Something is wrong with the way they think.

[ironmonk]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 7 2006, 08:47 PM']I've worked a number of low-paying jobs, and can tell you the income taxes really eat up a lot of one's income!

Higher taxes could be placed on sales of expensive "luxury" items, rather than necessities such as food, etc.

One can modify one's spending habits, but one cannot avoid income taxes - which simply punish people for being productive.

And yes, I'm quite aware such taxes would not be able to support all of today's massive federal spending - I think the federal government should be cut back drastically.

The fact that everybody takes the government's policy of taxing citizen's incomes for granted, and people get upset at the idea of "tax breaks," acting as though this money really belongs to the government, shows how far the socialist mentality has crept into our common thinking.

The fact is that having no income taxes is not some radical new idea - The federal government did not tax anyone's income in this country until 1913 - That's right, for 137 years, no one in America paid federal income taxes!
[right][snapback]879558[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

Just something to think about when saying to tax the luxery items... when the luxery boats got hit with a big tax, it put a lot of people out of work. There has to be a better way, but it's ramifications need to be considered.

God Bless,
ironmonk

[Cow of Shame]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Feb 7 2006, 12:51 PM']Maybe poor people could get ID cards, or wear special patches on their coats or clothing.
[right][snapback]878745[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
Branding might be easier.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='Socrates' date='Feb 7 2006, 08:47 PM']I've worked a number of low-paying jobs, and can tell you the income taxes really eat up a lot of one's income!

Higher taxes could be placed on sales of expensive "luxury" items, rather than necessities such as food, etc.

One can modify one's spending habits, but one cannot avoid income taxes - which simply punish people for being productive.

And yes, I'm quite aware such taxes would not be able to support all of today's massive federal spending - I think the federal government should be cut back drastically.

The fact that everybody takes the government's policy of taxing citizen's incomes for granted, and people get upset at the idea of "tax breaks," acting as though this money really belongs to the government, shows how far the socialist mentality has crept into our common thinking.

The fact is that having no income taxes is not some radical new idea - The federal government did not tax anyone's income in this country until 1913 - That's right, for 137 years, no one in America paid federal income taxes!
[right][snapback]879558[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I'm aware of the history of income tax in America. Despite the fact it hasn't always been around, I don't think doing away with it would have as big a net change as you predict in the real buying power of your dollar. If you indeed limit sales tax to "non-necessities" (which, by the way, presents a definitional conundrum -- who decides what's a necessity and what's a luxury?) you still end up with the rich paying the lion's share of the taxes as they do now. And, you'd drive up the cost of products. I think the net change would be that your salary would go just as far then as now, while the changeover from an income-based system to a sales-based system would be cumbersome and expensive. A whole lot of trouble for not much payoff. Too bad you weren't around in the early 1900s when they were considering income tax.

[quote name='Cow of Shame' date='Feb 7 2006, 09:48 PM']Branding might be easier.
[right][snapback]879613[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
You're right, of course. Branding would be the ideal way to go. If I had to be branded, I'd prefer it to be on my arse. "Don't tread on me," ala Bart Simpson. I could get a lot of pleasure out of proving my poverty-strickenness if that were the case.

[Cow of Shame]

[quote name='Sojourner' date='Feb 7 2006, 11:54 PM']You're right, of course. Branding would be the ideal way to go. If I had to be branded, I'd prefer it to be on my arse. "Don't tread on me," ala Bart Simpson. I could get a lot of pleasure out of proving my poverty-strickenness if that were the case.
[right][snapback]879814[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
I had no idea you were such a exhibitionist.

[JoeB]

[quote name='The Price of Independence' date='Feb 6 2006, 03:48 PM']In my opinion, corporations shouldn't pay ANY taxes whatsoever.  The biggest travesty of the the capitalist system in America is the double taxation of corporations.  The corporation gets taxed for any profits.  Then the stockholder gets taxed for the dividends paid!  That's an absolute abuse and it hurts our economy!
[right][snapback]877566[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]

As the income of a legal person, corporate income is taxable. Corporations derive far more benefit from this legal distinction (for example, a corporate right to free speech and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures) than they incur harm from being taxed. A shareholder's personal income is distinct and different from that of the corporation since it will not be reinvested by the corporation.

[Sojourner]

[quote name='JoeB' date='Feb 8 2006, 02:58 AM']As the income of a legal person, corporate income is taxable.  Corporations derive far more benefit from this legal distinction (for example, a corporate right to free speech and freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures) than they incur harm from being taxed.  A shareholder's personal income is distinct and different from that of the corporation since it will not be reinvested by the corporation.
[right][snapback]879977[/snapback][/right]
[/quote]
This is true.

As an interesting side note, the Fourteenth Amendment was passed after the Civil War as a means of establishing the personhood of people who had been slaves. However, o the Fourteenth Amendment cases brought before the Supreme Court between 1890 and 1910, 19 dealt with African Americans and 288 dealt with corporations.