We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!! - PowerStrokeNation : Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
post #1 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-11-2011, 03:02 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Plover WI
Posts: 345
We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

I got this off of Mark Belling's website, I would say one of the best conservative talk show host (based in Milwaukee, WI). Hands down he is the best in my book. I just wish I could get the station in better on my radio.

Sen. Rubio: We Don't Need New Taxes, We Need New Taxpayers | RealClearPolitics
Binderpower is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-11-2011, 03:29 PM
PSN Veteran
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Arnold,Mo
Posts: 608
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

I agree too many mooches getting handouts.

Pat

2003 2500hd ccsb, intake 5" straight pipe, ad2 165, Bosch remans, ride right bags, tinted windows, ppe boost valve, on the way leveling kit 285's, efi live, built trans and batmo wheel
1996 E350 4x4 sled puller Draggin Wagon

Carpenter's local 2214 St. Louis, MO
silverf250 is offline  
post #3 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-11-2011, 03:33 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Plover WI
Posts: 345
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

I am going to give you a quick history lesson on taxes: Source (Income tax fundamentals- 1998 edition, Gerald E Whittenburg, and Martha Altus-Buller

The U.S. income tax was authorized by the 16th amendment to the constitution on March 1, 1913. Prior to this the U.S. had levied various income taxes for limited periods of time. Ex. income tax was used to help finance the civil war. The findings by the courts that the income tax law enacted in 1894 was unconstitutional eventually led to the adoption of the 16th amendment. Since this amendment, the constitutionality of the income tax has not been questioned by the fed courts.

Many people believe the sole purpose of the income tax is to raise revenue to operate the gov't. This belief is not accurate. The income tax is used also as a tool of economic and social policy. The tax law has many goals other than raising revenue. These goals fall into 2 categories-economic and social goals.

Ex of economic goals - limited allowance for expensing of capital expenditures and the ACRS or MACRS of depreciation.

Social goals- resulted in teh adoption of the child tax credit, dependant care credit, EIC and charitable contribution deductions etc.
Binderpower is offline  
 
post #4 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-11-2011, 03:43 PM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Plover WI
Posts: 345
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

Lets just a make a hypothetical example: lets say the so called rich $500,000 / yr. and lets say they pay a total of 15% of their income to taxes. That is $75,000/yr. Now lets say a family of $40,000 pays that 15%, that equals to $6,000/yr. Now that person making $500K is covering 12.5 times more than those who make $40K. All in all the, the wealthy are contributing.
Binderpower is offline  
post #5 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-11-2011, 06:16 PM
Junior Mint
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Austin, TX
Posts: 2,461
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

I agree that everyone should have to pay Federal income taxes. Even the guy making (claiming really) 8K/ year. No write-offs, no -deductions.

Approximately half of Federal revenue should come from a national sales tax.

I'm officially...Stroke-less.
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
Suns_PSD is offline  
post #6 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-13-2011, 10:24 PM
<-- it's like that
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 6,567
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Binderpower View Post
I am going to give you a quick history lesson on taxes: Source (Income tax fundamentals- 1998 edition, Gerald E Whittenburg, and Martha Altus-Buller

The U.S. income tax was authorized by the 16th amendment to the constitution on March 1, 1913. Prior to this the U.S. had levied various income taxes for limited periods of time. Ex. income tax was used to help finance the civil war. The findings by the courts that the income tax law enacted in 1894 was unconstitutional eventually led to the adoption of the 16th amendment. Since this amendment, the constitutionality of the income tax has not been questioned by the fed courts.

Many people believe the sole purpose of the income tax is to raise revenue to operate the gov't. This belief is not accurate. The income tax is used also as a tool of economic and social policy. The tax law has many goals other than raising revenue. These goals fall into 2 categories-economic and social goals.

Ex of economic goals - limited allowance for expensing of capital expenditures and the ACRS or MACRS of depreciation.

Social goals- resulted in teh adoption of the child tax credit, dependant care credit, EIC and charitable contribution deductions etc.
Other than to simply spread conspiracy theories based on the sheer opinion that tax somehow has "goals other than raising revenue", what exactly was the point of that?

I'm being serious. I know you copied and pasted it, but exactly what was the point the author was trying to convey? It simply ended abruptly with a blind assumption of conspiracy, with zero explanation as to why.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Binderpower View Post
Lets just a make a hypothetical example: lets say the so called rich $500,000 / yr. and lets say they pay a total of 15% of their income to taxes. That is $75,000/yr. Now lets say a family of $40,000 pays that 15%, that equals to $6,000/yr. Now that person making $500K is covering 12.5 times more than those who make $40K. All in all the, the wealthy are contributing.
Problem is, what if you make $100K a year, and fall into the 28% tax bracket.... then you don't qualify for deductions, and pay the full 28%. All the while someone who makes $500K, who would be in the 35% bracket, only pays 15% because their income qualifies for "capital gains".

