Will Obama help or hurt Fractionals

[Sparse]

The real question is "Will Obama hurt you ?"

Are our 401ks at risk of governent takeover? No one in the media talked about this.

http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php

 

[gunfyter]

Are our 401ks at risk of governent takeover? No one in the media talked about this.

http://www.workforce.com/section/00/article/25/83/58.php

I saw this coming at least 10 years ago. SS will collapse and the people who saved will have these accounts raided.

 

[AeroBoy]

Sparse said: "No one in the media talked about this."

And you link to a story <wait for it> from a publication -- i.e. the media. Anyway, the story says that the committee is merely looking at ways to overhaul the system. Nothing has been proposed at this time. Let's leave it at that and stop the rampant speculation.

Gunfyter: The last sentence above applies to you, too.

 

[Sparse]

Sparse said: "No one in the media talked about this."

And you link to a story <wait for it> from a publication -- i.e. the media. Anyway, the story says that the committee is merely looking at ways to overhaul the system. Nothing has been proposed at this time. Let's leave it at that and stop the rampant speculation.

Gunfyter: The last sentence above applies to you, too.

Correction; The mainstream media. Stick your head in the sand if you like, but if they are holding hearings, they are thinking about it. Do you want them tinkering with the 401K system at all, let alone overhauling it? The professor refers to the government as subsidizing the system. Maybe the interest on the deferred tax, but in the end the tax gets paid.

 

[rettofly]

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks, so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, boys and girls, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.
Professor of Economics, University of Georgia

Can you say "Atlas Shrugged"? Dr. Kamerschen is dead on.

The best solution is a tax on consumption. It rewards thrift. I believe it's called "THE FAIR TAX". Unfortunately, it's not going to happen as long as the non-producers can subsist by voting to drain the pockets of the producers.

 

[rettofly]

The Bush Labor Dept. has arguably been the most anti-union is history. It has instituted rules designed to undermine union's abilities to exist, let alone thrive.

And this is bad because........?

 

[AeroBoy]

Rettofly,

"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

 

[G100driver]

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

Haven't you heard the good news?

The more you talk about Jesus, the less you have to act like him!

 

[gunfyter]

Rettofly,

"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

Robin Hood would be for the Income Tax... since it is stealing.

Now the poor would effectively not pay tax as they would receive a Prebate up to the poverty level. Right now, although the poor may not pay ANY income tax out of their paychecks ... They are paying the passed along cost of corporate tax, payroll taxes, compliance costs ... embedded in the cost of the things they buy.

Right now we (middle class) are already paying the 23% cost of the Fair Tax. It is already embedded in the cost of all the products and services you buy. It is the cost of all the corporate taxes and payroll taxes and tax-code compliance costs that are added into the cost of doing business.

IOW the cost of products you buy ... a certain percentage of the price represents the costs of paying all those taxes and complying with income tax code. So though you may be in a 15% marginal tax bracket today ... that is NOT the total cost to you of the tax code. You are paying, embedded in the price of products you purchase, the passed along cost of corporate taxes and taxes the rich owners of corporations pay.

Stuff rolls downhill ... and you live in the valley.

 

[blueridge71]

Rettofly,

"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

The poor would get a prebate up to the amount of the poverty level. The Fair Tax is levied only on new products, so if people bought only used items, they would not pay any taxes.

The current tax code punishes production. The Fair Tax is consumption driven and would encourage savings.

The only time that I can remember Jesus discussing tax policy is when He said, "render under to caesar that which is caesar's" (Matthew 22:21).

Jesus would most likely promote a system that encourages people to be productive. In the same breath He said to "render under God that which is God's." Christians are told to support the church and the church is told to help the poor.

Jesus would not like a system that saps people of the will to be productive and support themselves if they are able. 2 Thessalonians 3:10 says "For even when we were with you, this we commanded you, that if any would not work, neither should he eat. "

Note that this does not address people who cannot work, but only those who will not.

 

[blzr]

Rettofly,

" A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

I am not a religous person, but idn't Jesus say "give unto Caesar what is Caesars....? Refering to taxes. I think it was his way of saying everyone pays their share.

I am all about helping out the poor, but I am not ALL ABOUT the strong arm of the government FORCING me to pay higher taxes so they can redistribute it to people that either pay NO taxes as it is or just won't work!

 

[blzr]

Blueridge!! That was awesome!! I am not as versed as you, but I do remember Religion class, back when the LEFT would let schools teach Religion!! Way to point specifics out to the ignorant that want to throw your religion in your face to try to make THEIR pathetic point!

Hey Aeroboy, if you feel guilty that you are not paying enough in taxes, feel free to make larger than required contribution to the treasury! There are plenty of freeloaders that would still piss on you if they git the chance who would be glad to have more money!

 

[Sparse]

Rettofly,

"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

Tax collectors in those days were the scum of the earth. They were hated, and feared. Jesus hung out with tax collectors much to the surprise of his followers. He hung out with the good , the bad, and the ugly. I am sure he would hang out with you. I wouldn't begin to guess which tax plan Jesus would elect. What I do know from his teachings, is the responsibility to feed the hungry, visit the sick, etc. etc. fell directly on the shoulders of those who chose to follow him. Never have I read anywhere where he taught that it fell on the shoulders of Rome. But which ever one was in place he would encourage you to "give to Ceaser, that which is his". I am a Christian, and like most Christians not part the so called "Christian right".

 

[Sparse]

Rettofly,

"The Fair Tax" is fair in name only. It's actually a regressive tax because the poor would actually be in a higher tax bracket (by tax paid in relation to what they earn) than the middle or upper class. A progressive tax system lowers the tax burden for the poor and places more on the rich.

