TX's

Discussion in 'Politics' started by wpe3bql, Jun 10, 2015.

  1. wpe3bql

    wpe3bql
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2015
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    12
    No, not the state that gave us JR Ewing, "W," Rick ("I forgot!") Perry, etc., ad nauseum.

    I'm referring to that favorite subject of about 99.999% of those who post/peruse the hallowed pages of BB.

    You guessed it.......One of Benny Franklin's two certainties.

    Dem thar' taxes.

    Now, I'm fairly certain that some (unnamed to protect the guilty) individuals here on BB believe that their Nirvana is funded by the above-mentioned, but allow me these 2nd Amendment-protected rants.

    Just why is it that the IRS punishes those whom God has called to remain single for his/her entire life by stealing a MUCH LARGER percentage of his/her income??

    Seems to me that if single person X makes X amount of $$$, why then MUST he/she hand over MORE than a married couple filing jointly does??

    Please cite specific, relevant Book(s), Chapter(s), and Verse(s) in Holy Writ that support that notion.

    Moreover, why must the citizens of this beloved Republic even HAVE an income tax at all????

    Wouldn't a "National Sales Tax" be a more equitable means of funding every level of our various governments?

    Why, or why not?

    Please explain in detail your reason(s) for supporting and/or defending this kind of tax.























    PS--Please don't waste BB's bandwidth by hitting the QUOTE button in your replies. We've got more than enough of that already on BB.
     
  2. Rolfe

    Rolfe
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    May 17, 2014
    Messages:
    5,294
    Likes Received:
    391
    You meant First Amendment? :)
     
  3. JonC

    JonC
    Expand Collapse
    Lifelong Disciple
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2001
    Messages:
    6,935
    Likes Received:
    369
    I have always wondered about this. It seems that the Federal Government should be able to tax states, but not individuals. States, and not individuals, should be represented at the federal level (and ultimately, I think that it works out that way.....to an extent) with individuals represented at a state level. Individual taxes should be regulated by and paid to the state. But the federal government has bought out states with excess funding (states have positioned themselves so that they are dependent on federal funds).

    First Amendment, Second Amendment....whatever it takes. :smilewinkgrin:
     
  4. wpe3bql

    wpe3bql
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2015
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    12
    The Tenth and the Fifth(!) might be added to the list. And, of course, the Sixteenth Amendment needs to be declared null and void [Retroactively would be fine with me!] post haste!! :thumbsup:
     
  5. InTheLight

    InTheLight
    Expand Collapse
    Well-Known Member

    Joined:
    Dec 17, 2010
    Messages:
    16,194
    Likes Received:
    611
    The marriage tax deduction was created to give a tax incentive for people to get married. Simple. Instead of having people shack up temporarily, especially if they have children, the government wants them to be married.

    The national sales tax, or consumption tax, is an intriguing idea. It has some advantages over the flat tax, but ultimately it would get bogged down in exceptions, loopholes, additional add-on legislation etc. For example, do you tax food? What about clothes? Wouldn't corporations lobby like crazy to get their products exempted from the tax? Would the burdensome sales tax on a house prevent people from becoming homeowners? Same question for new cars.

    At what percentage do you set the tax? I've heard anywhere from 17% to 24%. Why wouldn't that tax rate creep up in the future? Don't you have to give poor people a break on this tax? For example, at what income level does the tax become active? $30,000? $40,000?

    What's to stop the government from having a consumption tax AND an income tax? (Answer: Repeal the 16th amendment. Good luck with that.)

    The barter system would thrive under a national sales tax, as would cash transactions, as people try to evade the tax. Not to mention it would be the biggest tax cut for the wealthy in the history of the world.

    (And knowing you are an amateur radio operator, given the thread title, I thought the post was about radio transmissions.)
     
    #5 InTheLight, Jun 10, 2015
    Last edited by a moderator: Jun 10, 2015
  6. wpe3bql

    wpe3bql
    Expand Collapse
    Member

    Joined:
    May 15, 2015
    Messages:
    979
    Likes Received:
    12
    ITL: I know all about the reason(s) for the "Married - Filing Jointly" provision(s), and I don't per se condemn them.

    I also know that there are good conservative organizations who've come up with ways that on the surface seem to be a good way(s) to implement a national sales/consumption tax.

    And, I also know that once our Uncle Samuel (obviously no relation to the OT prophet) gets involved with just about everything, he'll invoke his father [that one who did a job on Job] to assist him.

    Oh well ............... :tonofbricks:

    PS- Technically I'm not a "ham" (not even a kosher one). You can PM me if you want to know why I currently go by WPE3BQL.
     
  7. Salty

    Salty
    Expand Collapse
    20,000 Posts Club
    Moderator

    Joined:
    Apr 8, 2003
    Messages:
    22,098
    Likes Received:
    218
    My understanding is that in the past the wife did not work - thus the deduction was to make up for her loss of income.

    But I do agree about fairness.

    Personally I endorse the Automatic Electronic Tax. All electronic transactions ( credit, checks) are taxed at an extremely low rate. No exemptions. The link states 5%, but I beleive it could be as low as 1/2 of 1%.

    But the real problee is NOT enough taxes - its too much spending.
    First, the federal govt is spending money for programs it has no constitutional right to be involved.

    Then lets looks at the local school level. We all love sports - but do you know how much it costs to field a high school football team? This link from 2011 says it is 230,000 dollars - but I wonder if that is the true cost. First, the unifiorms - including all the safety equipment -just the helmet itself can be $300 each!.
    Then the salary of the coaches, electricty to run the stadium lights, transporation to away games - sometimes 50 miles or more.
    ect ---all this money - and often only a small % of students actually participate. - Is that fair to non-athletic students?

    We need to cut spending at many levels
     

Share This Page

Loading...