Wyden's Flat Tax


S

Steven

IOW, you don't understand the possible consequences.
Congress obviously does or this quackery would actually be considered
in a more serious light instead of being thrown about like a populist
prop.

More of this socialist crap and it embarasses them too, I'm sure.
 
Ad

Advertisements

N

no surrender

Lobby Dosser said:
IOW, you don't understand the possible consequences.
*****
And you, Chicken Little, fraudulently and misleadingly portray POSSIBLE
CONSEQUENCES as certainties. "Sky is falling...sky is falling," eh! That's
right up there with the intellectually nonsensical phrase, "could get up
to" when describing an alleged improvment in something, as in "You 'could
get up to' twenty miles more per gallon with the Little Wonder gas
additive."

When you're ready to discuss philosophical differences like an adult, get
back to me.

Dennis
 
N

no surrender

Steven said:
Why drag Germaine into this? What was HER crime?
*****
Now, now, now..don't do that; you'll just confuse the boy known as Lubby
Doser.

Dennis
 
P

Paul Thomas, CPA

Paul Maffia said:
And by the way, again using your own argument, all "flat tax" income tax
schemes proposed over the last 10 years, exempts a substantial amount of
income before it applies. So according to you, they are not flat tax
schemes but two step ones, zero rate or whatever







All this step talking reminds me of a song by the local band - Bearfoot
Hookers - called "I'd rather two-step than twelve step"......a currently
unknown future country hit.
 
R

rick++

The Social Security tax is NOT a "flat tax". While the Social
Security tax rate is flat, it is only assessed on wages, salaries and
net earnings from self employment.
Dems are chapping at the bit to make the SS tax a true flat tax
according to
your definition.
 
S

Steven

Dems are chapping at the bit to make the SS tax a true flat tax
according to
your definition.
Wish folks would read definitions before they go to yakking about
taxes and other crap they don't know anyway.

Everybody quit all the vomiting. It sounds bad at a bit past 8 am and
I had fried bologna and a mix of sugar-free lemon and lime Jellos for
breakfast. No bread right now, just don't make me queasy???
 
N

no surrender

Steven said:
Will you go **** the looney Southern bookkeeper or something?
*****
"**** the looney (sp: loony) Southern bookkeeper;" now that's obscure.

Dennis
 
S

stampeder

Steven said:
Everybody quit all the vomiting. It sounds bad at a bit past 8 am and
I had fried bologna and a mix of sugar-free lemon and lime Jellos for
breakfast. No bread right now, just don't make me queasy???
Phew, technicolor yawn...
 
R

Randal L. Schwartz

Paul> I tend not to suffer fools easily and put up with them only when they
Paul> are entertaining. Simply put the term "flat tax" refers to the rate of
Paul> taxation. A tax can be flat, ie. a single rate applying to whatever is
Paul> taxed or progressive where the rate changes based on the amount of what
Paul> is taxed.

Paul> The fact that SS taxes apply only up to a specified amount means that is
Paul> all that is taxed. And since only a single rate applies, it is by
Paul> definition a flat tax.

It's *not* a single rate though. It's X%, then 0%. That's two rates. There's
*no* difference between the first dollar I earn in a year, and the
90,001st. (Or whatever the cutoff is.) They're both "a dollar earned this
year". If you want a flat tax, you need to apply the *same* rate to both of
them.

--
Randal L. Schwartz - Stonehenge Consulting Services, Inc. - +1 503 777 0095
<merlyn@stonehenge.com> <URL:http://www.stonehenge.com/merlyn/>
Perl/Unix/security consulting, Technical writing, Comedy, etc. etc.
See PerlTraining.Stonehenge.com for onsite and open-enrollment Perl training!

--
 
L

Lobby Dosser

no surrender said:
*****
And you, Chicken Little, fraudulently and misleadingly portray
POSSIBLE CONSEQUENCES as certainties. "Sky is falling...sky is
falling," eh! That's right up there with the intellectually
nonsensical phrase, "could get up to" when describing an alleged
improvment in something, as in "You 'could get up to' twenty miles
more per gallon with the Little Wonder gas additive."

When you're ready to discuss philosophical differences like an adult,
get back to me.
When you understand the word 'Consequences' and the phrase 'Unintended
Effects', get back to me.
 
L

Lobby Dosser

no surrender said:
*****
Now, now, now..don't do that; you'll just confuse the boy known as
Lubby Doser.

Dennis
So Denny, what else are you doing while school's out?
 
L

Lobby Dosser

no surrender said:
*****
"**** the looney (sp: loony) Southern bookkeeper;" now that's obscure.

Dennis
What Steven was implying was that when we were 14 (like you) and had a
whole summer, we spent a lot of it trying to get laid. Not wasting time
wondering about health care. Well, except for where to get rubbers.
 
P

Paul Thomas, CPA

Randal L. Schwartz said:
It's *not* a single rate though.


It is a single rate. 7.65% on wages with 7.65% being matched by the
employer, 15.3% on earnings from self-employment and partnership profits.

The tax rate doesn't change, the government exempted certain incomes.

I don't see there being a dollar cap on wages and SE profits as being
significantly different than any of the "flat tax" plans with a standard
deduction or personal exemption (effectively not taxing small incomes). In
those cases it's easy to see the "rate" is flat, but there are exemptions on
income at the low end.


