|
How taxes work. | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 16:24:23 |
|
The dichotomy I would like to see resolved WRT tax | by romandas | 2007-07-03 17:30:32 |
|
How are you 'punishing' the wealthy? | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 17:33:56 |
| Taxing someone higher than someone else |
by romandas |
2007-07-03 17:43:14 |
| because they have more money is punishing the wealthy. It defies point #1 to me. |
|
[ Reply ] |
|
Not doing that is punishing the poor | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 17:55:37 |
|
No, it's being fair. | by romandas | 2007-07-03 18:04:58 |
|
Unless the tax rate is 100% | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 18:08:51 |
|
They don't, here. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 18:15:43 |
|
They don't what? (n/t) | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 19:05:26 |
|
They don't pay any income tax. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 20:48:57 |
|
Yep... | by tepidpond | 2007-07-03 20:22:23 |
|
Actually, the entire monetary system.. | by romandas | 2007-07-03 18:21:41 |
|
Without a government, you don't have a single | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 19:08:02 |
|
How is a flat tax *rate* serfdom? | by esbita | 2007-07-03 19:44:06 |
|
He was also saying that deducting more from those | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 20:02:18 |
|
It's simple common sense. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 20:45:40 |
|
You're not looking at it system-wide. | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 20:49:34 |
|
How many of those people... | by esbita | 2007-07-03 20:58:47 |
|
That's getting perilously close to the 'trickle | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 21:14:41 |
|
No argument the trickle-down effect isn't | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 21:18:16 |
|
Because you've been arguing... | by esbita | 2007-07-03 21:29:18 |
|
I think our conflict here... | by esbita | 2007-07-03 21:30:19 |
|
Flat tax punishes the poor. | by Phoon | 2007-07-03 17:59:10 |
|
Right, but I don't believe our current system | by romandas | 2007-07-03 18:06:34 |
|
So raise the standard deduction amount. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 18:21:39 |
|
The last part of your statment is what I was | by techi870 | 2007-07-03 18:49:21 |
|
All that says is that many people are self-serving | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 19:09:05 |
|
Welcome to reality and human nature. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 19:54:19 |
|
And how would we do that? | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 20:00:56 |
|
but then you've just proven the point ... | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 20:02:42 |
|
And what point is that? | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 20:06:57 |
|
but people ARE self-serving. | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 20:08:26 |
|
So? | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 20:26:48 |
|
Nope, it's a fool's game and accomplishes nothing. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 20:49:40 |
|
That's what I meant. (n/t) | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 20:56:56 |
|
That's what the TLP is doing: | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 21:02:37 |
|
Except that what started the whole argument... | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 21:13:07 |
|
Ahem. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 21:20:18 |
|
It's a *simple* analogy | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 21:20:23 |
|
Just because it's simple doesn't mean it has to be | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 21:28:21 |
|
so you're complaining about poor math skills? | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 21:37:42 |
|
When it invalidates the analogy, yes. (n/t) | by Arachnid | 2007-07-03 21:50:59 |
|
agreed. But in this case, it doesn't. (n/t) | by subbywan | 2007-07-03 22:47:15 |
|
Low tax, flate rate, no loopholes. | by esbita | 2007-07-03 20:18:00 |
