Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Trump tacked on about $8 Trillion in 4 years.

Biden wants to pile on $3.5 Trillion after 10 months in office?

Both parties are run by drunken sailors.

---

If Biden commits to this being the main spending bill of these 4 years, and raises taxes back to historical norms,

---

Actually what do you consider historical norms ?

---

Pre Bush cuts.

---

If you want pre Bush tax rates back ...then also give back pre Bush tax write offs .

---

That's not how math works. We owe a lot of money. Giving everyone ways to not pay taxes shouldn't be anyone's priority.

---

Then you are not advocating the realities of the pre Bush tax rates.

You just want other people to pay more....much more.

Of course I haven't read how much you are willing to pay .

---

I think history proved that those tax rates provided enough money for the government to do its job, and did not hamper the economy. I'm willing to pay what the IRS says to pay.

And if you will read, I'm advocating for pre Bush tax rates, slightly higher income taxes on millionaires, and sticking with the 0, 10, 15, 20% capital gains tax rate.

That doesn't come close to paying for our yearly budget, so I've thought of other ways to increase rvenue, for example a treasury backed banking product guaranteed to outpace inflation, a type of savings account. Giving especially low income families a way to save without investing, and not essentially be taxed more and more every year by inflation.

There are other ways we could increase revenue without higher taxes, but that's another thread.

---

You are attempting to slide around two obvious points.......

A. Without pre Bush tax write offs you are advocating a net of more taxes.
B. You constantly insist that others pay more.....yet never disclose what YOU are willing to pay.


More than a little hypocritical .

---

Why does it matter what I'm willing to pay? I can assure you, I'm not rich, but I do pay my taxes. If ever I'm rich, I'm willing to pay the pre Bush rates, or the 45% if I make 50m a year (lol).

---

Nice 2-step

---

I don't follow. Is my answer unclear?

---

Clear enough .

You are a hypocrite .

Demanding others pay more while you don't .

---

When did I say that? If I ever make as much money as I'd like, I'm advocating for higher taxes on myself. Why is it so hard to understand. Calling me a hypocrite is a stupid cop out. Be better.

---

No, YOU be better.

Lead with your own wallet and stop worrying what other people do or what they pay.

You got a serious case of envy working and it will never improve your own life in the slightest.

---

Your logic is that anyone who is ok with a progressive tax system is envious. That's almost unbelievably dumb, but you're a Republican, right?

---

You gonna get us a flat tax? Way too many lawyers and accountants in this country. The government would have to downsize the IRS. Good luck with that. I am pulling for you.

---

Flat tax is unfair. It assumes that everyone profits the same under the current economic system. In reality, it's really easy to make money once you have money. With none, you have nothing but your own hard work to make anything.

---

Over 50% of citizens pay $0
That isn't fair

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

Rawhide said:

---

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

---

I might also be able to get on board with this, though hashing out the sliding scale would be tough. Can you really imagine Congress undertaking such an immense task and completing it without major screw ups? I don't think it's realistic at all.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: "The government will not always spend more than it takes in. "


What is that claim based on? Certainly not human history.

---

Our spending was even with our intake, all time, in 2001. Hilarious that the time since is "human history."

---

Nope. Accounting tricks, as I have already said.

There has not been a federal budget in over a century that would pass GAAP standards.

---

1998-2001 were all surplus years according to the Office of Budget and Management. You must have your own evidence and know better, so either back it up or just stop.

---

Come on, Porteroso, you know as well as I that the OMB is a political office, no matter what we are told.

GAAP and the OMB are very different, and I don't mean just the initials.

---

It's been a while since I took my grad Government Accounting course but I stay pretty up to date with GAAP. What GAP accounting tricks are you referring to?

BearTruth13 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso: "The government will not always spend more than it takes in. "


What is that claim based on? Certainly not human history.

---

Our spending was even with our intake, all time, in 2001. Hilarious that the time since is "human history."

---

Nope. Accounting tricks, as I have already said.

There has not been a federal budget in over a century that would pass GAAP standards.

---

1998-2001 were all surplus years according to the Office of Budget and Management. You must have your own evidence and know better, so either back it up or just stop.

---

Come on, Porteroso, you know as well as I that the OMB is a political office, no matter what we are told.

GAAP and the OMB are very different, and I don't mean just the initials.

---

It's been a while since I took my grad Government Accounting course but I stay pretty up to date with GAAP. What GAP accounting tricks are you referring to?

---

You got a year to cover it al? Start here:

https://smallbusiness.chron.com/gaap-vs-governmental-auditing-standards-37182.html

https://yourbusiness.azcentral.com/government-accounting-vs-profit-business-accounting-8114.html

Rawhide said:

---

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

---

If would likely stifle spending resulting in lower tax receipts, not higher.

I don't much need a new TV but I want one. If I had to pay 20-25% tax on it I'm not replacing my TV until the thing dies and there is no option.

Damned sure not paying 25% on a car. Just won't buy a new car ever again.

nein51 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

---

If would likely stifle spending resulting in lower tax receipts, not higher.

