--- In [email protected], "jim_flanegin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
> --- In [email protected], Bhairitu <noozguru@> wrote:
> >
> > authfriend wrote:
> > > --- In [email protected], TurquoiseB <no_reply@>
> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >>>>> I think some reasonable attention could be put on our
social
> > >>>>> programs without having to resort to charges of socialism.
> > >>>>>
> > >>>>>
> > >>>> According to what I've read, Jim, in order to balance the
> U.S.
> > >>>> federal budget, the government would have to raise payroll
> > >>>>
> > > taxes
> > >
> > >>>> by 30% and cut all entitlements by 50%.
> > >>>>
> > >>> Or just roll back the gigantic tax cuts for Bush's
> > >>> superrich cronies.
> > >>>
> > >> Or, as some economists have pointed out, simply
> > >> institute a flat tax of 15% of income, NO deduc-
> > >> tions, for all working individuals and all companies
> > >> and corporations. NO deductions or exemptions of any
> > >> kind for corporations.
> > >>
> > >> According to their figures (because a great
> > >> number of corporations pay no taxes at all as
> > >> a result of loopholes and incentives), this plan
> > >> would raise nearly double the amount of tax
> > >> dollars per year as are raised now, while prov-
> > >> iding most people with an effective tax *cut*.
> > >>
> > >
> > > Actually, a flat income tax would make the tax
> > > system as a whole regressive, so that the poor would
> > > pay a greater percentage of their income in taxes,
> > > while the rich would pay a smaller percentage. And
> > > the middle class would also suffer if there were no
> > > deductions. Plus which, if corporations have to
> > > pay more tax, they'll just pass it on to consumers
> > > in higher prices, and to their workers in lower
> > > wages.
> > No, no, the percentage stays the same. The argument is that 15%
> of a
> > poor person's income would be a much greater blow to them than
to
> a rich
> > person. There was a proposal by a 1980's third party
> Presidential
> > candidate who suggested that one wouldn't pay the flat tax until
> they
> > had an estate worth $100K. I think the same candidate was where
I
> heard
> > the idea of 100% tax once someone has an estate of $12
million.
> We
> > don't need billionaires throwing their weight around and
everytime
> they
> > sneeze putting 1000s out of a job.
> >
> If the ultra rich paid the same taxes as the middle class (28%),
> we'd collect $120 BILLION from just the 400 wealthiest Americans.
> Don't worry because they could keep the other $780 BILLION to
> themselves.
>
Ooops-- Should be $280 BILLION in taxes, keeping $720 BILLION to
themselves. And that's just 400 people!!
