YOU MUST READ!!!! - Page 4

Silverado · 08-07-2007, 08:06 PM

I agree with a "consumption tax" as you call it, only I'd call it sales tax. However, you have to eliminate a couple things first. Get rid of all income tax, social security, and welfare. Then a consumption tax is realistic. Everyone then controls the amount of taxes that they pay. If you don't want to pay taxes, don't buy anything. Not realistic, so if you don't want to pay higher taxes, then don't buy Tahoes and 3000sqft houses.

If you just add a consumption tax like you propose, then you are taxing people twice on the same dollars and that already happens too often (IRA contributions, captial gains tax, estate tax, etc). But, that's probably okay with you. It sounds like you just want the rich to pay more and the less rich to pay less. Why can't everyone just pay their fair share and let it be?

Okay, not really feasible (too many "need-to-feel-good-so-take-money-from-those-who-work-for-it-to-give-to-those-who-are-too-lazy-to-work-for-it" people in the positions of power). So make income tax a flat 15% (10% Federal and 5% State...those are valid numbers by the way, Forbes proved it awhile back that 11% would actually be enough, but say 15% for arguments sake). Of course, those taxes should only go to pay for things outlined in the constitution (like the defense of the country, I would include infrastructure as well). Cut out paying for welfare and almost all of these social programs. Make everyone pay 15% right off the top and again, you have everyone paying their own fair share meanwhile everyone has more of their own money in their own pockets....meaning more of us could afford to buy the top dog Camaro and kick the crap out of the Mustangs and Ricers on the road.

*Mr. Wyndham* · 08-07-2007, 09:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverado

Okay, not really feasible (too many "need-to-feel-good-so-take-money-from-those-who-work-for-it-to-give-to-those-who-are-too-lazy-to-work-for-it" people in the positions of power). So make income tax a flat 15% (10% Federal and 5% State...those are valid numbers by the way, Forbes proved it awhile back that 11% would actually be enough, but say 15% for arguments sake). Of course, those taxes should only go to pay for things outlined in the constitution (like the defense of the country, I would include infrastructure as well). Cut out paying for welfare and almost all of these social programs. Make everyone pay 15% right off the top and again, you have everyone paying their own fair share meanwhile everyone has more of their own money in their own pockets....meaning more of us could afford to buy the top dog Camaro and kick the crap out of the Mustangs and Ricers on the road.

I wouldn't want to make the Rich pay more simply because they're rich. But maybe have a cut off. I mean; the really poor wouldn't be able to pay a 15% tax that comes so easily to the rich. So. Maybe anybody with a family and an income under 10,000 have them pay 50% the tax or something. Then anybody who makes over 150,000 k a year, make 'em pay a little more. Don't squeeze them to death, but maybe 175% of the tax. 15% really isn't that unreasonable. isn't the current federal, like 30% !?!? The only trouble would be health care, and welfare. But if you have more money to yourself, and you were forced to pay for your own social security, There would undoubtedly sprout competing companys - which could end up having people pay less then you would have for government coverage.

I guess what I'm saying, is that when it comes to government - there needs to be less of it.

If the government was smaller, we wouldn't have to pay so much for it.

I am by no means an expert on this matter, but we need to revamp a few things if we're to turn this country around. First and Foremost: Get Bush the Hell outta office. We've had enough as a country. 20% aproval rating? Um, time to go. I wish Congress would just impeach him already. there are so many things they could get him on, too. But if he just leaves somehow...that's good enough. COME QUICKER, 2008!!

Silverado · 08-07-2007, 10:01 PM

I agree Dragon, regarding government, we need less of it. Going back to the flat rate tax, it was studied and proven that with a flat tax (since you wouldn't have to file any tax returns, etc), you could get rid of something like 80-85% of the IRS. Talk about reduction. I'm no expert either, but I'd bet there are other huge reductions that could be made.

I like your comment about the companies that would sprout up and create competition, thus decreasing prices.

Now, while I get that you don't like Bush, you can't honestly blame this mess that the country is in solely on him. Realistically, the president doesn't have as much power as the people think. Congress is really who's to blame for so much of this mess. On smaller scales, parents are to blame for not teaching their kids properly, but that's a whole other thread I'm sure.