Meaning someone who earns less can pay almost twice the percentage of their income simply because they get a paycheck in a slightly different way. That's just one very simplified example. There's tons others.

Hence why I prefer the national sales tax in leu of the income tax.

Curtis
2002 F-250 PSD
Gambling with 250/200's on PMR's.
478hp/851tq on Haller's dyno - 7/28/12
Your connection to the
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
Pocket is offline  
post #7 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-13-2011, 10:27 PM
FNG
 
Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Trempealeau WI
Posts: 6,018
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

Flat tax FTW

Dave G

06 F250 Lariat 4x4 leveled on 35s

4 inch flowmaster exhaust
Bulletproof diesel egr delete.
Bulletproof diesel FICM
Performance Machine & Manufacturing Coolant Filter Kit

ECM and FICM tuned by Bill at PHP SCT tunes from Gearhead, Innovative and Wildman
Dave is offline  
post #8 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-14-2011, 04:02 AM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Plover WI
Posts: 345
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket View Post
Other than to simply spread conspiracy theories based on the sheer opinion that tax somehow has "goals other than raising revenue", what exactly was the point of that?

I'm being serious. I know you copied and pasted it, but exactly what was the point the author was trying to convey? It simply ended abruptly with a blind assumption of conspiracy, with zero explanation as to why.


Problem is, what if you make $100K a year, and fall into the 28% tax bracket.... then you don't qualify for deductions, and pay the full 28%. All the while someone who makes $500K, who would be in the 35% bracket, only pays 15% because their income qualifies for "capital gains".

Meaning someone who earns less can pay almost twice the percentage of their income simply because they get a paycheck in a slightly different way. That's just one very simplified example. There's tons others.

Hence why I prefer the national sales tax in leu of the income tax.
Pocket, I copied this word for word out of my old textbook, and typed it in. Trust me I can give you tax examples after tax examples.

But even those who may theoretically pay more percentage wise still don't pay the total sum of someone who makes more. If that is the case, they better hire a tax accountant.
Binderpower is offline  
post #9 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-14-2011, 06:35 AM
<-- it's like that
 
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Parker, CO
Posts: 6,567
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Binderpower View Post
Pocket, I copied this word for word out of my old textbook, and typed it in. Trust me I can give you tax examples after tax examples.

But even those who may theoretically pay more percentage wise still don't pay the total sum of someone who makes more. If that is the case, they better hire a tax accountant.
If you read my post, you'd see that I'm not arguing that someone in a higher tax bracket can't pay more in total dollars (28% of $100K vs 15% of $500K). The point I did make was that someone in a higher tax bracket can get deductions to the point that they pay a far lower PERCENTAGE of their income in taxes. So why should someone with less total income pay a much larger percentage of that income than someone who earns far more? Would you rather pay 28% of your income in federal taxes, or 15%?

Furthermore, I asked what the point was behind the text you copied and pasted. As I said, it did nothing but make a claim that taxes were collected for other purposes than revenue, then magically generated conspiracy theories out of thin air... all with ZERO explanation or reasoning behind it. I know it wasn't yours, but a copy and paste. So what was the point? I'm simply asking for a reason, because it really didn't make any sense.

Curtis
2002 F-250 PSD
Gambling with 250/200's on PMR's.
478hp/851tq on Haller's dyno - 7/28/12
Your connection to the
To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 posts.
.
Pocket is offline  
post #10 of 61 (permalink) Old 07-14-2011, 11:23 AM Thread Starter
Banned
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Plover WI
Posts: 345
Re: We need more taxpayers, NOT tax Increases!!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pocket View Post
If you read my post, you'd see that I'm not arguing that someone in a higher tax bracket can't pay more in total dollars (28% of $100K vs 15% of $500K). The point I did make was that someone in a higher tax bracket can get deductions to the point that they pay a far lower PERCENTAGE of their income in taxes. So why should someone with less total income pay a much larger percentage of that income than someone who earns far more? Would you rather pay 28% of your income in federal taxes, or 15%?

Furthermore, I asked what the point was behind the text you copied and pasted. As I said, it did nothing but make a claim that taxes were collected for other purposes than revenue, then magically generated conspiracy theories out of thin air... all with ZERO explanation or reasoning behind it. I know it wasn't yours, but a copy and paste. So what was the point? I'm simply asking for a reason, because it really didn't make any sense.
Pocket, I am not arguing either. I am just making a blanket statement. No I just copied word for word out of my text.

I just know, and I know we will disagree on what type of tax, but we need a simplified tax code, one that no one can escape. I don't wanna argue over spilled milk here, but that is how I feel. The current tax code has entirely too many loopholes, and is much more complicated than it has to be. I think we can all agree on that.
Binderpower is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the PowerStrokeNation : Ford Powerstroke Diesel Forum forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in










Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Linear Mode



Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome