feel bad 4 them

This thread needs some boobs.

I fall with AbunDiga on this topic, true capitalism only works when it rewards hard work and talent with a proportional return. If you implement a so-called "Fair Tax" you have just made it possible for the top 10% of the country and all thier decendents to never again do a days work, or take a reasonable risk of capital in thier lives.

The money behind the disinformation on these topics typically comes from those who make more money than they can spend (and therefore be taxed under a "Fair Tax" setup, and they don't make it because they are working 400 times harder or smarter than their employees or because they made some better decisions, with few exceptions these are people born with advantages. I have worked on a daily basis with a billionaire (Todd W. Herrick), and met a few more along the way and they were all running their fathers, or their grandfathers company's. I can say without any doubt that if there were no income taxes their companies would have been boarded up years ago and they would be makeing a safe 6% on thier billions (60 million a year per billion is more than you can spend). With compound interest and no taxes the fortune would grow every generation without any of the future dependants ever so much as taking a risk. Talent and Money removed from the economy forever is not good capitalism.

I don't begrudge people the american dream, I make 80k a year as a 30 year old, and I hope to make more, if I make enough I would love to provide all my decendents with a comfortable future and even with our pre GWB tax giveaways to the rich it was possible for people to do so, but it should remain the vast exception to the rule.

I have no love for oil companies because they make money on a resource that they had no hand in producing, and the use of which has negative externalities which effect not only everyone in the current world but also all those that will come after.

As for 10 percent profits, that 10% number is a return on sales and doesn't reflect inventory turns. Walmart makes about 3 percent return on sales but somehow all the waltons are billionaires? When we talk about our investments and returns we talk about return on the investment over a year. If walmart turns over its inventory 20 (it was actually alot more than that last I checked) times a year and makes 3 percent a turn thats an annual return on investment of 60%, (actually more because the 3% gets reinvested and compounded but you get the idea). Its the same way with Exxon Mobil how many inventory turns do you think they do in a year? My guess its about the average number of times a truck shows up to fill the tanks at the average gas station, similar to the number of times an average person fills thier gas tank in an average year, thats a lot of 10% turns, if it was 1% of each fill up they wouldn't shut the doors. If it was an efficient market with no lobbyists, no monopolys, no wars, no tarrifs, no preferential contracts that allow them the use of oil taken off of public land someone else would open up and do it for less.

Basically I expect businesses and the rich to take care of themselves, and I prefer to worry about those hard working innovators who werent born with advantages.

Final meandering thought, taxing income less does not increase investment in business. Investment in business is not taxed, only profits or income. Business owners invest more back in the business to avoid paying taxes on profits that are above what they can or want to spend, I have seen this first hand, it is what keeps people with multimillion or billion dollar companies in business and thier money in circulation buying equipment and paying salaries. The above mentioned billionaire, owns 49% of a multibillion dollar corporation that spent 650 million dollars on an aquisition three years ago in a year when the company reported 27 million dollars in profits. That was about 1% on sales, he didn't close the doors, he didn't retire, he expanded his net worth through work and the risk of taking on a new company, if there was no income tax the company would have been sold off years ago and he would be getting progressively richer without working or risking his capital forever...

Economics isn't simple any solution that sounds too simple to be true probably isnt.

my 2cents..
Joe.

Great debate here.
Some food for thought.

Two men of equal means begin their journey through life. Man A, pays his way through school and eventually owns a thriving buisness.
Man B get's a goverment grant to pay some of his schooling and gets student loans to complete the same degree as man B. After college, man B defaults on school loans, works dead end jobs, becomes a drunk and eventually becomes a begger on the street.

Which man needs the goverment's aid and why?

well., just wrote some good stuff and hit the back button by mistake, so its gone...crap

Bottom line is we'll have to agree on what we think "fair" really is. I think of all that money that Exxon's, and other company's, CEOs and executives make and think, what if we just took 1 or 2 mil of their salary and but it towards, lets say, a new medical center, further education, reknew and refurbish government housing, etc... How would that guy's life who makes 39 mil a year differ that much if he only made 38? 35? 30? 20 GOD FORBID! Not all THAT much, especially when there are people on the streets.