I agree I want 2K8 to get here sooner, but not because of the election/Bush leaving office, because the Camaros will be out shortly thereafter, and afterall, isn't that why we're all here?

*Mr. Wyndham* · 08-07-2007, 10:21 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverado

Now, while I get that you don't like Bush, you can't honestly blame this mess that the country is in solely on him. Realistically, the president doesn't have as much power as the people think. Congress is really who's to blame for so much of this mess. On smaller scales, parents are to blame for not teaching their kids properly, but that's a whole other thread I'm sure.

No, no. I don't blame the Whole mess on him. I blame 50%+ of all problems in this country on him and his administration. My Big thing is that we had a surplus of money in our nation before he came along; Now we're in 8 trillion dollars + of debt...

Another argument for another time...

Quote:

Originally Posted by Silverado

I agree I want 2K8 to get here sooner, but not because of the election/Bush leaving office, because the Camaros will be out shortly thereafter, and afterall, isn't that why we're all here?

Nice!

I agree with that.

That's Exaclty Why We're here!

Though...only Camaro guys can have an intelligent discussion of this caliber...

MerF · 08-08-2007, 09:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dragoneye

I wouldn't want to make the Rich pay more simply because they're rich. But maybe have a cut off. I mean; the really poor wouldn't be able to pay a 15% tax that comes so easily to the rich.

15% of $400 is $60.

15% of $10,000 is $1,500.

So if the rich and poor guy are both buying an engagement ring for their future wives, and the rich guy can afford a ring 80x more expensive, then he's got a huge tax compared to the poor guy. Likewise the poor guy is feeling the bite of HIS tax becasue it's a PERCENTAGE of the value, not based on your status.

Equally shitty.

Now when it comes down to daily amenities, there's more to be done about it.

SSMUFF · 08-08-2007, 10:40 AM

What I was saying was getting rid of all sales tax and everything esle we have now and go to a full Consumption Tax. Just think if you were to go out and buy that 3000 sf house what the tax revenue would be??? or that Hummer with 24's!! You would consider buying one car and keeping it for 10 yrs, one house for 50 yrs and so forth just so you wouldn't have to pay such high taxes.

Seriously though the rich need to pay more for what they spend on luxury items and all there toys.

I have one kid soon to have 2, 3 dogs and a wife. I drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee and that is as big as we go. There is NO need to have a 3 seater Expledition to haul around a few kids and some soccer balls.

I guess when I see all these Mcmansions going up and the foreclosure rate we have that maybe there is a problem. STATUS and KEEPING UP WITH THE JONES is gotten to a point that is going to hurt the US.

Oh and another thing to think about is why do the people with health insurance have to fear going to the doctor when they pay $100+ a month for insurance yet the low class non working can get health care for free???

Wonder why the health care system in America is shit??

Silverado · 08-08-2007, 11:07 AM

Seriously though the rich need to pay more for what they spend on luxury items and all there toys.

Why should the rich pay more than anyone else? Just because they can? So, some guy or gal goes out and works his or her tail off to earn a lot of money so they can afford to buy the things they want, the house they want, whatever they want, and you think they should pay more for it just because they have the money?

Sorry, but that's bull. If a guy making 10K a year wants to save up to buy a Hummer (probably not going to happen, but I've seen stupider things) and another guy making 100K a year wants to buy the same Hummer, it should cost the same amount. The guy making 100K shouldn't have to pay more for it just because he can.

You mention "all there toys" (it's their by the way). They only have those "toys" because they worked hard enough to earn the money to buy them (yes, I know that there are rich people who haven't worked for it...inherited, lottery winners, etc, but they are a small percentage of the rich). The not-so-rich don't have all those toys because they are still taking care of needs, not wants.

You imply that you "only drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee". Assuming it's less than 20 years old, a JGC is a pretty nice vehicle. Assuming you've had it longer than you've had kids, it was way more vehicle than you needed then, so why did you have it? If you got it after having kids, then it's far newer than 20 years old, and it's a very nice vehicle. Even with 2 kids, it's still way more vehicle than you need, so why do you have it? Maybe because you wanted it? Exactly.

What it boils down to is that everyone should pay their fair share. It will never be equal dollars for dollar, but it should be the same percentage across the board, whether you make $100 or $100K.