It's X%, then 0%. That's two rates.

Again, the *rate* doesn't change at all. Certain income is exempt from the
rate. Period.

Nowhere in the laws do you see any inkling of a 0% rate on the higher
earnings or wages. That's because the higher earnings or wages are exempt
by legislative grace. In fact, you'll find language similar to what I'm
saying, those wages and earnings are exempt from that tax.





There's *no* difference between the first dollar I earn in a
year, and the 90,001st. (Or whatever the cutoff is.)


$97,500 for 2007.


And the difference is that the government decided to exempt the $97,501st
dollar from the tax.

But the rate remains constant.
 
L

Lobby Dosser

Steven said:
Wish folks would read definitions before they go to yakking about
taxes and other crap they don't know anyway.

Everybody quit all the vomiting. It sounds bad at a bit past 8 am and
I had fried bologna and a mix of sugar-free lemon and lime Jellos for
breakfast. No bread right now, just don't make me queasy???
Used to eat at a place in Pasadena called the Bolo Burger - on Foothill,
IIRC. Half inch of fried bologna on a bun, with appropriate condiments.
That was all they served. Even though they were delicious, those suckers
caused serious gastric distress.
 
P

Paul Maffia

God, another moron!

Hey dufass according to your moronic argument none of the proposed flat tax
schemes are flat taxes since they have a zero rate for some specified
minimum amounts based on family size and then everything after is taxed at
the one specified rate.

If you are going to try to make an argument, at least try to be consistent.

Randal L. Schwartz said:
Paul> I tend not to suffer fools easily and put up with them only when
they
Paul> are entertaining. Simply put the term "flat tax" refers to the rate
of
Paul> taxation. A tax can be flat, ie. a single rate applying to whatever
is
Paul> taxed or progressive where the rate changes based on the amount of
what
Paul> is taxed.

Paul> The fact that SS taxes apply only up to a specified amount means
that is
Paul> all that is taxed. And since only a single rate applies, it is by
Paul> definition a flat tax.

It's *not* a single rate though. It's X%, then 0%. That's two rates.
There's
*no* difference between the first dollar I earn in a year, and the
90,001st. (Or whatever the cutoff is.) They're both "a dollar earned this
year". If you want a flat tax, you need to apply the *same* rate to both
of
them.
To use your words almost exactly, if the tax scheme taxes first at a rate of
0% then X%, it is not a flat tax.

Are you trying to give knews4u a run for title of village idiot of MORON
TOWN?
 
B

Bob B.

It is a single rate. 7.65% on wages with 7.65% being matched by the
employer, 15.3% on earnings from self-employment and partnership profits.

The tax rate doesn't change, the government exempted certain incomes.

I don't see there being a dollar cap on wages and SE profits as being
significantly different than any of the "flat tax" plans with a standard
deduction or personal exemption (effectively not taxing small incomes). In
those cases it's easy to see the "rate" is flat, but there are exemptions on
income at the low end.





Again, the *rate* doesn't change at all. Certain income is exempt from the
rate. Period.

Nowhere in the laws do you see any inkling of a 0% rate on the higher
earnings or wages. That's because the higher earnings or wages are exempt
by legislative grace. In fact, you'll find language similar to what I'm
saying, those wages and earnings are exempt from that tax.









$97,500 for 2007.


And the difference is that the government decided to exempt the $97,501st
dollar from the tax.

But the rate remains constant.
Geez, you're both right depending on how you look at it, no?

The rate is single since no person ever pays anything other than the
stated rate on any income that legally falls under the tax. The rate is
not single in that it is not a continuous function of income from zero
to infinity.

I have more sympathy for Randall's position, because you're arguing that
certain types of income are exempt. When someone says "types of
income", they usually mean something like the difference between wages
earned and capital gains, not between the 97,500th dollar and the
97,501st dollar earned in exactly the same fashion. So the distinction
does seem disingenuous and very much like a tax weighted to fall
disproportionally on those earning less than the cap. Even if you're
technically correct.

So until someone can tell me the legal definition of a flat tax, if such
a think exists, you're both wrong and you're both right.
 
Ad

Advertisements

B

Bob B.

Paul said:
God, another moron!
Aw, don't be so hard on yourself. I'm sure you have some redeeming
qualities. Somewhere.

The folks who are advocates for a True Flat Tax generally mean exactly
that. One rate. All income. No exemptions.

Hey dufass according to your moronic argument none of the proposed flat
tax schemes are flat taxes since they have a zero rate for some
specified minimum amounts based on family size and then everything after
is taxed at the one specified rate.
Good. At least you understand the basic argument. You even got it right.
If you are going to try to make an argument, at least try to be consistent. ....
Are you trying to give knews4u a run for title of village idiot of MORON
TOWN?
He's gotta run for something. Group prick apparently has been sewn up
for some time now.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Similar Threads

Flat tax 2
Flat tax 0
Unoccupied flat, council tax 2
Flat rate pricing and flat rate taxing in QuickBooks... 12
Frehold flat 3
flat access 5
Claim tax relief on use of flat 6
capital gains tax on flat in Romania 12

Top