If White People are Economically Privileged, Shouldn't They Have to Pay a White Person Tax? - Page 2 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Political and non-political satire; all those terribly biased analogies live here.
#14781152
anasawad wrote:When the fuck are these SJW idiots realize that "privilege" is between classes not between races and genders when discussing it within a specific nation. :knife:



Agreed, people are so dumb that they cannot see the modus - operandi of the Westminster class system, they 'believe' that the 'system' works for them as a direct result of putting a 'X' on a ballot paper once every 5 years.

As for the E.U, I would lay good money in any high street against the majority of pedestrians even knowing who their M.E.P is, yet alone their local MP's name.

The Tories 'justify' welfare\other cuts because of the 'budget' deficit, which they help to create, they shift the burden onto local councils & cut more services.

The FACT is, they caused the budget deficit & national debt to explode.

They forego £40 BILLION a year, on Additional Pension Contribution Relief to the rich & better off.

That's paid for by the poor alone, an act of war against one section of society, whom they blame for their own circumstances, with no allowances made between the 'deserving' or 'undeserving' amongst them, yet, they keep the floodgates open for migrants to swarm over 'our' country, in order to undermine our living standards, so that the rich get filthy rich & we get poorer.
#14792052
Income tax isn't fodder for lawyers and accountants because of it's graduated system. It fodder for lawyers and accountants because of the various write offs and loopholes. None of which will be going anywhere under a flat tax.

As for sales tax companies still have lawyers and accountants to deal with them.

The flat tax and sales taxes aren't any simpler than our current tax system. They simply burden wealthy people less.
#14792059
mikema63 wrote:Income tax isn't fodder for lawyers and accountants because of it's graduated system. It fodder for lawyers and accountants because of the various write offs and loopholes. None of which will be going anywhere under a flat tax.

As for sales tax companies still have lawyers and accountants to deal with them.

The flat tax and sales taxes aren't any simpler than our current tax system. They simply burden wealthy people less.


Perhaps my understanding is flawed. Which is entirely possible. Does not a flat tax remove said loopholes? If so, how does this increase burden on the poor if it is merely based on a percentage of income?
#14792071
The problem with the loopholes is that they are a combination of popular with donors and also in some cases necessary. For instance child tax benefits, more of your income is going into raising your child so the government tax's you less.

As for the poor being effected it depends on how much you are going to cut government spending. The bulk of the tax money from the income tax comes from the higher tax brackets. So all else being equal a flat tax would have to be higher percentage wise than the lowest tax bracket. So in essence you'd have to raise the income tax on lower income people in order to lower it for higher income people. Or cut services massively, especially considering that about 45% of people don't end up paying any income taxs. Because loopholes and tax benefits.

Consumption taxes hit lower income people more just by virtue of the fact that low income people spend a higher proportion of their income on consumption. You can think of consumption taxes as a tax on the part of your income you spend on consumption. The poor spend all of their income on consumption while the rich invest large portions of their income. So a sale tax basically taxes all of the income of the poor and tax the rich only on the portion of income that they spend on consumption.
#14792072
Extremely informative post and I thank you immensely. As always, in my quest for a simple understanding of matters, the baby often goes out with the bath water.

I think we both agree that some loopholes like "off shore" tax shelters should be addressed.
Last edited by Billy Pilgrim on 31 Mar 2017 16:44, edited 1 time in total.
#14792074
Extremely informative post and I thank you immensely. As always, in my quest for a simple understanding of matters, the baby often goes out with the bath water.

Who knew economics could be so complicated? (*facetious phaser set to kill*)

I think we both agree that loopholes like "off shore" tax shelters should be addressed.
Trump's Dumb Economics

So how's Trump doing on the economy? 1. Budget […]

I don't see why Qatar would take that risk. I'm […]

The Popular Vote...

Why should anyone here give a shit about what you[…]

Part 2 of 3 Which is also a sign of how far t[…]