Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Johannes Pilch who wrote (666615)	12/30/2004 7:40:25 PM
From: Wayners	Respond to of 769670

I wish there was an Amendment that said when the Feds have spent X dollars per year indexed for inflation, the Government shuts down until the next fiscal year. Any President and their party of course who went over budget would be toast in the next election. That would be a very strong incentive not to overspend. The indexing would be done correctly, not using CPI which includes the cost of Tobacco for example. The Govt doesn't buy tobacco.

To: Johannes Pilch who wrote (666615)	12/30/2004 10:59:25 PM
From: DuckTapeSunroof	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 769670

"If the flat tax is applied to everyone, then many who now pay no income taxes will incur...." That's the idea. All income treated the same. "... that will hit them in a lump sum once a year." Why? Wouldn't payroll deduction be operated the same as now? Wouldn't people be allowed to file quarterly... just as now? "A better solution would be to cut the government's expenses significantly, tremendously." Certainly an excellent solution under nearly any circumstances, but the two are not mutually exclusive.... "... we should also tax consumption through sales taxes on tangible goods." The States and localities will never allow the Feds to horn in on one of their primary sources of revenue. "Wealthier people would shoulder larger shares of the national tax burden because they are compelled to consume more than the poor." Actually, it's exactly the OPPOSITE! The wealthy 'consume' at a far lower rate (proportionate to their income) then do the poor... the wealthy invest at a higher rate. "Staple items, such as rice, bread, certain meats perhaps would not be taxed at all while other items would be taxed heavily." Well... if you are going to have a LONG list of special exemptions, special rates, and other loopholes... then I fear 'consumption taxes' will be an even bigger mess, and drain on the citizen's wealth, and a bigger enabler of government bureaucracy and tax evasion... then what we have now.