Very interesting! Glad to see we share the interest. Sheepgoat.

________________________________

From: On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com on behalf of David Rudel
Sent: Fri 7/10/2009 2:26 PM
To: On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com
Subject: Re: [Left Wing & A Prayer] Re: Two current issues...feedback wanted.





Flat/fair Taxes (at least the ones being floated around) are not "regressive" in
the sense of taxing the poor more than the rich. The plans being suggested would
make a large percentage of the population completely tax free...indeed, it would
create a type of free welfare bonus because most of these plans give out free
money to all taxpayers to set against a base cost of living. A 2-earner
household with 2 children have 0 effective tax on the first 28,000 dollars. A
single person household has 0 tax on the first 10,400 dollars.


A case could be made that the fair tax puts extra burden on upper-middle class
[relative to both the poor and the wealthy], but that is a completely separate
matter.

The effective tax rate of a single person with two children earning 30,000 and
spending 26,000 is [26,000*.23-4048]/30000 = 6.44%
The effective tax rate for the same person earning 75,000 and spending 55,000 is
[55000*.23-4048]/75000 = 11.47 %
The effective tax rate for the same person earning 350,000 and spending 200,000
is [200,000*.23-4048]/350,000 = 11.98 %


It should be pointed out that the invisible payroll taxes cause current taxation
to be rather regressive. It might not look like it when you file your actual tax
return because the 15% that has been taken out for SS and MC does not show up
there. People who are self-employed are aware of this because there is a magic
number [94,200] where they no longer get hammered with the equivalent
self-employment tax.

-David




On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 2:55 PM, George Lillard <glillard@...
<mailto:glillard@...> > wrote:






Denise & group - The "Fair Tax" has it's merits. I love to muse on the topic
... so here goes ....

The Federal income tax taxes what citizens contribute - the Fair Tax would tax
what we consume or take out. So the Fair Tax has the leg up in structure
anyway. The down side is that it is regressive (favors the rich to the
detriment of the poor who spend a greater portion of their income on
essentials).

Property tax, by comparison simply taxes what you have - in land/building
anyway. I've heard it convincingly argued that this is fair, because the virtue
of shear ownership does not necessarily mean you are contributing to the society
(making something or providing a service). After all, had the original owner
(the government) kept it - all the rent could go to them and that would be the
taxes. Great in theory - but the loss in entrepreneurial drive would be a drag.
Besides - Man's thirst for ownership is unquinchable.

Here's an idea. A financial transaction tax split between the parties. Kind
of like a sales tax but split between the buyer and seller. On top of that all
financial transaction could be included - deposits, withdrawals, stock trades,
transfers out of the country. This would balance the regressive issue and could
be easily graduated and prorated to be equitable. I figured it'd take about 6%
to generate the funds needed to keep a government in good shape (with
healthcare!). That would be 3% for each side of the transaction.

The best news is that the banks could do all the collecting - no more 1040.
Hey, ya know, the banks already have something similiar in the credit cards
racket they have going on. They collect 3%-4% on every transaction from the
seller and God knows they take a ton more than that from the card holders.

Hmmmmmm - weren't we talkin' awhile back about nationalizing the banks? If we
owned 'em - the credit card interest could be the Federal Tax? Now that could
be really fair and knock off a system that more often isn't.

Course - I'm happy to render my due - it's the bank account upstairs to be
conerned about. - You know no moths - no rust and all.

Sheepgoat



-----Original Message-----
From: On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com>
[mailto:On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com> ]On Behalf Of Denise
Sent: Thursday, July 09, 2009 3:58 PM
To: On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com
<mailto:On_A_Left_Wing_and_A_Prayer@yahoogroups.com>
Subject: [Left Wing & A Prayer] Re: Two current issues...feedback wanted.





Diana,

Good points...

On taxes: have you checked out the "Fair Tax" movement? My brother has
been telling me about it for years. Please don't think that just
because the "tea-baggers" have taken up the call (in part) that it
belongs to them. The most basic "drill-down" of the subject is: a flat
rate sales tax... and no income tax. It would be better for people to
save... it would tax people - in a reasonable way- who buy luxury items
(still, more incentive to save), and it doesn't tax the poorest
people... i.e. you can get a return for all your sales tax if your
income is around 18K or less. Since businesses would not be paying an
"income tax" they would be more inclined (we hope) to stay in the U.S.

Now, on Michael Jackson: he breaks my heart. He really does. This
morning I saw my former Rheumatologist, Dr. Robert Lahita, commenting on
the reports now out that MJ had lupus. It explains so much about the
clothing... the skin issues, the hair issues, avoidance of sunshine and
even the nose. I knew someone at a church I worked at in the 80s who
lost his nose and looked like his face had been on fire, because it was
so badly scarred.

He was remarkably talented and I've been a fan of his music and videos
since I was 9 (and he was 10! :D) The purported child abuse hits much
too close to home for many of us and is simply sickening. At best:
some things may have been done from childlike thinking, but it's
sad...and HORRIFYING... that someone with such an extended family had no
one to check his line-crossing. I mean, how does someone grow up in the
Jehovah's Witness group and not hear "avoid all appearances of evil"?
Really. Then again, it is possible (POSSIBLE, not necessarily
"probable") that others were out to extort from him or to sell stories
to the press.

At worst, he was a sick man and a sinner (as we all are) who may have
preyed on youngsters. I wish he had gotten real help before he left us.
I've said (long before I ever heard of Dr. Phil) "Monsters live in the
dark." Michael could have been more open and dealt with issues, but
there was always someone ready to sell him out.

Diana, your point about the jury not convicting him is well-taken.
Since I am not really involved, I pray for those who are and give thanks
for the paths they are on and what they have to give to the world. The
American justice system (and most of Europe) says that one is innocent
until proven guilty. But the Press --and many individuals-- practice
the Napoleonic code of the French: "Guilty until proven innocent."

I like our way better. I like the Buddhist concept of non-judgement,
too (I think it resonates with what Jesus taught): We all have lessons
to learn here, we all have successes and failures along the way. When
you understand that, judgement has no place in you.

One other note. I remember seeing a video of Michael's in the 80s. I
lived in Nashville and the Music Biz and Film Biz folks I knew were
always a twitter about the latest Michael performance. I watched this
video performance and joined in the feedback. At some point I
commented, "Has anyone else noticed that the song was about peace and
brotherhood... but what I saw in his dance was pure rage."

How like us all that is: darkness and light, anger and laughter,
judgement and forgiveness, stretching toward Heaven while our feet are
rooted, clinging to earth. May he rest with the Lord, and his loved
ones find peace.






--
Need a good chess opening?: http://www.zukertort.com <http://www.zukertort.com/>

Unorthodox Christian Blog: http://www.authentic-christianity.net/
<http://www.authentic-christianity.net/>

Biblical Christianity compared to Modern (Evangelical) Dogma:
http://www.whoreallygoestohell.com/Bible-Evangelical.html
<http://www.whoreallygoestohell.com/Bible-Evangelical.html>

"A false conclusion, once arrived at and widely accepted is not dislodged
easily, and the less it is understood, the more tenaciously it is held." -
Cantor's Law of Preservation of Ignorance.