Honestly, there should be no income tax (it was supposed to be temporary anyway), no social security, none of that. Sales tax should be higher, and then if need be, there should be a "Luxury tax" on items that cost more than $100K. Actually, that number should be higher so that more not-so-rich people could buy a house without getting hit with a luxury tax.

Oh, on the topic of houses, the foreclosure rate you mention is so high because lenders keep letting people who can't afford it to borrow too much money. We have too many feel-good people in the world that say you can't deny someone a loan because it will make them feel bad about themselves, so give it to them even if they can't afford it. Similar issue....when I was working at the Lexus dealer, the finance guy told me that 51% of the people buying the cars couldn't afford them, but the lenders kept approving them for loans. You know what, when someone tells you that you are approved for a loan, that leads you to believe that you can afford it. While a lot of that blame falls on the lenders, some of it still falls on the people themselves for not taking the time and responsibility to figure it out on their own.

SSMUFF · 08-08-2007, 11:26 AM

Sorry, but that's bull. If a guy making 10K a year wants to save up to buy a Hummer (probably not going to happen, but I've seen stupider things) and another guy making 100K a year wants to buy the same Hummer, it should cost the same amount. The guy making 100K shouldn't have to pay more for it just because he can.

It would be and I am not sure where it said it wasn't? Consumption tax would equal the same for rich or poor, black or white!

Read up on how consumption taxs works before you assume that people would not be taxed the same. You pay for things you buy! So the more you buy the more taxes you pay! HENCE the rich would pay more since they spend more!

I earned what I have but I also dont think my 2004 Grand Cherokee is anything to brag about! I consider myself a smart bargin shopper. I drove off the lot new in '04 with 54 miles on that bitch for a grand total of $19,800!

So since I shopped around, waited til the price was right you assume I spent the $30K MSRP price??

Silverado · 08-08-2007, 11:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SSMUFF

It would be and I am not sure where it said it wasn't? Consumption tax would equal the same for rich or poor, black or white!

Read up on how consumption taxs works before you assume that people would not be taxed the same. You pay for things you buy! So the more you buy the more taxes you pay! HENCE the rich would pay more since they spend more!

I earned what I have but I also dont think my 2004 Grand Cherokee is anything to brag about! I consider myself a smart bargin shopper. I drove off the lot new in '04 with 54 miles on that bitch for a grand total of $19,800!

So since I shopped around, waited til the price was right you assume I spent the $30K MSRP price??

I know "Consumption Tax" should be equal, but I was referring to your comment in your previous post ("Seriously though the rich need to pay more for what they spend on luxury items and all there toys."). It sounded as if you thought there should be a difference.

I didn't make any assumptions about what you paid for your 04 Jeep and it doesn't matter. I merely said that it was a nice vehicle, and that it was more than you needed. Which was all in response to your comments about not needing a 3rd seat Expedition to haul around a couple kids and some soccer balls. Since all you're hauling is a couple kids, a Corrolla or even a Fit would work for you, but you wanted a Jeep, so you bought a Jeep. Does that mean you're trying to keep up with the Jones? No, it means you wanted it. You worked for it, you earned it, and you negotiated a great deal on it. Good for you.

AirGoya · 08-08-2007, 01:54 PM

Im glad this thread is getting so many posts but i think we are getting off track. Because i have no idea what you guys are talking about.

MerF · 08-08-2007, 02:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AirGoya

Im glad this thread is getting so many posts but i think we are getting off track. Because i have no idea what you guys are talking about.

I literally LOL'd.

Now, on with the heated discussion!

SSMUFF · 08-08-2007, 02:39 PM

I am done.

MerF · 08-08-2007, 03:50 PM

SSMUFF · 08-08-2007, 05:58 PM

Well...................

A honda fit is enough for me? Did you not read the 3 ****ing dogs I have along with my family? I was 24 when I bought that Jeep. Now that I am older and wiser I would agree in my statments and a new 2008 jetta wagen tdi will be enough for my small family!

Sorry just had the 300 in me!

