My Tax reform Proposal - GoFuckYourself.com

Probono · 05-12-2003, 08:31 PM

If the Republicans really want to make a change that would help stimulate the economy they are doing it wrong. Instead of trickle down economics they shouild just stop collecting Social Security and Medicare taxes for a year.

With the extra take home pay people spend more, get deeper into debt and end the recession (opps we are not in a recession) quickly.

Just think the rich would have almost no benefit and the average working guy would have a fictitous raise for one year.

tony286 · 05-12-2003, 08:37 PM

My tax reform is give nothing to the little people. $300 to $500 isnt going to get anything going. Give big tax breaks to companies to hire new employees, that will get the economy going.The more people they hire, the bigger the tax break they get. Also take the 3 billion you were going to give the airlines and use it to reeducate airline employees instead and let them fail, the days of the big airlines are over.

Probono · 05-12-2003, 09:05 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by tony404
My tax reform is give nothing to the little people. $300 to $500 isnt going to get anything going. Give big tax breaks to companies to hire new employees, that will get the economy going.The more people they hire, the bigger the tax break they get. Also take the 3 billion you were going to give the airlines and use it to reeducate airline employees instead and let them fail, the days of the big airlines are over.

Yes Dubya. How about 9% approx increase in take home pay to every workign stiff and 9% kept by the employer. Sounds like lots of money into the economy to me.

In fact since it only benefits US taxpayers and those who employ US taxpayers it won't all be used to move the jobs to India.

Carlito · 05-13-2003, 01:37 PM

Trickle down works perfectly - just takes time.

Best tax reform> refuse to pay any taxes at all... I own taxrevolt.us - lets develop it.

playa · 05-13-2003, 02:15 PM

i say implement the Federal sales tax and drop the income tax,,

it has proven to work on the state level, no reason why it won't work at the federal

12clicks · 05-13-2003, 03:25 PM

flat tax. 15% across the board. Everyone pays.

12clicks · 05-13-2003, 03:26 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Probono
If the Republicans really want to make a change that would help stimulate the economy they are doing it wrong. Instead of trickle down economics they shouild just stop collecting Social Security and Medicare taxes for a year.

With the extra take home pay people spend more, get deeper into debt and end the recession (opps we are not in a recession) quickly.

Just think the rich would have almost no benefit and the average working guy would have a fictitous raise for one year.

oh, yeah. and just what is the democrat plan again? do nothing?

Probono · 05-13-2003, 03:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks

oh, yeah. and just what is the democrat plan again? do nothing?

I have no clue what the democratic plan is I am selling mine!

tony286 · 05-13-2003, 03:39 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by 12clicks
flat tax. 15% across the board. Everyone pays.

You got my vote

iroc409 · 05-13-2003, 03:41 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by playa
i say implement the Federal sales tax and drop the income tax,,

it has proven to work on the state level, no reason why it won't work at the federal

i like this, it has merit.

Probono · 05-20-2003, 02:48 PM

Does this make my idea more realistic!

Buffett slams dividend tax cut

One of world's richest calls plan 'voodoo economics,' says it puts burden on low-income families.
May 20, 2003: 10:41 AM EDT

NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Renewing his criticism of the dividend tax cut laid out by the Senate last week, Berkshire Hathaway's Warren Buffett called the proposal "voodoo economics" that uses "Enron-style accounting."

The Senate's plan for dividends to be 50 percent tax free in 2003, 100 percent tax free in 2004 through 2006 and then face the full tax in 2007 would "further tilt the tax scales toward the rich," Buffett wrote in an opinion piece in the Washington Post.

Buffett posed a hypothetical situation in which Berkshire Hathaway, which does not currently pay a dividend, paid $1 billion in dividends next year.

Through his 31 percent ownership of the company, Buffett said he would receive an additional $310 million in income that would reduce his tax rate from about 30 percent to 3 percent, while his office secretary would still have a tax rate of about 30 percent.

"The 3 percent overall federal tax rate I would pay -- if a Berkshire dividend were to be tax free -- seems a bit light," Buffett wrote.

Instead of the Senate's tax cut plan, Buffett proposed that it provide tax reductions to those who need and will spend the money in the form of a Social Security tax "holiday" or a tax rebate to lower-income people.

"Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets," Buffett added.

He closed the piece by saying that the "government can't deliver a free lunch to the country as a whole. It can, however, determine who pays for lunch. And last week the Senate handed the bill to the wrong party."

Warren Buffett sits on the board of the Washington Post Co (WPO: up $3.91 to $715.01, Research, Estimates). and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B: up $2.00 to $2451.00, Research, Estimates) owns a stake in the newspaper publisher. *

Libertine · 05-20-2003, 02:53 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Carlito
Trickle down works perfectly - just takes time.

Best tax reform> refuse to pay any taxes at all... I own taxrevolt.us - lets develop it.

Yes, why pay taxes? After all, who needs things like roads and police and such, right?

dchottie · 05-20-2003, 02:57 PM

My line of thinking is if they do away with the IRS they wouldn't need to have a federal income tax because in my opinion the money that they actually collect each year (you have to remember all the refunds they issue) just goes to pay the beauracrats salaries anyway. It would be interesting to see the flow sheet of their income on collected taxes versus the acutal cost of running the IRS.

