[Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics

[General Boats]

it is nice to hear others making my points more effectively than I can -
keep those letters coming.

stan/gbi

Bill Berner wrote:

> Wally -
>
> I respectfully disagree that a flat tax on wages would be fair.  Because
> when you add in all of the other taxes and fees that must be paid for
> everyone it would shift a disproportionate amount of total taxes to
> those in the middle and lower income brackets, creating a seriously
> regressive tax system.
>
> Bill Berner
> 191 South Broadway
> Hastings on Hudson, NY  10706
>
> v 914 478 2896
> f 914 478 3856
> e BBerner@optonline.net
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: rhodes22-list-bounces@rhodes22.org
> [mailto:rhodes22-list-bounces@rhodes22.org] On Behalf Of Wally Buck
> Sent: Wednesday, January 22, 2003 3:39 PM
> To: rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org
> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] Taxes & Politics
>
> Stan,
>
> Usuall discliamer - hit delete now if not interested in taxes -
>
> I agree with some of what you said -
>
> >Just tried to
> >point out that if you cut taxes for some, you raise them for others.
>
> This is not true!!!! You are missing one critical piece of the formula,
> you
> forgot to cut spending.
>
> >
> >Re your wish for a flat tax, Bill B points out that in effect we
> already
> >have that.
>
> Well Bill tried to point that out, but he is wrong. We actually don't
> have a
> flat tax on wages. See IRS tax schedule if there are any doubts. If you
> throw in all of the other various taxes it might approach a flat tax
> overall
> but that is not the same thing. I think a flat tax on wages is fair. I
> also
> said we need to throw out the IRS book and start over.
>
> More tax cutting will make the low end pay even a higher
> >percentage of their earning towards their total tax burden compared to
> >the wealthy end.
>
> If we had a flat tax how would this be true? If you are below certain
> income
> no taxes, above everyone pays the same %.
>
> Try Bill Gates
> >father who has been outspoken against these cuts.  I know a lot of
> >variables influence Wall Street but it does represent wealth and so far
> >it is not applauding the tax cut.
>
> Well I am sure he is a great guy but why would I want to take his word
> for
> anything? Previously this discussion did not talk about the current tax
> plan. As it is written I am not for current plan either. I still think
> we
> need to reduce taxes though.
>
> >Corporations should Not pay any taxes.  They are not people and only
> >pass on the cost of their taxes to the buyers via higher product prices
> >which results in the buyer being double taxed.  This would also do away
> >with the unfair double tax on dividends.
>
> I have an open mind here. I am curious, how much is generated each year
> by
> taxing corporate profits? How do we make up for this loss of revenue?Are
> you
> suggesting spending cuts or increasing the tax on the middle class or
> rich?
>
> There should be no Tolls.  In
> >my management consulting days I had a glimpse behind the scenes of the
> >NY Thruway.  Toll delays create air pollution for everyone and health
> >hazards for collectors, waste drivers' productivity time, waste
> gasoline
> >and create costly duplicate tax collection administrations.
>
> I agree here.
>
> I am against collecting taxes via charities.  When Rose was
> >nursing, one job was with the March of Dimes.  She said only 10% of
> >collections got to do what the charity was intended for.
>
> I admit I am not a tax expert. What kind of taxes do charities have to
> pay?
> Hopefully all donations are recieved tax free. Do they pay real estate
> taxes
> or capital gains? I didn't think they had to. I don't have a problem
> with
> charities being tax free. I have my suspicions why charities only have
> 10%
> of the donations trickle down to the needy. Of the 90% that the poor do
> not
> see how much of that is taken away in taxes VS payroll or entertainment
> costs?
>
>   I am against
> >sales taxes in any form and by any name.
>
> So we remove the sales tax, do you suggest we cut spending or add more
> taxes
> to the middle class or wealthy?
>
> >But this one is a deal breaker when a buyer faces it at the end of
> >negotiating for a big ticket item (like a sailboat).
>
> Well now I can see why you are against sales tax.
>
> There is only one
> >way to fairly pay for the cost of running a country and that is a
> >graduated income tax.
>
> Again who says so? Isn't this what we have now? The current system
> stinks!
>
> With one bureaucracy instead of dozens, it can be
> >run more efficiently and better policed.
>