08-08-2007, 01:54 PM	#52
AirGoya Drives: 2012 Camaro SS Join Date: Nov 2006 Location: Chicago/Carbondale Posts: 815	Im glad this thread is getting so many posts but i think we are getting off track. Because i have no idea what you guys are talking about. __________________ -Tim

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
5th Gen Camaro LS3 info from Chevy Hi-Po...READ	TAG UR IT	Camaro V8 LS3 / L99 Engine, Exhaust, and Bolt-Ons	295	03-07-2008 11:06 AM
Mark As Read	Urthman	Site Related Announcements / Suggestions / Feedback / Questions	3	03-27-2007 03:33 PM
Early release plausible when you read this...	rray200	5th Gen Camaro SS LS LT General Discussions	22	02-01-2007 02:00 PM
Interesting read on American cars and trucks......	fbodfather	General Automotive + Other Cars Discussion	8	12-22-2006 09:47 PM

08-07-2007, 08:06 PM	#43
Silverado GM Guy For Life Drives: 2010 GMC Yukon XL Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 971 View My Garage	I agree with a "consumption tax" as you call it, only I'd call it sales tax. However, you have to eliminate a couple things first. Get rid of all income tax, social security, and welfare. Then a consumption tax is realistic. Everyone then controls the amount of taxes that they pay. If you don't want to pay taxes, don't buy anything. Not realistic, so if you don't want to pay higher taxes, then don't buy Tahoes and 3000sqft houses. If you just add a consumption tax like you propose, then you are taxing people twice on the same dollars and that already happens too often (IRA contributions, captial gains tax, estate tax, etc). But, that's probably okay with you. It sounds like you just want the rich to pay more and the less rich to pay less. Why can't everyone just pay their fair share and let it be? Okay, not really feasible (too many "need-to-feel-good-so-take-money-from-those-who-work-for-it-to-give-to-those-who-are-too-lazy-to-work-for-it" people in the positions of power). So make income tax a flat 15% (10% Federal and 5% State...those are valid numbers by the way, Forbes proved it awhile back that 11% would actually be enough, but say 15% for arguments sake). Of course, those taxes should only go to pay for things outlined in the constitution (like the defense of the country, I would include infrastructure as well). Cut out paying for welfare and almost all of these social programs. Make everyone pay 15% right off the top and again, you have everyone paying their own fair share meanwhile everyone has more of their own money in their own pockets....meaning more of us could afford to buy the top dog Camaro and kick the crap out of the Mustangs and Ricers on the road.

08-07-2007, 10:01 PM	#45
Silverado GM Guy For Life Drives: 2010 GMC Yukon XL Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 971 View My Garage	I agree Dragon, regarding government, we need less of it. Going back to the flat rate tax, it was studied and proven that with a flat tax (since you wouldn't have to file any tax returns, etc), you could get rid of something like 80-85% of the IRS. Talk about reduction. I'm no expert either, but I'd bet there are other huge reductions that could be made. I like your comment about the companies that would sprout up and create competition, thus decreasing prices. Now, while I get that you don't like Bush, you can't honestly blame this mess that the country is in solely on him. Realistically, the president doesn't have as much power as the people think. Congress is really who's to blame for so much of this mess. On smaller scales, parents are to blame for not teaching their kids properly, but that's a whole other thread I'm sure. I agree I want 2K8 to get here sooner, but not because of the election/Bush leaving office, because the Camaros will be out shortly thereafter, and afterall, isn't that why we're all here?

08-08-2007, 10:40 AM	#48
SSMUFF Drives: Jeep Grand Cherokee Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 65	What I was saying was getting rid of all sales tax and everything esle we have now and go to a full Consumption Tax. Just think if you were to go out and buy that 3000 sf house what the tax revenue would be??? or that Hummer with 24's!! You would consider buying one car and keeping it for 10 yrs, one house for 50 yrs and so forth just so you wouldn't have to pay such high taxes. Seriously though the rich need to pay more for what they spend on luxury items and all there toys. I have one kid soon to have 2, 3 dogs and a wife. I drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee and that is as big as we go. There is NO need to have a 3 seater Expledition to haul around a few kids and some soccer balls. I guess when I see all these Mcmansions going up and the foreclosure rate we have that maybe there is a problem. STATUS and KEEPING UP WITH THE JONES is gotten to a point that is going to hurt the US. Oh and another thing to think about is why do the people with health insurance have to fear going to the doctor when they pay $100+ a month for insurance yet the low class non working can get health care for free??? Wonder why the health care system in America is shit??

