Tax Reform

[Belsnickel]

(09-18-2017, 12:11 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: If there is no gov safety net programs then people will just have more children to take care of them when they are old. That is often how families did this for years.

There is a flaw, there. The government safety net might as well be non-existent for seniors, and has been viewed for decades that late-gen X on will see nothing of any tangible benefit, yet fewer children are being had.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-18-2017, 12:30 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: There is a flaw, there. The government safety net might as well be non-existent for seniors, and has been viewed for decades that late-gen X on will see nothing of any tangible benefit, yet fewer children are being had.

Because of the myth of the safet net existing. Take it away then family planning changes. The debate should be where should the burden fall.... the public or the family. Families can provide better than the gov.

[*TheLeonardLeap*]

Flat 10% federal, 5% state income tax regardless if you're a person or a corporation. No sales taxes, no deductions for charity or dependents, no tax brackets, none of any of that.

If you made money that year, regardless of how (be it job, lottery, inheritance, stock market), 10% goes to the federal government, 5% goes to the state government. Done. The paperwork your tax filing would require would be the size of a postcard, and literally anyone could do it for themselves. There would be no space for loopholes.

Make up some of the money on tariffs, but mostly just cut spending across the board. Stop foreign aid, stop world policing, and force the governments to live within a budget.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

(09-15-2017, 09:51 PM)Nebuchadnezzar Wrote: What I want to see is taxes raised across the board.

It will hurt for a while but it needs to be done. Families have to live within their means, drop the Internet, drop cable, buy hamburger and buy small cars. 

Force everyone to live in a joyless life without entertainment, where every day is just waking up and going to work in order to give the federal government all your earnings before going home to stare at your blank wall while eating a bowl of rice, before going to bed once it's dark in order to repeat the day all over again.

That sounds like a real great country you got planned there.

[Au165]

(09-18-2017, 12:11 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: If there is no gov safety net programs then people will just have more children to take care of them when they are old.   That is often how families did this for years.

A government can't account for future liabilities this way, it's not how the real world works. You can't risk running into a situation where a large portion of your aging population ends up in poverty. Again, the cheapest way to do this is incentivize people into saving for themselves. It is the same idea around proactive health programs. It is cheaper to get people to keep themselves healthy than it is to treat them once they get sick.

[Au165]

(09-18-2017, 12:57 PM)TheLeonardLeap Wrote: Force everyone to live in a joyless life without entertainment, where every day is just waking up and going to work in order to give the federal government all your earnings before going home to stare at your blank wall while eating a bowl of rice, before going to bed once it's dark in order to repeat the day all over again.

That sounds like a real great country you got planned there.

Ironically enough that sounds like cold war Russia haha

[Belsnickel]

(09-18-2017, 12:53 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Because of the myth of the safet net existing. Take it away then family planning changes. The debate should be where should the burden fall.... the public or the family. Families can provide better than the gov.

You did not address my post and, in fact, ignored my point entirely.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-18-2017, 01:35 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: You did not address my post and, in fact, ignored my point entirely.

Actually I didn't. You mentioned seniors. I addressed seniors.

[Belsnickel]

(09-18-2017, 06:04 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Actually I didn't. You mentioned seniors. I addressed seniors.

What about my statement that late-Gen X to Millennials already don't expect anything but have been having fewer children? You know, the part of my post that you ignored.

[*Nately120*]

(09-18-2017, 12:53 PM)StLucieBengal Wrote: Because of the myth of the safet net existing.   Take it away then family planning changes.   The debate should be where should the burden fall.... the public or the family.   Families can provide better than the gov.

So does your mother in law live with you, or what?  Yikes.  This isn't my idea of a great america! 

[StLucieBengal]

(09-18-2017, 10:11 PM)Nately120 Wrote: So does your mother in law live with you, or what?  Yikes.  This isn't my idea of a great america! 

My mother In law has died.

[StLucieBengal]

(09-18-2017, 07:04 PM)Belsnickel Wrote: What about my statement that late-Gen X to Millennials already don't expect anything but have been having fewer children? You know, the part of my post that you ignored.

Then they obviously should have some retirement planning: There should be no government plan for anyone.

[THE Bigzoman]

Make the tax code simpler. And not just to reduce the time needed to file, but to get rid of the costs of complexity: http://time.com/4286921/complex-tax-code/

You don't even need institute a flat tax. Keep marginal tax rates but eliminate most loopholes and deductions.

Everything else is secondary.