I don't much need a new TV but I want one. If I had to pay 20-25% tax on it I'm not replacing my TV until the thing dies and there is no option.

Damned sure not paying 25% on a car. Just won't buy a new car ever again.

---

In Europe they have luxury taxes .

nein51 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

---

If would likely stifle spending resulting in lower tax receipts, not higher.

I don't much need a new TV but I want one. If I had to pay 20-25% tax on it I'm not replacing my TV until the thing dies and there is no option.

Damned sure not paying 25% on a car. Just won't buy a new car ever again.

---

History shows that your opinion is at odds with what really happens.

People spend money. That's what they do. The spending wouldn't stop. Hell, people borrow money (often with high interest rates) to buy stuff. Then when they pay off the loan, they borrow money again to buy even more stuff. It's been said that people even refinance existing debt to save some money so then they can use it to buy stuff again.

Consumption tax is the way to go.

nein51 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

---

If would likely stifle spending resulting in lower tax receipts, not higher.

I don't much need a new TV but I want one. If I had to pay 20-25% tax on it I'm not replacing my TV until the thing dies and there is no option.

Damned sure not paying 25% on a car. Just won't buy a new car ever again.

---

yes you will, it will be added to the car note and paid in payments like everything else, just like now. If you are paying cash for a car now, you are unwisely investing your money in a commodity that is way more liability than asset. Appliances will be bought on consumer finance cards like home depot like they are now. Major ticket items are not often purchased by cash and are mostly finianced so the tax wont be noticed by most.

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Trump tacked on about $8 Trillion in 4 years.

Biden wants to pile on $3.5 Trillion after 10 months in office?

Both parties are run by drunken sailors.

---

If Biden commits to this being the main spending bill of these 4 years, and raises taxes back to historical norms,

---

Actually what do you consider historical norms ?

---

Pre Bush cuts.

---

If you want pre Bush tax rates back ...then also give back pre Bush tax write offs .

---

That's not how math works. We owe a lot of money. Giving everyone ways to not pay taxes shouldn't be anyone's priority.

---

Then you are not advocating the realities of the pre Bush tax rates.

You just want other people to pay more....much more.

Of course I haven't read how much you are willing to pay .

---

I think history proved that those tax rates provided enough money for the government to do its job, and did not hamper the economy. I'm willing to pay what the IRS says to pay.

And if you will read, I'm advocating for pre Bush tax rates, slightly higher income taxes on millionaires, and sticking with the 0, 10, 15, 20% capital gains tax rate.

That doesn't come close to paying for our yearly budget, so I've thought of other ways to increase rvenue, for example a treasury backed banking product guaranteed to outpace inflation, a type of savings account. Giving especially low income families a way to save without investing, and not essentially be taxed more and more every year by inflation.

There are other ways we could increase revenue without higher taxes, but that's another thread.

---

You are attempting to slide around two obvious points.......

A. Without pre Bush tax write offs you are advocating a net of more taxes.
B. You constantly insist that others pay more.....yet never disclose what YOU are willing to pay.


More than a little hypocritical .

---

Why does it matter what I'm willing to pay? I can assure you, I'm not rich, but I do pay my taxes. If ever I'm rich, I'm willing to pay the pre Bush rates, or the 45% if I make 50m a year (lol).

---

Nice 2-step

---

I don't follow. Is my answer unclear?

---

Clear enough .

You are a hypocrite .

Demanding others pay more while you don't .

---

When did I say that? If I ever make as much money as I'd like, I'm advocating for higher taxes on myself. Why is it so hard to understand. Calling me a hypocrite is a stupid cop out. Be better.

---

No, YOU be better.

Lead with your own wallet and stop worrying what other people do or what they pay.

You got a serious case of envy working and it will never improve your own life in the slightest.

---

Your logic is that anyone who is ok with a progressive tax system is envious. That's almost unbelievably dumb, but you're a Republican, right?

---

You gonna get us a flat tax? Way too many lawyers and accountants in this country. The government would have to downsize the IRS. Good luck with that. I am pulling for you.

---

Flat tax is unfair. It assumes that everyone profits the same under the current economic system. In reality, it's really easy to make money once you have money. With none, you have nothing but your own hard work to make anything.

Wealth inequality is real. The lefties have idiotic ideas about how to fix it, but the righties who want to pretend it doesn't exist are even worse. The middle class is fast shrinking, the poor getting poorer, the rich getting richer, so only the ignorant wants a flat tax. I'm aware there are plenty of them.

Flat taxers are the right wing equivalents of socialists. Great idea in a vacuum. Seemingly as fair as it could ever be. Horrible idea in reality.

---

One of your problems is the underlying assumption that wealth inequality is a negative. It should serve as a positive incentive and an example of what can be accomplished through working, saving, and investing. All should aspire to do better. The poor getting poorer is likely due to cultural/behavioral factors that have nothing to do with the rich getting richer. This isn't a zero sum game. Compounding over decades/generations is something anyone can take advantage of if they will.

4th and Inches said:

---

nein51 said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

Quote:

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

And let's go wild and pretend the government wanted to grow the middle class to grow the economy and get more tax dollars... It's best to not drive someone in poverty to homelessness with taxes. The government only loses tax dollars in the long term that way.

We are talking about balancing the budget long term. The strategy should obviously be to avoid encumbering anyone in poverty with taxes that wants to reach the middle class. At that point, they start contributing significant tax dollars.

---

The best and fairest tax system would be consumption tax. I could be convinced to not be against even a sliding scale for consumption tax - the guy buying a Porsche would pay a higher tax rate than someone buying a Honda.

---

If would likely stifle spending resulting in lower tax receipts, not higher.

I don't much need a new TV but I want one. If I had to pay 20-25% tax on it I'm not replacing my TV until the thing dies and there is no option.

Damned sure not paying 25% on a car. Just won't buy a new car ever again.

---

yes you will, it will be added to the car note and paid in payments like everything else, just like now. If you are paying cash for a car now, you are unwisely investing your money in a commodity that is way more liability than asset. Appliances will be bought on consumer finance cards like home depot like they are now. Major ticket items are not often purchased by cash and are mostly finianced so the tax wont be noticed by most.

---

Exactly.

It's almost always about them monthly payments.

Porteroso said:

---

Osodecentx said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

RD2WINAGNBEAR86 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Canada2017 said:

---

Porteroso said:

---

Thee University said:

---

Trump tacked on about $8 Trillion in 4 years.

Biden wants to pile on $3.5 Trillion after 10 months in office?

Both parties are run by drunken sailors.

---

If Biden commits to this being the main spending bill of these 4 years, and raises taxes back to historical norms,

---

Actually what do you consider historical norms ?

---

Pre Bush cuts.

---

If you want pre Bush tax rates back ...then also give back pre Bush tax write offs .

---

That's not how math works. We owe a lot of money. Giving everyone ways to not pay taxes shouldn't be anyone's priority.

---

Then you are not advocating the realities of the pre Bush tax rates.

You just want other people to pay more....much more.

Of course I haven't read how much you are willing to pay .

---

I think history proved that those tax rates provided enough money for the government to do its job, and did not hamper the economy. I'm willing to pay what the IRS says to pay.

And if you will read, I'm advocating for pre Bush tax rates, slightly higher income taxes on millionaires, and sticking with the 0, 10, 15, 20% capital gains tax rate.

That doesn't come close to paying for our yearly budget, so I've thought of other ways to increase rvenue, for example a treasury backed banking product guaranteed to outpace inflation, a type of savings account. Giving especially low income families a way to save without investing, and not essentially be taxed more and more every year by inflation.

There are other ways we could increase revenue without higher taxes, but that's another thread.

---

You are attempting to slide around two obvious points.......

A. Without pre Bush tax write offs you are advocating a net of more taxes.
B. You constantly insist that others pay more.....yet never disclose what YOU are willing to pay.


More than a little hypocritical .

---

Why does it matter what I'm willing to pay? I can assure you, I'm not rich, but I do pay my taxes. If ever I'm rich, I'm willing to pay the pre Bush rates, or the 45% if I make 50m a year (lol).

---

Nice 2-step

---

I don't follow. Is my answer unclear?

---

Clear enough .

You are a hypocrite .

Demanding others pay more while you don't .

---

When did I say that? If I ever make as much money as I'd like, I'm advocating for higher taxes on myself. Why is it so hard to understand. Calling me a hypocrite is a stupid cop out. Be better.

---

No, YOU be better.

Lead with your own wallet and stop worrying what other people do or what they pay.

You got a serious case of envy working and it will never improve your own life in the slightest.

---

Your logic is that anyone who is ok with a progressive tax system is envious. That's almost unbelievably dumb, but you're a Republican, right?

---

You gonna get us a flat tax? Way too many lawyers and accountants in this country. The government would have to downsize the IRS. Good luck with that. I am pulling for you.

---

Flat tax is unfair. It assumes that everyone profits the same under the current economic system. In reality, it's really easy to make money once you have money. With none, you have nothing but your own hard work to make anything.

---

Over 50% of citizens pay $0
That isn't fair

---

They do not. They pay the same sales tax at the gas pump that someone buying fuel for their yacht pays.

They may pay 0 income tax, but if you can be honest for a moment, you will admit that most people making 20k a year are not going to contribute many tax dollars, even at 43% income tax.

---

Thanks, I was referring to the income tax. I think everyone ought to pay something. What is the Earned Income Tax credit?

We're either all in it or not

Rawhide said:

---

It's almost always about them monthly payments.

---

Monthly hell...................it's weekly now. Particularly in certain areas.

Thee University said:

---

Rawhide said:

---

It's almost always about them monthly payments.

---

Monthly hell...................it's weekly now. Particularly in certain areas.

---

more and more jobs are offering to pay by the day direct deposit.