It is the governments responsibilty to provide those things that private companies cannot, and the government needs the money they can get. This tax cut is the stupidest thing I've ever heard of. I know a guy who got a check in the mail for $400, woo hoo, great, ALL HIS FINANCIAL PROBLEMS WERE SOLVED! The top 2% of the country got about 98% of the tax break! Billions of dollars that could have been put to good use went to the people. Their excuse: the rich will put it back in the economy. Well, the government just took billions that couold have gone to cancer research, and put it in the hands of the richest executives in America, HOPING they will expand their businesses.

Again, the tpyical argument against this is that the rich earned it. But I think this is a very selfish way of looking at things. What I meant when I said they get more out of the government is that, not only did they get the bigger tax breaks (unfortunately), the rich guy is having more protected by the government services out there, where the homeless guy has nothing to lose.

Maybe I just like giving too much, but I certaintly dont think the rich guy is being PUNISHED by having higher taxes.... I do not see how you think its fair that the sales tax on a shirt for a rich person is almost nothing compared to his income, while for the poor person, it is huge, how the heck is that fair? I wouldn't say b/c the "poor guy made some bad decisions, isn't as smart as the rich guy, etc..." That idea is making the poor poorer and the rich richer! Goldman Sachs just gave out 16.8 BILLION in bonuses... some executive got a check for $500 million! I havent lived on welfare, and hope I never have to, but if you are exposed to some of these peoples living conditions, I hope, i really hope, that you will not see as a progressive tax "punishing" the rich. It is simply the law. And, I cannot think of one person who has deliberately not tried to be sucessful to avoid higher taxes...

I'm sure theres more to say but thats all the crap that comes to mind now...

good convo btw

p.s. not proofread at all, tired as hell

sorry about that BKH mixed you and 88 up from another post. But I did get the answer I was looking for between the two fo you . Thank you.

Oh, I've not forgiven Exxon for the Valdez spill, either.

I've never liked Exxon, probably never will. two words: exxon valdese (sp?)

poster, do you believe in the PROGRESSIVE income tax, or would you rather see it regressive, like sales? which do you think is fairer?

The national sales tax thing was going around during the 04 elections. I'm telling you the elected idiots don't want it. Look at the fair tax site and look at the list of reps that support it. Not even a handfull. It doesn't stand a chance in hell, but I have already started emailing my reps and telling them to support it. The news media will do everything they can to suppress it as well.

87BFN, California charges taxes on used vehicles based on the price you paid for the used item. Of course everyone is honest on how much they paid for it.

Kurt, I agree, they did nothing when they had the chance. That is why they are gone. Perhaps they will learn from it. If they would run on the fair tax in '08, I don't think that they could be stopped.
Chris

I don't follow this type of stuff much.Too busy to keep up with it.I guess that makes me dangerous,cause I don't know all the facts and I still voice my opinion .Anyway,I just think it's odd that oil/gas prices fluctuate so much.It's not the taxes that cause the price to do that.I'm glad they're not charging us 4.00 a gal.for it,but if it STAYED at that price consistently I may eventually feel better about it....If that makes any sense.I just feel like when heating oil goes up cause winter is coming or it is cold out,or gas prices go up as millions prepare to hit the streets for a holiday weekend,that I'm being taken advantage of.The guy who put the heating system in my house was telling me last year as oil prices were skyrocketing,that there was x amount(millions) MORE oil in the reserve at that time,than in previous years when oil was cheaper.Just makes me wonder.

   Mike

Would the "fair tax" just be at the federal level? If so, states would still be free to tax used items again and again such as boats and cars. And counties could still a$$ess taxes on so called "luxury items" such as boats.
I'm still all for it. Where do I sign up?

Dude, I'm an insurance auditor. I used to be in the restaurant business.
Chris

poster what's your line of work?

it's 37.3 cents a gallon in michigan I believe. I know for sure it is over 34 cents and our roads suck. But that is from the heavy over wieght semis.

But by no means am I whining about gas prices, just stating the fact that we are getting screwed on the ptice per gallon. But supply and demand is the name of the game. As long as we demand they will control the supply make sure the price is in their favor.

Windfall taxes are not something I want to see.

I think every one should be taxed a straight ten percent of what you make no matter how much you make. No deductions straight ten percent whether your a business or an individual. Then see how things change. The people making multi-millions a year have tax people that hide all there money. Goto the straight ten percent plan and all that is gone. I think, just my two cents that we would be better off that way. Anyone else's opinion. I would like to hear it. See if we can find any down falls to this crazt idea.

Oh, and the most important point is that if they made less profit, the prices would go up to compensate. Very few business are in business to make less than a 10% profit margin.