Over 29 years of fanhood Posted February 27, 2023 Posted February 27, 2023 I guess the actual problem with any novel taxation concepts is wealthy elites will always ensure it doesn’t impact them, so what does it matter? A great modern day ladder to economic success is to identify as someone in the protected class (gender, orientation or race) and go work for the government. Run for federal office if you can, then you can syphon money off of the special interests eventually finding a way to “private equity” or “lobbying” and back again. Republican, Democrat, beliefs, ideals… that’s less important… you just need to know somebody that matters. 1
Tommy Callahan Posted February 27, 2023 Posted February 27, 2023 6 minutes ago, sherpa said: Years ago, this issue actually got some reasoned, rational discussion. The print number was discussed with an entire format of exclusions to protect the poor and eliminate the tax on certain necessities. Sadly, that discussion is not possible now. Why not. in the big picture I dont trust them to do anything correctly. but the reporting out of the plan so far, has some of those same aspects. Also something about it not even being used on people making less than so much. to me, it seems like another way to increase fed revenue.
Pokebball Posted February 27, 2023 Posted February 27, 2023 On 2/22/2023 at 1:54 PM, cle23 said: 8 of the top 10 states for federal tax deficit are Red. Kentucky takes in $26.6B more per year in federal aid than they pay in. Alabama. Louisiana. Mississippi. All huge deficits. It's not this simple, however. I can speak to Wyoming very well. We've got two major federal highways through our state. We've got 1 of 3 nuclear air force bases. We've got one of the largest national parks and we've got one of the highest federal land ownerships in the nation. We've got very significant federal expenditure in our state for these and many other reasons. Then consider our denominator, having the smallest population of all states in the union. Our deficit is huge. Our per capita federal spending is huge. 2
sherpa Posted February 27, 2023 Posted February 27, 2023 5 minutes ago, Chris farley said: Why not. in the big picture I dont trust them to do anything correctly. but the reporting out of the plan so far, has some of those same aspects. Also something about it not even being used on people making less than so much. to me, it seems like another way to increase fed revenue. Why not? Read the comments on the issue in this very thread. People writing things that indicate they have absolutely no knowledge of what was proposed just a few years ago, and instead, turning it into a political/class warfare suggestion instead of a reasoned economic issue. The chasm, in my view, has broadened to a point where such a commonality of purpose for the good of our union is not possible. 1
SoTier Posted February 27, 2023 Posted February 27, 2023 (edited) On 1/19/2023 at 10:24 AM, Westside said: Less people means less poor in rural areas. The urban cities have miles and miles of nothingness and despair the rural folks don’t have. In the country you can at least raise your own food. Not in the urban areas. Everyone is literally on top of one another. Besides, the soil in the city are usually loaded with chemicals and who knows what else has been dumped there. Have you ever lived in a rural area or ever even been in a rural area for more than a few hours on driving on an interstate???? With fewer people spread out over larger areas, there are fewer resources to care for the poor who are do live in rural areas. Overall, the poverty rate in nonmetro (ie, rural) is about 16% while it's about 12% in metro (urban) areas. Across the country, the poverty rate is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the gap between rural and urban poverty rates vary significantly by region. In the Midwest, the rural poverty rate is .8% higher than the urban poverty rate (13.4% vs 12.6%). Geography of Poverty "Who know what's dumped there" describes just about every single private farm dump anywhere in the rural US ... and most farms had -- and many still have -- private dumps. FYI ... farmers have been using pesticides on their fields and putting those pesticides and other poisons in their dumps since WW II. Edited February 27, 2023 by SoTier 1
Tommy Callahan Posted February 27, 2023 Posted February 27, 2023 7 minutes ago, SoTier said: Have you ever lived in a rural area or ever even been in a rural area for more than a few hours on driving on an interstate???? With fewer people spread out over larger areas, there are fewer resources to care for the poor who are do live in rural areas. Overall, the poverty rate in nonmetro (ie, rural) is about 16% while it's about 12% in metro (urban) areas. Across the country, the poverty rate is higher in rural areas than in urban areas, but the gap between rural and urban poverty rates vary significantly by region. In the Midwest, the rural poverty rate is .8% higher than the urban poverty rate (13.4% vs 12.6%). Geography of Poverty FYI, the Social Security Administration estimates that about 56% of SS recipients pay at least some federal income tax on their SS income. The 44% of SS recipients who don't pay taxes on their benefits have a maximum annual income from all sources of about $25k for a 1 person household and about $32k for a 2 person household. These people would go from paying 0 income tax to paying nearly a third of their income All good points. And I dont believe its anything more than a grab for more revenue. but the bill tabled has this in it. https://money.com/fair-tax-act-national-sales-tax/#:~:text=In everyday practice%2C the national,23% — not 30%. "The framework also provides for a monthly universal "prebate," in which Americans would receive a check from the government equivalent to 23% of the cost of living at the federal poverty line. This provision was designed to offset tax for the basic necessities and assist lower-income families." Seems that if people realized this plan came with a Check from the feds every month, if it would have more support!!! from a PR standpoint. and addresses the questions you had about folks on SS. The hard part about the povery in urban vs rural is complex. Farming has been dying for decades. Cities have great wealth, and great poverty all in one. Seems everyone has a different definition of what Rural is to Urban 1
Pokebball Posted June 12, 2023 Posted June 12, 2023 1 minute ago, BillStime said: Someone explain to Billsy that the Corps getting tax cuts from the GOP are the same Corps getting tax cuts from the Dems. Who do you think Billsy thinks is developing non fossil fuel alternatives? 1 1
SoCal Deek Posted June 12, 2023 Posted June 12, 2023 6 minutes ago, Pokebball said: Someone explain to Billsy that the Corps getting tax cuts from the GOP are the same Corps getting tax cuts from the Dems. Who do you think Billsy thinks is developing non fossil fuel alternatives? Corporations paying or not paying taxes is just more divisive chatter for the masses. Taxation should occur at the personal, not corporate level.
Recommended Posts