Forum Post: A Tax Proposal
Posted 12 years ago on Oct. 5, 2011, 1:02 a.m. EST by nobody1231234
(5)
This content is user submitted and not an official statement
I feel for most people, this would be a doable solution, and be easier on the poor:
For individuals: 1.) Get rid of all deductions. Tax on all income, no matter where it's from (interest, salary, lottery, etc.)
2.) No tax on any income up to the poverty line (approx. $21-22k/year). 10% rate on the amount between this amount to 2x's the poverty line, then maybe 15% to 3-4x's, increasing to eventually 50-60% income earned on the amount 50x's the poverty line (currently around $1m/year).
3.) Children under 18 will count as a person under their parent, filing jointly. This would be fair as it takes more money to survive for a household of 5 vs. 1.
For Businesses:
1.) Get rid of all deductions. Tax on all income generated. The only possible exceptions would be employee salaries and overhead.
2.) Since we'd want to encourage "Main Street" and small businesses, there should be no tax on the first $100-200k/year. The reason I'm using such a high number is I'd assume this would support a family, and money needs to be put back into the business.
3.) Make a sliding scale so that over $5m/year, the tax rate is at least 50% of any income earned above that.
Something like this would likely raise a lot more money for the government, and hurt the people at the bottom much less than they are right now.
I agree very much that the most straight forward solution to MOST but not all of our problems is a change in the tax code. I posted something about that yesterday. I like much of what you write, nobody, but let me suggest a simpler approach: (1) Get rid of the payroll and inheritance taxes. Just have an income tax, on ALL income (earned, cap gains, interest, gifted, inherited, stolen, etc.) (2) One class of income: all income is treated the same: no special treatment for cap gains, etc. (3) One filing status: no "married" "head of household" b.s. (4) One deduction: $100,000. (5) One tax rate: 60%.
Also, there needs to be a tax on holdings of non-tangible assets (stocks, bonds, and weirder "investment instruments") that exceed $10million. A small tax. Like 0.5%. Rich people pay 3 times that to management companies to manage their wealth, so forking over 0.5% to a government that basically protects them and their investments seems like a small amount.
The above would readily fund the government, social security, medicare for all, and even their damned wars. And it would be a tax code you print on an 8.5x11 sheet of paper that an 11 year old could understand.
For Business tax: I like your intention but I think it would have to be more complicated than that, and take int account expenses more.
Good for you for thinking about this.
Man, this is crazy. The government is the problem. Do you not understand that? They are the problem. Do you agree that Wall Street, corporate America, and the government have caused the cronyism through their incestuous relationship?
We need to address the fundamental underlying issues like the Fed, the Too Big To Fail banks and the corporate owned politicians. Then we return to the Constitution and suck the government dry at the first opportunity. A real free market combined with sensible regulation would unleash a wave of innovation and advancement that could make this country great again.
Years from now, if they get out of line again, we will just throw the greedy fascists right back out on their asses and do it over again. The government is a big part of the problem, not the solution. Sorry if I am harsh. Just my opinion, of course. But taxes and big government won't fix a thing.
Changing the tax code addresses the too big to fail banks and corporate owned politicians, as a large portion of the money they'd make would go into programs that'd help the people. We can't guarantee the government blowing most the taxed money on future bailouts with this proposal alone...but at least we could guarantee the rich people would not have as much money to throw around.
YES! I used to think "who cared how rich some people get as long as there is a social safety net?". But the ability to get so rich has cause those SOBs to destroy the net. I want to tax the rich at a rate that disincentives them from stealing everything that is not nailed down.