08-08-2007, 11:07 AM	#49
Silverado GM Guy For Life Drives: 2010 GMC Yukon XL Join Date: Apr 2007 Location: Omaha, NE Posts: 971 View My Garage	Seriously though the rich need to pay more for what they spend on luxury items and all there toys. Why should the rich pay more than anyone else? Just because they can? So, some guy or gal goes out and works his or her tail off to earn a lot of money so they can afford to buy the things they want, the house they want, whatever they want, and you think they should pay more for it just because they have the money? Sorry, but that's bull. If a guy making 10K a year wants to save up to buy a Hummer (probably not going to happen, but I've seen stupider things) and another guy making 100K a year wants to buy the same Hummer, it should cost the same amount. The guy making 100K shouldn't have to pay more for it just because he can. You mention "all there toys" (it's their by the way). They only have those "toys" because they worked hard enough to earn the money to buy them (yes, I know that there are rich people who haven't worked for it...inherited, lottery winners, etc, but they are a small percentage of the rich). The not-so-rich don't have all those toys because they are still taking care of needs, not wants. You imply that you "only drive a Jeep Grand Cherokee". Assuming it's less than 20 years old, a JGC is a pretty nice vehicle. Assuming you've had it longer than you've had kids, it was way more vehicle than you needed then, so why did you have it? If you got it after having kids, then it's far newer than 20 years old, and it's a very nice vehicle. Even with 2 kids, it's still way more vehicle than you need, so why do you have it? Maybe because you wanted it? Exactly. What it boils down to is that everyone should pay their fair share. It will never be equal dollars for dollar, but it should be the same percentage across the board, whether you make $100 or $100K. Honestly, there should be no income tax (it was supposed to be temporary anyway), no social security, none of that. Sales tax should be higher, and then if need be, there should be a "Luxury tax" on items that cost more than $100K. Actually, that number should be higher so that more not-so-rich people could buy a house without getting hit with a luxury tax. Oh, on the topic of houses, the foreclosure rate you mention is so high because lenders keep letting people who can't afford it to borrow too much money. We have too many feel-good people in the world that say you can't deny someone a loan because it will make them feel bad about themselves, so give it to them even if they can't afford it. Similar issue....when I was working at the Lexus dealer, the finance guy told me that 51% of the people buying the cars couldn't afford them, but the lenders kept approving them for loans. You know what, when someone tells you that you are approved for a loan, that leads you to believe that you can afford it. While a lot of that blame falls on the lenders, some of it still falls on the people themselves for not taking the time and responsibility to figure it out on their own.

08-08-2007, 11:26 AM	#50
SSMUFF Drives: Jeep Grand Cherokee Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 65	Sorry, but that's bull. If a guy making 10K a year wants to save up to buy a Hummer (probably not going to happen, but I've seen stupider things) and another guy making 100K a year wants to buy the same Hummer, it should cost the same amount. The guy making 100K shouldn't have to pay more for it just because he can. It would be and I am not sure where it said it wasn't? Consumption tax would equal the same for rich or poor, black or white! Read up on how consumption taxs works before you assume that people would not be taxed the same. You pay for things you buy! So the more you buy the more taxes you pay! HENCE the rich would pay more since they spend more! I earned what I have but I also dont think my 2004 Grand Cherokee is anything to brag about! I consider myself a smart bargin shopper. I drove off the lot new in '04 with 54 miles on that bitch for a grand total of $19,800! So since I shopped around, waited til the price was right you assume I spent the $30K MSRP price??

08-08-2007, 02:39 PM	#54
SSMUFF Drives: Jeep Grand Cherokee Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 65	I am done.

08-08-2007, 03:50 PM	#55
MerF Go Rays! Drives: 03 Trailblazer Join Date: May 2007 Location: St Pete, Florida Posts: 2,532

08-08-2007, 05:58 PM	#56
SSMUFF Drives: Jeep Grand Cherokee Join Date: Aug 2007 Location: Kansas Posts: 65	Well................... A honda fit is enough for me? Did you not read the 3 ****ing dogs I have along with my family? I was 24 when I bought that Jeep. Now that I am older and wiser I would agree in my statments and a new 2008 jetta wagen tdi will be enough for my small family! Sorry just had the 300 in me!