Commented 14 years ago2010-08-11 06:31:25 UTCComment #47950
Depends on how you look at it, It's nice to suddenly get $1000 monies, but it's not that nice when you find out they actually stole it from you and now are just giving it back.
Commented 14 years ago2010-08-12 00:36:11 UTCComment #47945
A progressive one would be great if you could close up some loopholes (tax cuts/evasions, that is). Those who have more slush money then they know what to do with should pay more. Those at the bottom of the chain should pay some, but have enough that they can still enjoy themselves / have a chance at opportunity with their extra money.
I think the problem with a flat rate is that it might be too low. It wouldn't be as high as your 'more than some families make in a year' rate, but it wouldn't be free either. The government still needs to make money.
If its too high, then the uber-low making families wont be able to enjoy what little money they had to spare if they can pay it at all. There's no way to set some kind of flat-rate without excluding some people and giving the richer guys a slap on the hand. They would still be getting off comparatively easy.
A progressive one is the only way to go imo, but it should be overhauled a bit.
Commented 14 years ago2010-08-12 01:06:46 UTCComment #47954
While we're on the topic of taxes, The Spirit of '43 is one of my favourite Disney short films. Not because of its message (which is good) and I'm very much against government propaganda, but because of its style and tone.
Kidding. That must be a nice surprise.
Take the wife and kid out for a nice weekend trip somewhere
That's the whole reason why I formed my own corporation. I pay a lot less taxes that way.
All the mean while, the super-rich pay almost no taxes at all because they can afford to hire expensive lawyers and accountants to evade taxes.
I would love to have a flat rate tax system for this country.
I think the problem with a flat rate is that it might be too low. It wouldn't be as high as your 'more than some families make in a year' rate, but it wouldn't be free either. The government still needs to make money.
If its too high, then the uber-low making families wont be able to enjoy what little money they had to spare if they can pay it at all. There's no way to set some kind of flat-rate without excluding some people and giving the richer guys a slap on the hand. They would still be getting off comparatively easy.
A progressive one is the only way to go imo, but it should be overhauled a bit.