Taxes

[avguste]

I would have no problem with taxes on what one consumes, however all other taxes would need to be removed for good

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Rich people don't create jobs. Job creation went down when the rich got tax breaks. When Clinton was in office and the rich were paying more in taxes (albeit still not as much as they should have), job creation was higher.

 

[katy perry is hot]

I have explained time and time again why a flat income tax doesn't work, and why pretty much no developed country in the world has an effective flat income tax. Progressive taxes are pretty much the norm everywhere, but the debate is how much higher it should be on the rich over the middle class.

Here is a quote from my post in the other tax topic:

Well it's not as simple as that. If you tax all people 20% for example, that's 4,000 dollars off the salary of someone who is making 20 grand a year. That's 70000 dollars for someone who makes 350,000 a year. Is that fair to the person making 20,000 dollars a year? No, it isn't.

It sounds good in theory, everyone pays the same percent, but it simply does not work. What you're doing with that is killing the lower middle class families (if it were 20%, that family bringing in 20 grand will only have 16 grand, they won't be able to afford clothing or food for themself) and letting the rich get off scott free (I'm pretty sure one can get by with 280,000 grand a year just fine).

If you recall, a few years ago, Warren Buffet went and testified to congress about how he supports higher tax percentages for people within his income range. Remember when he said that his receptionist pays a higher tax percentage than he does. The fact is, the rich people in this country pay a smaller percentage of taxes than the people who teach their children do, or the people who clean the floors in their office buildings.

Also, the fact is, it's not like Bill Clinton started this. Tax brackets have existed since the early 1900s. Yes, Reagan did have tax brackets, by the way. Clinton's high tax bracket was 39.5 %, the way the republicans set it in 2002 or 2003 (i forget) was at 35%. Hmmmmm... surplus under Clinton, deficit under Republicans... who was right?!?!?!?

As I said in the other page, the wealth divisions in this country have increased rapidly in the past 10 years. The rich simply have so much money, and the poor simply have so less. It wasn't that way under Clinton.

Farside, you make some good points. We do have a lot of dumb unneeded programs. Look at all of the federal law enforcement agencies we have. This country has hundreds of them. We have an NCIS, A marine CID, an Army CID, an Airforce CID, a CGIS (coast guard investigative service)... for what god damn reason? Why not combine them all into something like "MIS - Military Investigative Service"... do you know how many billions that would save in separate agency budgets?

And what about the ATF? What do we still have that for? Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives... for what need? Take whatever modern day jurisdictions they still have and have them absorbed into the FBI.

If we had no income tax the government would be bankrupt within about 3 days and we would be taken over by China and/or Russia.

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Let's also not forget that most of these unneeded agencies were established by conservatives (who love to spend on "defense"), so don't play the "tax and spend liberal" card.

 

[katy perry is hot]

Let's also not forget that most of these unneeded agencies were established by conservatives (who love to spend on "defense"), so don't play the "tax and spend liberal" card.

Sure, a lot of the federal agencies we still have today were created in the early-mid 70s under Nixon. (ATF,DEA)

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Let's also not forget that most of these unneeded agencies were established by conservatives (who love to spend on "defense"), so don't play the "tax and spend liberal" card.

Sure, a lot of the federal agencies we still have today were created in the early-mid 70s under Nixon. (ATF,DEA)

Let's have a WAR ON DRUGS!!!

 

[katy perry is hot]

Let's also not forget that most of these unneeded agencies were established by conservatives (who love to spend on "defense"), so don't play the "tax and spend liberal" card.

Sure, a lot of the federal agencies we still have today were created in the early-mid 70s under Nixon. (ATF,DEA)

Let's have a WAR ON DRUGS!!!

Marijuana is a schedule 1 drug with a high potential for abuse and no medical usages.
But for some reason cocaine is schedule 2. People have died from cocaine. Not from marijuana, yet the federal government considers cocaine to be not as bad... hmmmm....

 

[Deleted member 1609]

So cocaine has a... semi-high potential for abuse?

 

[katy perry is hot]

I suppose. Meth is also a schedule 2 drug.

* Schedule I — drugs with a high abuse risk. These drugs have NO safe, accepted medical use in the United States. Some examples are heroin, marijuana, LSD, and PCP.
* Schedule II — drugs with a high abuse risk, but also have safe and accepted medical uses in the United States. These drugs can cause severe psychological or physical dependence. Schedule II drugs include certain narcotic, stimulant, and depressant drugs. Some examples are morphine, cocaine, oxycodone (Percodan®), methylphenidate (Ritalin®), and dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine®).

 

[Watch Me Sink]

What medicinal uses does cocaine have?

 

[Deleted member 1609]

Marijuana is in the same category as heroin. Way to go, America! Why isn't alcohol a schedule I drug?

What medicinal uses does cocaine have?

Cocaine used to be used in headache medication. Coca-Cola was originally a cocawine, a wine that contains a small amount of cocaine, that was used to cure headaches.

 

[Watch Me Sink]

Marijuana is in the same category as heroin. Way to go, America! Why isn't alcohol a schedule I drug?

What medicinal uses does cocaine have?

Cocaine used to be used in headache medication. Coca-Cola was originally a cocawine, a wine that contains a small amount of cocaine, that was used to cure headaches.

What medicinal uses does alcohol have, that would put it as useful?

Ah. Knew that about Coca-Cola, but did not know why and was too lazy to look it up. Probably in small doses, but obviously in large doses there is a high risk of dependency and such.

 

[Gimgak]

I suppose. Meth is also a schedule 2 drug.

* Schedule I — drugs with a high abuse risk. These drugs have NO safe, accepted medical use in the United States. Some examples are heroin, marijuana, LSD, and PCP.
* Schedule II — drugs with a high abuse risk, but also have safe and accepted medical uses in the United States. These drugs can cause severe psychological or physical dependence. Schedule II drugs include certain narcotic, stimulant, and depressant drugs. Some examples are morphine, cocaine, oxycodone (Percodan®), methylphenidate (Ritalin®), and dextroamphetamine (Dexedrine®).

lololol wow heroin is together with Marijuana and LSD... that's crazy. Glad to know it's healthier to go crazy cooking meth than to smoke weed or try acid :lol:

 

[Deleted member 1609]

What medicinal uses does alcohol have, that would put it as useful?

It's just that if marijuana is a schedule I drug, then alcohol should be, too. Alcohol is every bit as harmful as marijuana if not moreso. However, neither drug deserves schedule I status. I was just giving another example of how U.S. drug policies make no sense.

 

[MissTake]

Back to Taxes please 😉