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.

Strategies & Market Trends : Bob Brinker: Market Savant & Radio Host -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (4714)	4/25/1998 9:33:00 AM
From: Alan Whirlwind	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

"i, for one, do not want my taxes to be reduced on the backs of those that can barely afford a place to live as is" Feel free to send in as much extra in taxes next April 15 as your conscience directs. --Alan

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (4714)	4/25/1998 9:51:00 AM
From: Kirk ©	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 42834

the bottom line is that most people don't want a simpler tax code, they want to pay less tax. a graduated tax system is very simple. just as simple as a flat tax. Skeeter, you missed my whole point. You'll have to go read the posts suite101.com as I am not going to repeat myself other than to say I was offering to pay more tax and not tax those at all below a certain income threshold. The whole discussion started on me wanting a simpler tax code so we don't waste so many resources figuring out what we owe. It broke down when Senator Boxer took the opportunity to get on her soapbox and said I should pay much more in taxes because someone making 6 times my salary got a deal according to her. If you feel someone needs more money, you are free to give them as much as you wish. I object when you force me to give to your causes rather than choose my own. Forbes believes there will be more charity if givers have more money to give. I am a bit of a cold hearted bastard and believe in Darwinism to some degree and think we do society wrong to always step in and prevent people from paying the consequences of their bad choices. For example. 25 yrs ago if a girl was pregnant in my high school, she would go on an extended visit to her "aunt" and deliver the baby then return to school and have a new "little sister". Now high schools have day care. Needless to say the birth rate amoung high school girls is way up. We make it too easy. have a good weekend. kirk out

To: Skeeter Bug who wrote (4714)	4/26/1998 7:42:00 PM
From: edward miller	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 42834

I also don't agree with the flat tax ideas, but for a totally different reason - Social Security Taxes. Lower and middle income wage earners pay FICA on all of their income - and that is another 7.65%, plus they get paid less because their employers are taxed the same amount, so employees don't get the money, the government does. Please don't tell me it's a forced savings plan because we all know the money is being spent now so that if we need that money in retirement it won't be there. I suspect that the poorest will still get net benefits, but not anybody else. The truth is that this is another income tax. Any flat tax means that rich people are taxed at the flat rate and everyone else is double taxed - the flat rate plus FICA up to the income limit for that tax. This makes for an unfair tax on the poor and middle class. For the record, I do not pay FICA the entire year and I am one of those few who actually want to see it right even if it costs me a few bucks. A flat tax on top of FICA is grossly unfair and an unequal tax burden. Ed Miller