The "rich" needs a tax break

Squiggy

ThunderDick
Yes. I agree. You would have to make it across the board. I didn't mean to concur with Forbes, just the flat tax.
 

flavio

Banned
Jerrek said:
flavio said:
I thought you only worked part of the year and didn't even pay taxes?
You thought wrong.

And my parents pay taxes. Both of them. 45% That is such an encouragement knowing that the harder I'm going to work the more money the government is going to steal.

I thought wrong?

Really?

Maybe it's because in your first post you said:

Because I work only part of the year, I don't currently pay any federal taxes. I am forced to pay for Canadian Pension Plan and for Unemployment Insurance though. Grr.

So which is it?
 

Jeslek

Banned
outside looking in said:
Jerrek said:
Forbes suggested that those under $36,000 pay NO TAX at all. I can go with that. Those over that amount pay 17%. No matter how much you make, you pay 17%. The more you make, the more tax dollars you pay, but it doesn't go up exponentially. It will encourage people more than the current system to work harder and earn more.

OK, I'm all in favor of a flat tax, but the above suggestion is ludicrous.

If you make $35,000 a year you keep $35,000 a year.

If you make $36,000 a year you keep $29,880 a year.

:confuse3:

In fact, you'd have to make $43,375 to keep the same amount as someone making $35,000.

:retard5:

No, you have three choices:

(1) A flat tax across the board

(2) A linear tax across the board

(3) A linear tax up to some point, and it's flat from thereon.

I'd vote for number (1) first, and number (3) next, with (3) being the closest to what we have in the US currently.

Whoever said we should have a flat tax and fix the loopholes had it right.
Um dude, if you make $36,000 you would pay 17% on $1,000. If you made $70,000, you would pay 17% on $35,000....
 

Jeslek

Banned
flavio said:
Jerrek said:
flavio said:
I thought you only worked part of the year and didn't even pay taxes?
You thought wrong.

And my parents pay taxes. Both of them. 45% That is such an encouragement knowing that the harder I'm going to work the more money the government is going to steal.

I thought wrong?

Really?

Maybe it's because in your first post you said:

Because I work only part of the year, I don't currently pay any federal taxes. I am forced to pay for Canadian Pension Plan and for Unemployment Insurance though. Grr.

So which is it?
Ever heard of co-op? It is a way of working full time part of the year. I work full time. Part of the year. Not too hard to comprehend, eh?
 

outside looking in

<b>Registered Member</b>
Jerrek said:
Um dude, if you make $36,000 you would pay 17% on $1,000. If you made $70,000, you would pay 17% on $35,000....
Then your original statement was just poorly worded.

Jerrek said:
Forbes suggested that those under $36,000 pay NO TAX at all.
OK, that part is clear enough. Under $36,000, zero tax.

Those over that amount pay 17%. No matter how much you make, you pay 17%.
I guess I missed the part where you said 17% on the portion in excess of $35,000. You said pay 17%, not stipulations, no qualifiers, just pay 17% if you make $36,000 or better.

But I'd be fine with what you meant to say. That's option (3) I outlined previously, and it's the way the US tax system is supposed to work, albeit with different percentages and different exempt and flat tax points (corresponding to the $35,000 and $70,000 in what Forbes proposed - if I'm not mistaken, those points are currently at, what, roughly $6000 and $300,000?).
 

Jeslek

Banned
Then your original statement was just poorly worded.
Well sorry about that. English is my third language and sometimes I don't make myself clear, but I am working on that. Thanks.

"different flat tax points" lol
 

flavio

Banned
Ever heard of co-op? It is a way of working full time part of the year. I work full time. Part of the year. Not too hard to comprehend, eh?

What's hard to comprehend is what you meant by "You thought wrong".

So what did you mean?
 

Jeslek

Banned
flavio said:
Ever heard of co-op? It is a way of working full time part of the year. I work full time. Part of the year. Not too hard to comprehend, eh?

What's hard to comprehend is what you meant by "You thought wrong".

So what did you mean?
Are you daft? I said up there I pay EI and CPP...:confuse2:
 

flavio

Banned
You pay Canadian Pension Plan and Unemployment Insurance. I got that part.

So when I said "I thought you only work part of the year and don't pay taxes" it sounds like that was true.

And by saying "You thought wrong" you actually meant "You are correct sir".

I think I'm catching on here but it's a little tricky with all the fog you throw in.

So how much of the year do you work? When you said "I am a stull time student, and I work full time too." does that mean simultaneously? From my understanding co-ops aren't usually run that way.
 

Jeslek

Banned
It doesn't... I alternate 4 months. :) But institutions consider me a full time student, even when I work, and they also consider me a full time worker, even when I study. In a year, I work either 8 months (this past year I did), or 4 months (2003 I will only work 4 months). 2004 I will work 8 months again.
 

flavio

Banned
So when I said "I thought you only work part of the year and don't pay taxes" it sounds like that was true.

And by saying "You thought wrong" you actually meant "You are correct sir".

So I assume that above is cleared up now too?

Are your words intentionally misleading or is it something you just can't help?
 

Jeslek

Banned
flavio said:
So when I said "I thought you only work part of the year and don't pay taxes" it sounds like that was true.

And by saying "You thought wrong" you actually meant "You are correct sir".

So I assume that above is cleared up now too?

Are your words intentionally misleading or is it something you just can't help?
Um you really don't make sense. You said "don't pay taxes", and I said you thought wrong, because I do pay EI and CPP.
 

Jeslek

Banned
Professur said:
Those aren't taxes, Jer. They're contributions
Merriam Webster's definition of "tax":

" a charge usually of money imposed by authority on persons or property for public purposes "

That fits EI and CPP.
 

Gonz

molṑn labé
Staff member
I think Prof was kidding LL.

If you want to go off on a tangent of unfair taxes, how about fee's imposed, mandatory insurance & the like. Anything that is required to be paid before "privileges" are granted is a tax. How about paying property tax? One is never a homeowner, taxes are forever. Your telephone bill is full of taxes, surcharges & fee's imposed. Same with your satelite, cable, water, electricity & gas.

In a nutshell, we pay too many taxes-rich & poor alike. The burden is shifted to the working class because there is no tax on wealth. Get $100,000,000. & never pay taxes again, except on your dividends.
 
Top