Girl's Behavior 
Guy's Behavior 
Flirting 
Dating 
Relationships 
Fashion & Beauty 
Health & Fitness 
Marriage & Weddings 
Shopping & Gifts 
Technology & Internet 
Break Up & Divorce 
Education & Career 
Entertainment & Arts 
Family & Friends 
Food & Beverage 
Hobbies & Leisure 
Other 
Religion & Spirituality 
Society & Politics 
Sports 
Travel 
Trending & News 
Republicans just wrote a bill, coming up for vote, I assume…DEFUNDING the IRS and instead institute a NATIONAL SALES TAX of 23%.
That’s TRIPLE what you’re paying now at every register or online store…around 8%. And who knows if that will go up?
The United States absolutely flourished economically for almost a century before income tax became a permanent part of our system. The budget was not only balanced, but frequently had a surplus based on land taxes, tariffs and sales tax alone. Prior to that year, income taxes were only used to fund war efforts. When our government decided that military expansion and intervention was a good investment, the IRS was born. Yes, US taxpayers have been subsidizing warmongers’ profits for over a century and a half. And they can’t even be bothered to take care of wounded veterans and their families out of their billions of dollars in profits.
Bill HR25 is halfway smart. It taxes those with the most expendable income more than those who are just paying their bills. It still puts MOST of the tax burden on working class citizens though, instead of the filthy rich who profit the most from our utterly broken system. Consider this: if we taxed Elon Musk at 99%, he would have to get by on a measly $1,758,000/year. How much is “too much”? When you have enough to bribe politicians instead of just paying your fair share of taxes, literally crushing the working class people who make your money for you, it’s too much.
The republicans will tell you, “Don’t tax the rich! They’ll run away!”. Ell oh ell! WHERE? There’s no other country on earth where they let this happen AND keep the uber rich safe from the riff raff! Not one!
The Republican have claimed trickle down economics works for 40 years WITH CONTRARY EVIDENCE as their "facts" The only trickle down is them pissing on us and telling us it's raining!!
Supply side economics HAS worked exactly as it was intended. It has coordinated the largest transfer of wealth in human history, from the working class to the wealthy. It’s on you if you thought that they meant it was working FOR us instead of against us! Ell oh ell!
Dude. Either read the entire comment or don’t respond. If you didn’t understand it, reread it! It won’t go anywhere! If you still don’t understand, ask. I’ll explain it. Unless you’re high. Then come back when you’re not.
You literally said “No it hasn’t” and then paraphrased exactly what i wrote.
LMFAO!! Touche!
Perhaps you should reread the rant before the last two sentences. Just a thought
@DrPepper12 @chazmatazz269
By that your referring to one of the most successful periods of the 20th century?
The income inequality your referring to is a direct result of importing large amount of unskilled labor via immigration and trade deals devaluing the same labor in forcing it to compete with the global value.
We know this as historicy income inequality goes up and down with immigration. As labor is a commonality just like everything else.
Wholly false. I’m not sure if you’re an idiot or an asshole. Either way, we’ll have none of your nonsense here. Begone, troll!
I am in foavor of cutting the 1 TRILLION dollar useless military budget which should reduce taxes a bit. Also closing the LOOPHOLES that only benefit the rich.
Second! The problem is every congressman has military jobs or related in their district so it'll never happen!
The interest on the dept already is more than the military budget. So no, not having an army during the years before we are invades wouldn't reduce taxes.
@OddBeMe As mentioned else where contrary to your imagination a sales tax would actually effect the rich far more than the poor as the rich are engaged in sales far more often and frequently.
Sales taxes are also far simpler and far harder to game with exceptions and lawyers which benefit the rich able to afford to pay for both.
@monorprise that is incorrect. The poor spend a higher percentage of their income than wealthy people.
@DrPepper12 I would not dispute that the poor use a higher % of their income on basic living expensive rather than investment. But that is not the same thing as spending.
Just because you might count the rich's investment as someone else's spending, does not change the fact that the taxing of said spending activity upon that which they own is the taxing of themselfs.
Nor the fact that we should further tax them if they should ever sell that which they own a 2nd act of Taxation which they should doubly pay.
This 2nd tax at least has the added benefit of forcing stock market gamblers to think more carefully about their investment changes as to insure that they get a profit worthy of the share they must pay the state.
The simplicity of a sales tax on the act of property changing owners the other hand leaves less room for the games of calculating income which defines the income tax system.
@monorprise you just made the complete argument for a VAT tax, not a sales tax.
These people need to live on an veterans tiny ssi check for a year and see if they still feel the same way.
As a side job I have trained various forms of public working dogs from the mid 90's. If having years of hands-on experience with survivors of those having served their country gives me the knowledge-label of "housewife" so be it. Better than having a silver spoon in my mouth and my head up my 🍑 and the voting power to seriously damage great people.
😎🐾🐾 Mine are federally protected when they leave for work.
@dustybiker2
The fact that SSI does not pay enough in compensation for injuries suffered on the job is a dispute to take up with The liable goverment.
Not relieve to the issue of how said goverment collects it's revenue.
@monorprise Seems the point I was making sailed straight over your head. The point, to clarify, was teach a lesson on hardship.
Opinion
12Opinion
Poor people spend almost 100% of their income so their income will be taxed at 23%.
Rich people spend only a very small amount of their income on food and clothes it's so small it hardly even registers. So their income will not be taxed at all.
If you think about the fact that financial inequality consistently increases, even without additional laws to help the rich, this is an insane idea. The only things that rebalance it are wars and plague etc. But atm the inequality is at a very high level and this would only accelerate the path to some kind of disaster. Also poor people don't even have enough money to pay for the governments expenses.
As you can see in this video taxing poor people triple won't make up for taxing rich people less at all.
Defunding the IRS of course that's a republican idea who would've guessed? They're gonna profit billions off this while some will say it's fair cause everybody is paying taxes.
Robert reichs books address this too. "It's VERY expensive to be poor in America USA"
This is a sales not income tax, so nobody's income would be taxes.
It would be easy to exclude needed Items like food and shelter, so if what your saying about poor people is true they would still pay no taxes at all.
Income inequality is primarily driven by immigration and trade deal importing large amounts of similarly unskilled labor devaluing it in favor of the comparatively rare skilled labor. Hence why you see in history income inequality goes up and down with immigration and trade deals.
Turns out your labor has a market value like everything else.
@Lynx122 you need to think this thou a little more.
@monorprise They're not gonna exclude food that would go against the whole pint of this bill. And no immigration is not the driver of income inequality. It's the fact that owning assets is vey expensive but very lucrative and then it's not taxed as much as it should be. You think the top 1% are rich because they have a good salary? No it's because they own stocks and real estate and other things that make them money. Then they hire tax lawyers and lobbyists so they don't have to pay taxes on the money they didn't have to work for and so the income isn't even taxed to invest in things that help everyone like infrastructure. So they take most of the income and then leave the tax burden to the working class people who can't afford a house or a tax lawyer.
@Lynx122
Your aware that many if not most states already have a sale tax system upon which the m majority of the State Government is funded. So most Americans already pay sales taxes. And in nearly every state the State does Not soo tax food.
The other part of this bill as showed is it lets the States actually do the sales tax collection which means the State will be able to practically control what is taxed regardless.
I see that your swiss so maybe you don't understand how it actually works.
What they are proposing would in practice give state's control of the taxing system. This basically how the Federal Government was financed originally.
I wouldn’t institute it (this idea has been around for decades), but you could at least be minimally honest about what this legislation would do and that it has zero chance of passing. How many members of the House have said they’d support it?
This would only help those who can afford to hoard money. Most Americans get a tax refund. Sure, you've got to fill out the forms, but most Americans don't pay in that much when it's over.
If you net ~0 in taxes, and an additional 15% sales tax is applied across the board, you're still paying the same $3.45 for a loaf of bread as the guy at the top, but the rest of his income is stagnate.
Stagnate money KILLS an economy. It leads to 2 things happening causing the valuation of currency to be a Rollercoaster.. 1st the money is hoarded, taken out of circulation, increasing the value of the currency, until that $3 loaf of bread is $1, then when it is reapplied suddenly and all of the $1 loaves of bread are gone, they go to $10/ loaf. That's when people. get hungry, and their children get hungry, and when someone sees their child hungry, they get violent. Governments have been toppled over food.
Your assuming both the federal Government and your state would choose to charge a sales tax on food and other times deemed essencal.
The existing Sales taxes in many states do not so tax food. If the feds let the states do the actual tax collection along side their existing sales tax collection then your State not washing ton effectively controls what is and is not taxes.
They would just have to adjust the rate to get the amount Washington is demanding.
@monorprise it's difficult to take you seriously when your writing cannot be deciphered.
Many states do charge sales tax on food, including mine, a red state, and essentials are more than just food.
I am a left-winger, but I'd support a national sales tax instead of income tax.
This way, there are no tax shelters.
The problem is that a national sales tax, especially if high, will bolster and grow an underground off-the-books economy.
It will decimate the poor.
@DrPepper12 There are ways around that... First, the national sales tax doesn't apply to food items. Second, the national sales tax doesn't apply to on purchases of items whose price is less than _________.
Yes they will. It's not unlike state sales taxes.
Here's the good thing that you sell to the rich...
There will be no more estate or other income tax.
In this way, the wealthy are not penalized for saving or investing their money. Money, in a sense, is worthless until it is spent. That's where the sales tax comes in. What's nice about this is that it also helps people aren't wealthy. Income taxes are paid based on income whatever the source and whatever you do with them money. This immediately penalizes frugal people and spendthrifts equally and thus disincentivizes people to save. With a sales tax, frugal people are not penalized for saving.
I think the state and local governments would like a word with you first... 😁
@DrPepper12 I say eliminate all income taxes.
There is pros an cons to this. Our tax code is deeply flawed and needs to be revised. Maybe a, sales tax is the way to do it. The bottom half of the population currently pay no taxes and the top 1% pay 50% of the taxes. This might make it more fair
Bad idea.
@monorprise I don’t disagree. But let’s not quibble. It’s not fun being on welfare. But humans have a tendency to cope and stay put. I've read studies where people don’t bother to apply for free money for one reason or another. So poor people are a problem.
But don’t pretend charging them more taxes will help.
@OddBeMe All money represents the work of someone, as such no money is "free".
How much we value that work is simply a product of how little people are willing to charge for it.
The global value of unskilled labor is very low, just as the global supply of skilled labor. When you make trade deals or import immigrants you connecting both countries markets equalizing their relative value.
That makes America's low skill labor very poor like the abundance forign low skilled labor while our high skilled labor is then made relatively wealthy being more rare and valuable in both countries.
Eventually our market will uplift the other country enough and merge culturally as to increase their skilled labor. As new generations need to learn in school that takes generations to happen. This is why free trade enriches the world and increases the overall pot size. But too much of anything is not good.
We make too many such trade deals or import too many immigrants and our own unskilled labor cease to be able to afford to live in our country. That is the cause of the poverty.
It has nothing to do whit how taxes are collected, but rather the value of their labor.
This is because money is always being bought and sold even when it is sitting in a bank.
@OddBeMe
We have far too many collage students for the size of our economy. So many in fact that a great many of them are unable to find jobs in the professions they were sold an 'education' on while the abundance of such skills had contributed to a credential inflation of previously lower skilled labor.
The fact that they are not as many immigrates in the welfare system is a reflection of immigrants not being permitted much to their economic benefit. A fact demonstrated with welfare reform in the late 90's making many more Americans into similar circumstances.
That they should open more businesses and be insidious instead is as such no surprise, this i after all what happened to Americans when kicked off the welfare role.
There are a great many business opperunties and niches to be filled that they are not as lucrative as being paid to do little or nothing all day is not a surprise. it is very hard to compete with free. Harder still when you have less to offer.
@OddBeMe
The trouble with American university is they have no real motivation to educate children for the workforce just take their money. That foreigners add to this problem feeding the same university with more and more money and if they stay here competing for the same jobs.
We do indeed have too many boomers in ratio to the number of younger kids. The lack of said children and their cultural and familiar investment in this country is a problem because the foreigners who replace them don't have any of that.
@monorprise luckily not a lot of foreigners do stay. But since the ones that do end up starting small businesses, or patenting new inventions, that’s good for the economy.
And a college degree doesn’t mean you have to get a job within that degree… But sure, we have an education issue of not educating for the real world. Could scale back the algebra for a few stock market classes. High school and college.
This is a great bill, it
1: Eliminates the most intrusive arm of the federal goverment.
2: Lets the State's collect taxes thus practically making them a check on federal abuses.
3: It enables select items like food, healthcare, or shelter to be effectively tax free.
4: It gets rid of one of the most costly sources of goverment regulations via a simplified tax code.
smart, it will get taxes from EVERYONE.
if it replaced income tax, my same tax from salary wil go via sales tax, while taxing even non workers.
yes. i don't pay taxes so politicians can get rich, or fund foreign countries to go to war or for the fed to police my state.
we've spent billions of dollars on foreign causes out of taxpayer dollars. we've been led to believe that the workforce is the cause of social security running out?
Sales tax is THE most regressive tax as it falls disproportionately on the poor. Figures it's a good idea. We need to return to Eisenhower tax table.
The Income Tax should never have come into being. And Sales Taxes WOULD have to increase. But at least people would have more control over how much they pay in taxes
What's wrong with income tax is assuming they're progressive?
Patently false. Choosing not to buy food, clothing, shelter, healthcare, transportation, utilities? Are you mad?
@DrPepper12 That's obviously not what I meant. But rather, choosing to not purchase those things that you don't really need. By not having an Income Tax, you then receive a lot more of your income, and can afford to pay a higher sales tax... which is Constitutional (if there wasn't an unconstitutional 16th Amendment)
You wanna fuck the poor. I get it
If you think it's progressive Rudy Giuliani has a bridge to sell you!
Sales tax is the worst way to tax since it hurts the poor the most. A better way to go about this is going after Wall Street and all their little favorite loopholes.
Every time I get tired of the stupidity of the Democrats, the GOP bumps up stupid to a whole new level.
The only opinion from girls was selected the Most Helpful Opinion, but you can still contribute by sharing an opinion!
You can also add your opinion below!
Most Helpful Opinions