Question for the Christian right: if Jesus were with us today, which system would he be promoting? If the moral majority wants to talk the talk, then they better be prepared to walk the walk, too.

I don't get it. With the fair tax, every family is given a prebate of taxes up to the poverty level, with adjustments upward for the number of dependants. So they get that tax back up front. They will then pay 23% on goods and services. Once they start spending over the poverty level, they begin to pay taxes. How is that regressive? Also, no one will pay payroll taxes for social security and medicare. From what I know, the only tax that will be withheld from ones check would be state and local income tax. Rich people tend to buy more goods and services, so they will pay the most taxes.

That being said, it will never happen, because the democrats use the tax system to retain power. If you can have half the country not pay taxes, you have a lot of votes in the bank.

 

[gunfyter]

Is the FairTax progressive? Do the rich pay more and the poor pay less as a percentage of their spending?

Is the FairTax progressive? Do the rich pay more and the poor pay less as a percentage of their spending?

Absolutely, as you can see in Figure 6 below -- where the graph shows annual expenditures for a family of four and the corresponding FairTax effective tax rates. The poor actually pay less than zero-percent retail sales tax on their spending. Much like with the earned income tax credit of today, the rebate may give them more money than they actually spend on retail taxes. Especially if they are frugal and buy mostly used products. On the other hand, the wealthy approach a maximum of 23-percent retail sales tax on their spending.
​

IMO ... if someone researches the Fair Tax ... they will favor it ... except for people who have some class warfare mentality and need to sock it to the Rich.

 

[gutshotdraw]

There is one major problem with the "Fair Tax" Gun. The second revenues don't meet projections (which according to the folks taking power next January is pretty much ALL of your money), they'll bring back an income tax and then we'll have BOTH. Just like that model of a society, France.

 

[gunfyter]

Is there any provision in the FairTax bill to prevent both an income tax and a sales tax?

There is a separate bill, HJR 16, which repeals the 16th Amendment to the Constitution but it must go through a different adoption process than HR 25. HJR 16 has to be passed by a two-thirds vote of members of both the House and the Senate and be approved (or ratified) by three-fourths of state legislatures (38). We are currently laying the organizational groundwork for this push and have already started the educational process at the state level.

​

 

[gutshotdraw]

Yeah, and we were told the 401 (K) plan would always be in place deferring income taxes until the funds are withdrawn. George Miller (D-CA) wants to change that.

Just because the enabling legislation "eliminates" the income tax doesn't mean the turds in Congress couldn't bring it back. When was the last time you saw a government agency give up a tax?

 

[Mike Jenvey]

Isn't this how your tax system works??

Our Tax System Explained: Bar Stool Economics

Suppose that every day, ten men go out for beer and the bill for all ten comes to $100. If they paid their bill the way we pay our taxes, it would go something like this:

The first four men (the poorest) would pay nothing.
The fifth would pay $1.
The sixth would pay $3.
The seventh would pay $7.
The eighth would pay $12.
The ninth would pay $18.
The tenth man (the richest) would pay $59.

So, that's what they decided to do.

The ten men drank in the bar every day and seemed quite happy with the arrangement, until one day, the owner threw them a curve. 'Since you are all such good customers,' he said, 'I'm going to reduce the cost of your daily beer by $20.' Drinks for the ten now cost just $80.

The group still wanted to pay their bill the way we pay our taxes so the first four men were unaffected. They would still drink for free.

But what about the other six men - the paying customers? How could they divide the $20 windfall so that everyone would get his 'fair share?'

They realized that $20 divided by six is $3.33. But if they subtracted that from everybody's share, then the fifth man and the sixth man would each end up being paid to drink his beer.

So, the bar owner suggested that it would be fair to reduce each man's bill by roughly the same amount, and he proceeded to work out the amounts each should pay.

And so:
The fifth man, like the first four, now paid nothing (100% savings).
The sixth now paid $2 instead of $3 (33%savings).
The seventh now pay $5 instead of $7 (28%savings).
The eighth now paid $9 instead of $12 (25% savings).
The ninth now paid $14 instead of $18 (22% savings).
The tenth now paid $49 instead of $59 (16% savings).

Each of the six was better off than before. And the first four continued to drink for free. But once outside the restaurant, the men began to compare their savings.

'I only got a dollar out of the $20,'declared the sixth man. He pointed to the tenth man,' but he got $10!'

'Yeah, that's right,' exclaimed the fifth man. 'I only saved a dollar, too. It's unfair that he got ten times more than I got'. 'That's true!!' shouted the seventh man. 'Why should he get $10 back when I got only two? The wealthy get all the breaks!'

'Wait a minute,' yelled the first four men in unison. 'We didn't get anything at all. The system exploits the poor!'

The nine men surrounded the tenth and beat him up.

The next night the tenth man didn't show up for drinks so the nine sat down and had beers without him. But when it came time to pay the bill, they discovered something important. They didn't have enough money between all of them for even half of the bill!

And that, ladies and gentlemen, journalists and college professors, is how our tax system works. The people who pay the highest taxes get the most benefit from a tax reduction. Tax them too much, attack them for being wealthy, and they just may not show up anymore. In fact, they might start drinking overseas where the atmosphere is somewhat friendlier.

For those who understand, no explanation is needed.
For those who do not understand, no explanation is possible.
David R. Kamerschen, Ph.D.

Professor of Economics
University of Georgia

Which of the men were pilots???

 

[Sparse]

Isn't this how your tax system works??


Which of the men were pilots???

The ones complaining and/or the ones trying to drink for free.