FlyingIguana · 05-20-2003, 03:02 PM

this current tax plan pretty much means, give with one hand and take with the other. it just sucks if you're next to the take side.

wait till you see what happens when your state has to up the yield on its debt because dividends have big tax breaks now. could see a nice increase in property taxes or other taxes plus spending cuts.

you want to stimulate the economy, get the 10 year treasury rate down under 2.5%. businesses will start to spend more and consumers can refinance when mortgage rates drop even more. the economy would start clicking within a year and bush would look like a genius.

05-12-2003, 08:31 PM	#1
Probono Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Under the Rainbow Posts: 2,731	My Tax reform Proposal If the Republicans really want to make a change that would help stimulate the economy they are doing it wrong. Instead of trickle down economics they shouild just stop collecting Social Security and Medicare taxes for a year. With the extra take home pay people spend more, get deeper into debt and end the recession (opps we are not in a recession) quickly. Just think the rich would have almost no benefit and the average working guy would have a fictitous raise for one year.

05-13-2003, 03:25 PM	#6
12clicks Too lazy to set a custom title Industry Role: Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: God's right hand Posts: 19,789	flat tax. 15% across the board. Everyone pays. __________________ I'm not a dinosaur, I'm a crocodile. I've seen dinosaurs come and go and I'm left unimpressed.

05-20-2003, 02:57 PM	#13
dchottie Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2003 Posts: 894	My line of thinking is if they do away with the IRS they wouldn't need to have a federal income tax because in my opinion the money that they actually collect each year (you have to remember all the refunds they issue) just goes to pay the beauracrats salaries anyway. It would be interesting to see the flow sheet of their income on collected taxes versus the acutal cost of running the IRS. __________________

05-12-2003, 08:37 PM	#2
tony286 lurker Industry Role: Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: atlanta Posts: 57,021	My tax reform is give nothing to the little people. $300 to $500 isnt going to get anything going. Give big tax breaks to companies to hire new employees, that will get the economy going.The more people they hire, the bigger the tax break they get. Also take the 3 billion you were going to give the airlines and use it to reeducate airline employees instead and let them fail, the days of the big airlines are over.

05-13-2003, 01:37 PM	#4
Carlito Confirmed User Industry Role: Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: Texas Posts: 856	Trickle down works perfectly - just takes time. Best tax reform> refuse to pay any taxes at all... I own taxrevolt.us - lets develop it.

05-13-2003, 02:15 PM	#5
playa Confirmed User Join Date: Feb 2001 Location: atlanta, GA Posts: 6,432	i say implement the Federal sales tax and drop the income tax,, it has proven to work on the state level, no reason why it won't work at the federal

05-20-2003, 02:48 PM	#11
Probono Confirmed User Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Under the Rainbow Posts: 2,731	Does this make my idea more realistic! Buffett slams dividend tax cut One of world's richest calls plan 'voodoo economics,' says it puts burden on low-income families. May 20, 2003: 10:41 AM EDT NEW YORK (CNN/Money) - Renewing his criticism of the dividend tax cut laid out by the Senate last week, Berkshire Hathaway's Warren Buffett called the proposal "voodoo economics" that uses "Enron-style accounting." The Senate's plan for dividends to be 50 percent tax free in 2003, 100 percent tax free in 2004 through 2006 and then face the full tax in 2007 would "further tilt the tax scales toward the rich," Buffett wrote in an opinion piece in the Washington Post. Buffett posed a hypothetical situation in which Berkshire Hathaway, which does not currently pay a dividend, paid $1 billion in dividends next year. Through his 31 percent ownership of the company, Buffett said he would receive an additional $310 million in income that would reduce his tax rate from about 30 percent to 3 percent, while his office secretary would still have a tax rate of about 30 percent. "The 3 percent overall federal tax rate I would pay -- if a Berkshire dividend were to be tax free -- seems a bit light," Buffett wrote. Instead of the Senate's tax cut plan, Buffett proposed that it provide tax reductions to those who need and will spend the money in the form of a Social Security tax "holiday" or a tax rebate to lower-income people. "Putting $1,000 in the pockets of 310,000 families with urgent needs is going to provide far more stimulus to the economy than putting the same $310 million in my pockets," Buffett added. He closed the piece by saying that the "government can't deliver a free lunch to the country as a whole. It can, however, determine who pays for lunch. And last week the Senate handed the bill to the wrong party." Warren Buffett sits on the board of the Washington Post Co (WPO: up $3.91 to $715.01, Research, Estimates). and Berkshire Hathaway (BRK.B: up $2.00 to $2451.00, Research, Estimates) owns a stake in the newspaper publisher. *

05-20-2003, 03:02 PM	#14
FlyingIguana aspiring banker Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: toronto Posts: 10,870	this current tax plan pretty much means, give with one hand and take with the other. it just sucks if you're next to the take side. wait till you see what happens when your state has to up the yield on its debt because dividends have big tax breaks now. could see a nice increase in property taxes or other taxes plus spending cuts. you want to stimulate the economy, get the 10 year treasury rate down under 2.5%. businesses will start to spend more and consumers can refinance when mortgage rates drop even more. the economy would start clicking within a year and bush would look like a genius.