Erollisi Marr - The Nameless

Go Back   Erollisi Marr - The Nameless > NON EQ Stuff (Real life, other games, etc.) > Steam Vent

Add/Share Add/Share Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-26-2004, 09:44 AM   #26
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Texas
Posts: 1,140
Just raising the minimum
8.25% is already the max

Shouldn't really affect people paying 8.25% already
I would like to extend to you an invitation to the pants party.
Deadscale is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2004, 04:55 PM   #27
Zolmaz Zo'Boto
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Texas
Posts: 3,040
I have the solution.

Tax all food 20%. TA-DA! And make it a Worldwide tax.. Droool
I'll bet you liberal-socialists are just drooling over the prospect of that one huh.

People must eat. It's a given. A forceable tax on Everyone yes?
Oh screw the poor. Their bread only costs a dollah. It's the rich people
that buy the good stuff. Make the rich pay now! And not at the checkout,
oh no. Lets make them pay by saying it's a tax incentive and raid their homes.

Yea, thats it. We'll hire government spies to watch the checkout stands
and send them sorry rich people a bill later. By um, hmm, got-it. By making
all supermarkets use their own cards. Yea, and you can only pay by credit card. EURIKA! I LOVE THE IDEA. Don't you? *cough kroger*

Oh and you poor people? sorry, but the socialist
experiment must be tried and tried again untill they get it right.
Wait a second. If your so poor how can you read this on the internet>?
Library? We'll fix that! Burn all books with any conservative veiwpoint! Done.

Now the poor can't see whats really going on because they cannot afford cable.

Huh? They'll steal cable? Then we shall impose the death penalty for stealing

Huh? Now their stealing food? Then impose the death penalty for stealing
anything. And Any acusation of stealing will result in death. period!
Just like England did. And it solved all of their criminal problems.

Freedom has a price, but not at the cost of FREEDOM!

God Bless AmeriKa
God Bless our Amerikan Socialist Nuklear armed Forces
God Bless our Amerikan feminist movement and their anarchists
Zolmaz Zo'Boto is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2004, 06:06 AM   #28
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: La La Land
Posts: 1,930
Originally Posted by Valleycrest
Yeah, in functionality, it is the same. But 8.25% is a lot different then 30% or more sales tax.
You're right, it's not. What fairy land did you pull the 30% figure from? I said Australia's sales tax, not Norway's or Denmark's.

Australia's GST is a flat 10% IIRC.

Edit: I am being to mean to both Norway and Denmark. Norway's tax is only 24% and Denmark's 25%


Last edited by Ulujain; 04-27-2004 at 06:11 AM. Reason: Had to get my facts right.
Ulujain is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2004, 11:27 AM   #29
Defrocked Irish priest
Valleycrest's Avatar
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 659
Originally Posted by Ulujain
What fairy land did you pull the 30% figure from?
I explained this already, but you might have missed it. I said about 30% or possibly more depending on each state and county's sales tax. I got my info from this thread

The Fair Tax Proposal was suggesting an income tax rate of 23%. Add that to the state and county sales tax of 8.25% mentioned earlier in this thread and voila, a sales tax greater than 30%. A 10% total consumption tax in lieu of an income tax is damn irresponsible and unrealistic. 30% or more is about what I'd expect to take the place of a federal income tax. Don't forget your state would still get a shot at your income, they're not bound to follow federal standards.

Also, Zaniel describes a situation where he would have to pay 48.5% of his total income to the government. In this instance, 30% is a very conservative number. The 10% consumption tax that you pay is not the only tax apparently. You do have an income tax that you pay, correct? Apparently, we aren't talking about the same thing because I'm discussing the inadequecy of having a high sales tax in lieu of a federal income tax. You are describing a federal sales tax and a federal income tax. The two systems are not comparable. Imagine paying no income tax, and paying 30%, 40%, maybe almost 50% (to support the extensive government programs you have), you still think this will have no effect on the economy?
Valleycrest is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-28-2004, 07:32 PM   #30
Registered User
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 357
This is why you need to look at a practical example. Our GST is 10% but you don't need to increase consumption tax by 1% to reduce income tax by 1%. Well, strictly speaking in a purely theoretical model you would but that's why practical examples are needed. Due to evasion & inefficiencies in the income tax model at least for the first 10-20% you get more bang for your buck.

When the system was being introduced I believe some models were presented that resulted in something like a 20-25% GST meaning you could scrap 100% of income tax. Don't ask me to find those models, it was years ago and I'd never be able to dig them out of whatever isolated government department they are hiding in.
Zaniel Stormseeker
Zaniel is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-29-2004, 04:23 AM   #31
Stop that rhyming!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Beaumont, TX
Posts: 253
Send a message via AIM to Aelain
I don't suppose any of you own a house? If a national sales tax or any kind of flat tax without deductions were introduced, one of the main reasons for home ownership would go BYE-BYE which would slow housing starts and kill the economy.

I live in Texas. Assuming real estate taxes would go away (mine were almost 5k last year, every bit deductible) I would still lose out on deductible interest, which was almost 2k. I went from a rent of $460 to house payments of $1560 and didn't feel it as much as you would think because I was able to file a revised W-4 which decreaed my withholding. I am STILL getting a refund of over 2k which will go into my somewhat depleted savings account.

Don't underestimate what removing tax deductions would do. It would kill charities if people couldn't deduct their contributions in some way, because most people wouldn't contribute. How many of you know that emploer-deducted health insurance premiums are now pre-tax? At least, they are for government employees. 401k's would become moot, thereby further taxing (no pun intended) the Social Security System. Real estate in general would suffer.

Tax shelters are a way of life in this country. Sure, some people abuse them, and some people avoid taxes altogether, but for law-abiding citizens, they are necessary.
Aelain, wizard
Aelain is offline   Reply With Quote

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not 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

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -8. The time now is 07:29 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.