Yeah I am not opposed to it by anymeans. I just think that cutting spending is more important than any other thing in terms of reducing the tax burden on americans and also pointing out that Sales tax is not perfect by anymeans also. With all that being said, i would probably perfer a a sales tax assuming it was not phased in as the income tax was phased out. The only exception i think needs to be made is old people should be given the choice of paying an income tax and getting a card exempting them from sales tax. Seems grossly unfair to tax a persons income all their life and then when they retire start taxing them on spending that income, when most people live with either one or the other.
On Fri, 3 Dec 2004 01:10:11 -0800, Lowell C. Savage <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I agree that a sales tax has various problems--compliance issues probably > being the largest. But there is one overriding attraction. Privacy. Yes, > the IRS is not supposed to reveal to anyone what is in your tax return. > Supposedly, you should be able to list your occupation as "Thief" or > "Illegal Drug Smuggler" and list the sources of your income as coming from > various illegal activities. But we all know that it doesn't always work out > that way, and sometimes even people who are innocent (according to the law) > are caught up in problems or have their privacy violated. > > I don't know if that attraction is enough to override the various problems > people are raising. But it is something to consider. > > Lowell C. Savage > It's the freedom, stupid! > Gun control: tyrants' tool, fools' folly. > > Travis Pahl wrote, in part: > > > > > These figures are not representative of the median taxpayer. Most > > > of this cost comes from corporate intities that spend inordinate > > > amounts of money to avoid paying a lot of taxes that they > > > otherwise would. I personally for example, spend about $20.00 a > > > year in computer software updates to prepare my tax return for > > > both state and federal taxes. The time involved, if paperwork is > > > handy, is only a few short hours of my time. Ford or General > > > Motors have their own tax experts, tax attorneys, and personnel > > > who attend to tax matters on a daily basis throughout the year. > > > > Perhaps not the median tax payer, but there are a large group of > > people that do pay far more than 20 dollars and a few hours. Last > > year I spent about 20 dollars and spent about 16 hours on taxes for > > myself and my wife. Granted some was NY state and NYC income tax (yes > > NYC has an income tax). But alot of it was just because my wife is > > now self employed. There are millions of self employed people out > > there that hate taxes just because of the time spent. Also although > > it is less direct, those corporate taxes that Ford pays people full > > time to attend to costs every ford owner money. That is part of the > > reason that I think rearranging taxes is not all that useful. In the > > end we as a society are still paying roughly the same amount, just at > > different times and at different places. is one way better than the > > other? probably, but that is like deciding which person it would be > > best to sacrifice rather than figuring out a way to avoid sacrificing > > people. > > > > > That assumes all things are equal, which they are not. It also > > > assumes that all of the above tax schemes would be abolished and > > > replaced by one national sales tax. That concept isn't set in > > > concrete either. What about payments to Social Security, > > > Medicare, and Medicaid, worker compensation and retirement > > > schemes? Would, or could a national sales tax cover all of that > > > at a 25% tax rate? > > > > Probably not. Republicans generally like to pretend that SS and > > medicare are not income taxes because even though they are taxes on > > income. They have a different name for it. > > > > > This assumption is the heighth of stupidity and absurdity! This > > > does NOT address the real issue of taxation, and why taxation is > > > necessary -- in other words, it doesn't deal with the spending > > > restraints necessary to really lower taxation and the cost of > > > government. All of the boondoggles listed above, plus many more, > > > are continuing to increase in cost at a time when no one > > > seriously wishes to remove or decrease government spending in > > > these areas. > > > > Exactly! This might buy us a little time in saving in administration > > costs and maybe helping the economy, but the real problem is still > > there. Of course the Republicans would showcase their solution as > > proof they are for smaller government, and people would continue to > > defend them, even though I doubt they will ever decrease spending (and > > thus create a smaller government). > > > > > Now that's a stretch! Would you suppose maybe that those in the > > > underground economy haven't already thought through all of this? > > > Of course they have! Personal consumption spending can also take > > > place in an underground economy. I used to buy my whole raw milk > > > directly from a local farmer without paying the already in place > > > state sales tax! > > > > I would go further and say that more transactions are not reported to > > the government than paychecks. > > > > Travis > > _______________________________________________ > > Libnw mailing list > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > List info and subscriber options: > > http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw > > Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw > > _______________________________________________ > Libnw mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw > Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw > _______________________________________________ Libnw mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] List info and subscriber options: http://immosys.com/mailman/listinfo/libnw Archives: http://immosys.com/mailman//pipermail/libnw
