1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

Federal Deficit/government shutdown

Discussion in 'Political Conversation and Debate' started by jimotis4heisman, Feb 2, 2009.

  1. AKAK

    AKAK Pistol packing, monkey drinking, no money bum. Staff Member Bookie

    I'd pay a lot more if the cops come when I call them.
  2. PlanetFrnd

    PlanetFrnd Newbie

    California's been working on their police situation for some time now...


    They used to show up in certain neighborhoods a little too much :lol:
  3. NewYorkBuck

    NewYorkBuck Do not read this title Staff Member

    Nope - much simpler.

    Say the poverty level is 15,000 of consumption per year. Say the tax rate is 20%. That means every tax payer gets a $3,000 rebate. That way, the consumption to get you out of poverty is effectively untaxed. So if you consume less than 15k, you actually make money. If you conversely consume 115k, you pay 23k - 3k = 20k net.
  4. Registered users don't see this player. If it bothers you, please log in.
  5. BIATCHabutuka

    BIATCHabutuka out of chaos comes playoffs

    it all depends on how you talk to them i guess. . . . .

    i am a fan of the local police in general as i play poker with some, but i don't want them cumming when i call.
  6. PlanetFrnd

    PlanetFrnd Newbie

    I bet if you switched 'poverty' with some sort of politically viable 'living wage' amount, so something a little higher... people might go with it... say, $5000 on a $25k living wage, 2x for married couples (as to not penalize) and, what, $500 per kid? In.
  7. BIATCHabutuka

    BIATCHabutuka out of chaos comes playoffs

    that works perfect, but i don't want to extend credit to the government, so give me my credit this year and then start the consumption tax next year please.
  8. muffler dragon

    muffler dragon Bien. Bien chiludo.

    A colleague of mine in San Diego told me yesterday that these motherfuckers might actually base the tax increase on total earnings (salary AND benefits). Thus, a lot of people not making the bottom line dollar amount might be boned anyway. :shake:
  9. BIATCHabutuka

    BIATCHabutuka out of chaos comes playoffs

    i never understood why benefits weren't taxable income.

    they clearly are as defined in the tax code i used to read.
  10. PlanetFrnd

    PlanetFrnd Newbie

    Someone call Deety. I'll take my $10,500 check on January first each year and pay my consumption taxes. I'm in. :lol:
  11. Deety

    Deety Ain't nothin' gonna breaka my stride Staff Member

    It would probably come out cheaper in the long run to rebate everyone to a certain level, whether they paid that much in or not. Much less paperwork than most welfare programs. It becomes that "safety net," but without hoops to jump through or people slipping through the he cracks. It would also remove the disincentive to work, since nobody is using the risk of lost benefits as a way to shackle people to a life of perpetual state support.

    It would still be redistribution of wealth, but with money people *chose* to put in. It would be up to each individual to decide whether they want to be the people who pay in or take out, and in this case, paying in is more fun. Also, less vote-buying, since everyone is treated exactly the same.

    To keep the program from draining the economy, and prevent vote-buying through promises of increases, the level of redistribution would have to be pinned in a difficult-to-revoke way to a set standard. Say, X% of revenue from the sales tax always goes out as rebates.

    Just spinning ideas as I write, so I'd appreciate not being asked to defend this with my life quite yet, 'kay?
  12. BIATCHabutuka

    BIATCHabutuka out of chaos comes playoffs

    that plan would make tax lawyers 100% unemployed.

    i would prefer to continue to play the tax dodge game, but that does seem fair and i would sign up for it as well.

    If i were given a credit for the poverty consumption level on this years taxes, they can implement the new tax 1/1/2013 for all I care.

    as long as they don't steal the time value of my money, i have no complaints here.
  13. Deety

    Deety Ain't nothin' gonna breaka my stride Staff Member

    Of course, what would happen in a system like that would be that people would adjust to the new prices and not think of them as taxes, and receive the rebate and think of it as a gift from the government. Eventually, this would reinforce the idea that government money comes from a magic beanstalk somewhere, so why can't they pay for everything anyone ever needs?

    Hmm. Maybe every receipt needs to be stamped with the amount going to taxes, and the date of the next election. You know, so all those people who think they pay too little can vote for someone who will do the hard work of taking more. :wink:
  14. BIATCHabutuka

    BIATCHabutuka out of chaos comes playoffs

    if we are going far out there, i suggest one tax dollar paid = one vote.

    no tax dollar paid = no vote.
  15. Fungo Squiggly

    Fungo Squiggly Mortal enemy of all things Bucky Former Game Champion

    A couple minor issues with the national consumption tax:

    -The black market will become massive.
    -Good luck getting vendors to remit the tax when the going gets tough. There are checks in place regarding employment taxes. Sales tax remittance is almost entirely driven on the honor system.
    -The wealthy will have no issue getting around most of it by making large purchases outside the country.

    I still like the idea. It becomes an optional tax. You don't want to pay it? Live like a pauper and you don't have to!

    Just a matter of time. They aren't starting to require large employers to include the total cost of insurance provided on W-2's just because they are curious. It's coming. Soon.
  16. PlanetFrnd

    PlanetFrnd Newbie

    Votes for all men of property!!

Share This Page