> I agree here, what can be easier than computing and collecting a flat
> tax on
> wages?
>
> Cutting income taxes under the
> >guise of making the economy work via the trickle down theory just does
> >not work.  I have been there several time under several
> >administrations.
>
> I am for cutting taxes period. I would be for tax reduction if the
> economy
> was booming as well. We need to reduce the size of our government, it is
> out
> of control. Cut spending!
>
> Our brightest Rhodies, Michael and
> >Roger are looking for work.  I have to give back a large deposit to an
> >IBM employee who was laid off, etc.., etc.
>
> I worked for a company that folded this year and spent four months
> looking
> for a job as well. Luckily I found one. Now what does this have to do
> with
> taxes? The economy was dropping before the tax cut, it continued to drop
>
> after tax cut. Are you suggesting we raise taxes?
>
> The first thing Clinton did
> >was appoint Rubin of Wall Street to the Treasury and they raised taxes
> >and the rest was history - argue all you want.
>
> I think blame or credit for the boom/bust in the 90s is often misplaced.
>
> Some like to say it was Greenspan. Well he was the same guy in place for
>
> Bush #1 and he led us through into a recession in the 80s, he was there
> for
> the boom of the 90s, and he is still here now. I think he deserves more
> blame for current situation than credit for the boom. I also don't think
>
> Clinton or Rubin deserves all of the credit (or blame) either. I think
> when
> historians look back on this period they will refer to the boom years as
> a
> hoax. Many of the companies that were booming had no increase in profits
> or
> revenues. Some of them had no products. Speculation drove up the stock
> market not performance, if it weren't so sad it would be funny.
>
> I began to realize that management
> >really wanted me to back their already taken position - that is, if
> they
> >liked what I reported, they used my reports to support their position
> to
> >the upper powers - if they did not like my position, they threw it
> >away.
>
> No argument here, this is what happened at Enron and others.
>
> When Greenspan was called by Congress to tell how to use the
> >surplus, I listened to every word.  He said, first pay off the debt -
> >then if you want, cut taxes.  They threw out his advice that they did
> >not want and used the rest, citing his support.
>
> As I said I am not totally in agreement with current plan. I agree with
> Greenspan but he is missing something obvious to me; Pay off debt,
> reduce
> taxes, and cut spending! How come you never mention cutting spending?
> >
> >Brad, I agree.  I work very hard - recently been sleeping at the plant
> >to save the traveling time.  So these kind of diversions are fun for me
> >- sort of therapy.  So Rick, thanks, but I am easy.
>
> I hope you are not working to hard, stress is not a good thing, take
> care of
> yourself!
>
> Contrary to Alex's view of the rules, I thought if there
> >was a subject title anything was OK.
>
> OK by me!
>
> >Jefferson said that education is the key to a successful democracy so
> >let's make education free,  like our government did in the days of land
> >grant colleges (like Purdue), not more costly, as tax cuts are forcing
> >states to do today
>
> Although I agree an education is important I think it is up to one's
> family
> to pay for college, not the government. Call me crazy (many do) but I
> would
> not be totally against the governemnt getting out of education
> completely.
>
> I do know one source of revenue we are missing the boat on and that is
> taxing illegal drugs. I say legalize most if not all drugs. This will
> get it
> off the street corner and we can start taxing the hell out of it. We
> lost
> the drug war but we are to stubborn to admit it. I am guessing that most
> on
> this list do not smoke crack. I am also guessing that if it were legal
> you
> wouldn't start. This is true with most Amercians. That people that abuse
>
> drugs don't care that it is illegal. We have many former tax payers in
> prison for drug use. Now instead of paying taxes they are a $40,000 per
> year
> tax burden. Put the same restricitons we have on booze, you must be 21,
> no
> driving, and so on.
>
> Take it easy Stan! I always respect different viewpoints, especially
> when
> calmly expressed. I follow my heart when I vote and cross all party
> lines.
>
> Wally
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*.
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
>
> _________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list
>
> _________________________________________________
> Use Rhodes22-list@rhodes22.org, Help? www.rhodes22.org/list