ishmael]

That is why the Fair Tax makes so much sense and why the Left will make up any number of silly lies and distortions about it (even though it will benefit them).


“Like most of her neighborhood, she was a fighting liberal, fighting to have her money taken from her. For all her exertions, it never was.”
John Updike

The only viable alternative out there is some form of 'consumption' tax. The 'Fair Tax' is one of several I've seen, and the best thought out as well.

The others are the VAT and the 'Progressive Consumption Tax.' The VAT is well known by anyone that's bothered to study taxation methods. It's employed by most Euro nations, along with an income tax. It's a proven money maker for the government. The reason I don't like it is that it's a 'stealth' tax, not transparent at all, and it's highly regressive. It impacts the lower income segments of society out of proportion to their means. Very much like our Payroll Tax without the transparency.

The 'Progressive Consumption Tax' is a relatively new idea. The idea, simply put, is that you subtract your savings from your income and pay a graduated tax on the difference above a standard deductible. It has some merit, but as I said, it's a new idea and hasn't been thoroughly vetted yet. Intuitively I believe that this one can't be implemented without some form of withholding, although that is not necessarily bad.

Ishmael

 

[ChinaBandit]

If capital gains rate increases mean we can still proceed to record market highs what are you complaining about.

And you have no proof that there was a surge in investment due to the capital gains rate decreasing.

No. The dramatic increase in the volume of shares traded is pure happenstance.

 

[mercury14]

Step 1) Eliminate the Income tax like it was for most of our history - they ran together for 8 years, not for "most of our history".

Step 2) wonder why the increased revenue didn't happen.

Since you seem to want historic taxation.

Income and capital gains tax rates weren't the same for most of out history, true. They were just extremely close - but not attached to the highest bracket.

 

[kbate]

Income and capital gains tax rates weren't the same for most of out history, true. They were just extremely close - but not attached to the highest bracket.

So, which "most of our history" were you hoping to emulate? Let me guess, perhaps the 1946-1949 tax rates are the historic correct ones.

 

[mercury14]

The thing is, the top marginal rate for people is the last dollar they're taxed on. Their first X amount of income is taxed at lower rates. Back when we had a very high top rate of 90% there were only a tiny number of Americans who reached that bracket since wealth disparity was so much lower. And those people had a typically large chunk of their income taxed at a far lower rate. The distortion here so often presented by conservatives is that the top marginal rate is the actual tax rate on all income. But nobody ever had all their income taxed at 90%, not even close.

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

No. The dramatic increase in the volume of shares traded is pure happenstance.

His premise is flawed and flawed for the same reason as the old school "Historical" school of economics and that is that the past will repeat itself if we go back to a certain set of numbers (MMT has this flaw too as does Glow Ball Warning), but since economics is a Social Science, that of Human Action, Economic History never repeats itself because it is a chaotic system, not a simple system of inputs and results.

People are absolutely beginning to fear this monster that we have created out of government.

This is why I like the Fair Tax, for it is one rate. You change the rate for everyone if you want more money in taxes rather than cobble together a 51% majority to that raises taxes on someone else. Plus the Fair Tax, as Ishmael stated, being well thought out, is more fair to the poor than our current system for it eliminates payroll taxes and gives them a prebate check to cover the costs of the basic needs of their household. Of course, "the rich" get a prebate check too, and this of course, to the economic mouth-breathers is nothing but gross injustice and "unfairness..."

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

So, which "most of our history" were you hoping to emulate? Let me guess, perhaps the 1946-1949 tax rates are the historic correct ones.

*chuckle*

 

[kbate]

The only viable alternative out there is some form of 'consumption' tax. The 'Fair Tax' is one of several I've seen, and the best thought out as well.

Tell me, when 'fairtax' passes (lol) and the 'prebates' begin going out, is a republican going to complain about 47% of the nation receiving a huge prebate cheque?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

Tell me, when 'fairtax' passes (lol) and the 'prebates' begin going out, is a republican going to complain about 47% of the nation receiving a huge prebate cheque?

Yeah, there are a lot of Progressives in that party too...

 

[mercury14]

No. The dramatic increase in the volume of shares traded is pure happenstance.

It was because we were coming out of a recession. It would have happened anyway. Because that's what always happens in recoveries. People buy.

 

[Ishmael]

Merc kinda ignores the unique set of circumstances that led to the enactment of the 90+% top marginal rate and the unique set of circumstances that allowed it to work. Circumstances that do not apply in today's world.

Ishmael

 

[mercury14]

Tell me, when 'fairtax' passes (lol) and the 'prebates' begin going out, is a republican going to complain about 47% of the nation receiving a huge prebate cheque?

Firefox is glitching out on me. My screen just showed AJ backing gubbermint checks to poor people.

 

[JAMESBJOHNSON]

The flat tax would be a tax increase for like half the country, possibly more. Therefore AJ is pro-higher taxes.

The CBO's latest deficit forecast cited the increase in capital gains taxes as one of the primary reasons the deficit is shrinking much faster than expected, thus destroying the conservative narrative that tax hikes don't lead to greater revenues.

The deficit is still 600 Billion, at least. In 1967 LBJ shit watermelons cuz the deficit was like 8 Billion.

 

[ChinaBandit]

It was because we were coming out of a recession. It would have happened anyway. Because that's what always happens in recoveries. People buy.

Thanks for making my point.

A 5% increase to capital gains was irrelevant to equity trade.

Consumer spending and market rallies happen anyway in a recovery.

However, it capital gains were lower there would be even more trading.

 

[mercury14]

Merc kinda ignores the unique set of circumstances that led to the enactment of the 90+% top marginal rate and the unique set of circumstances that allowed it to work. Circumstances that do not apply in today's world.

Ishmael

1920s - top rate 76%
Early 1930s - temporary drop to 25% to combat the GD
Mid 1930s - back up to 63%
Late 1930s - Up to 78%
WWII - up to 90-something percent
1951-1964 - 90%
1965-1981 - 70%
1982-1986 - 50%
1987-2002 - 40%


So what unique circumstance over pretty much the entire 20th century allowed much higher capital gains rates to work?

 

[4est_4est_Gump]

merc,


A_J is not for the Flat Tax you fucking lying moron.

 

[mercury14]

Thanks for making my point.

A 5% increase to capital gains was irrelevant to equity trade.

Consumer spending and market rallies happen anyway in a recovery.

Then you think it's okay to raise capital gains rates right now. Record profits, record investing/buying. An 80-year track record of showing that America prospers under a capital gains rate that's up to six times higher than it is now.... Why would you not back it?

 

[mercury14]

merc,


A_J is not for the Flat Tax you fucking lying moron.

Stop not ignoring me, dickless.

 

[ChinaBandit]

Then you think it's okay to raise capital gains rates right now. Record profits, record investing/buying. An 80-year track record of showing that America prospers under a capital gains rate that's up to six times higher than it is now.... Why would you not back it?

My edit, if capital gains were lower there would be even more trading.

 

[mercury14]

The deficit is still 600 Billion, at least. In 1967 LBJ shit watermelons cuz the deficit was like 8 Billion.

Please adjust for inflation and GDP.

 

[mercury14]

My edit, if capital gains were lower there would be even more trading.

Hardly. Investors are already all-in. Just ask the gold market.

 

[kbate]

The deficit is still 600 Billion, at least. In 1965 LBJ shit watermelons cuz the deficit was like 10 Billion.

In 1965 10 billion was big money. today it buys a bag of cheetos and half of an Obama campaign.

What the government spends in a month today, is greater than the M2 supply in 1965.