Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
CardiffBaseball
Participant[quote=marion]
I don’t agree with a flat tax rate. If you earn more, you should pay more taxes. A flat tax rate wouldn’t be good for our society because it would be no break for the poor.
[/quote]
Marion most flat tax proposals has anywhere from the first 35-50k people make not taxable. I’d say paying zero is a break.
Also once you factor in the amount of “free income” available, you’ll find the flat tax is also still progressive. i.e. let’s say the first 35k is free. You make 50k so we take away and 15k is taxed at 20% for simplicity.
You make 50k and 15k in taxable income so that is 3K in taxes.
The next guy makes 100k, subtract 35k and his taxable income is 65k of which 13k goes to the flat tax.
So you make 50k and pay 3k, while the next guy makes 100k, but pays in 13k instead of 6k. Do you see how the tax is still progressive?
Participant[quote=marion]
I don’t agree with a flat tax rate. If you earn more, you should pay more taxes. A flat tax rate wouldn’t be good for our society because it would be no break for the poor.
[/quote]
Marion most flat tax proposals has anywhere from the first 35-50k people make not taxable. I’d say paying zero is a break.
Also once you factor in the amount of “free income” available, you’ll find the flat tax is also still progressive. i.e. let’s say the first 35k is free. You make 50k so we take away and 15k is taxed at 20% for simplicity.
You make 50k and 15k in taxable income so that is 3K in taxes.
The next guy makes 100k, subtract 35k and his taxable income is 65k of which 13k goes to the flat tax.
So you make 50k and pay 3k, while the next guy makes 100k, but pays in 13k instead of 6k. Do you see how the tax is still progressive?
Participant[quote=marion]
I don’t agree with a flat tax rate. If you earn more, you should pay more taxes. A flat tax rate wouldn’t be good for our society because it would be no break for the poor.
[/quote]
Marion most flat tax proposals has anywhere from the first 35-50k people make not taxable. I’d say paying zero is a break.
Also once you factor in the amount of “free income” available, you’ll find the flat tax is also still progressive. i.e. let’s say the first 35k is free. You make 50k so we take away and 15k is taxed at 20% for simplicity.
You make 50k and 15k in taxable income so that is 3K in taxes.
The next guy makes 100k, subtract 35k and his taxable income is 65k of which 13k goes to the flat tax.
So you make 50k and pay 3k, while the next guy makes 100k, but pays in 13k instead of 6k. Do you see how the tax is still progressive?
Participant[quote=marion]
I don’t agree with a flat tax rate. If you earn more, you should pay more taxes. A flat tax rate wouldn’t be good for our society because it would be no break for the poor.
[/quote]
Marion most flat tax proposals has anywhere from the first 35-50k people make not taxable. I’d say paying zero is a break.
Also once you factor in the amount of “free income” available, you’ll find the flat tax is also still progressive. i.e. let’s say the first 35k is free. You make 50k so we take away and 15k is taxed at 20% for simplicity.
You make 50k and 15k in taxable income so that is 3K in taxes.
The next guy makes 100k, subtract 35k and his taxable income is 65k of which 13k goes to the flat tax.
So you make 50k and pay 3k, while the next guy makes 100k, but pays in 13k instead of 6k. Do you see how the tax is still progressive?
Participant[quote=marion]
I don’t agree with a flat tax rate. If you earn more, you should pay more taxes. A flat tax rate wouldn’t be good for our society because it would be no break for the poor.
[/quote]
Marion most flat tax proposals has anywhere from the first 35-50k people make not taxable. I’d say paying zero is a break.
Also once you factor in the amount of “free income” available, you’ll find the flat tax is also still progressive. i.e. let’s say the first 35k is free. You make 50k so we take away and 15k is taxed at 20% for simplicity.
You make 50k and 15k in taxable income so that is 3K in taxes.
The next guy makes 100k, subtract 35k and his taxable income is 65k of which 13k goes to the flat tax.
So you make 50k and pay 3k, while the next guy makes 100k, but pays in 13k instead of 6k. Do you see how the tax is still progressive?
ParticipantSo is SFT basically that which is to the north of Calle Acervo as you turn off of Rancho Santa Fe? Given that my kids are not in public school right now it seems moving over there is a bit of waste, but if I see that area correctly, kids can walk to OPE, Diegueno and LCC. That’s pretty convenient.
ParticipantSo is SFT basically that which is to the north of Calle Acervo as you turn off of Rancho Santa Fe? Given that my kids are not in public school right now it seems moving over there is a bit of waste, but if I see that area correctly, kids can walk to OPE, Diegueno and LCC. That’s pretty convenient.
ParticipantSo is SFT basically that which is to the north of Calle Acervo as you turn off of Rancho Santa Fe? Given that my kids are not in public school right now it seems moving over there is a bit of waste, but if I see that area correctly, kids can walk to OPE, Diegueno and LCC. That’s pretty convenient.
ParticipantSo is SFT basically that which is to the north of Calle Acervo as you turn off of Rancho Santa Fe? Given that my kids are not in public school right now it seems moving over there is a bit of waste, but if I see that area correctly, kids can walk to OPE, Diegueno and LCC. That’s pretty convenient.
ParticipantSo is SFT basically that which is to the north of Calle Acervo as you turn off of Rancho Santa Fe? Given that my kids are not in public school right now it seems moving over there is a bit of waste, but if I see that area correctly, kids can walk to OPE, Diegueno and LCC. That’s pretty convenient.
ParticipantYou know the Che flag is a real turn-off and ticks me off. I was leaning towards none of the above, but something tells me every freak crack-pot out there who’s had to sit out most national elections, has finally found a nice smile, and smooth talker to “represent”. At least Bill Clinton could bring back Reagan Democrats.
I would totally support Obama if the GOP had held the white house, but I am a little queasy about the central planners running amok.
ParticipantYou know the Che flag is a real turn-off and ticks me off. I was leaning towards none of the above, but something tells me every freak crack-pot out there who’s had to sit out most national elections, has finally found a nice smile, and smooth talker to “represent”. At least Bill Clinton could bring back Reagan Democrats.
I would totally support Obama if the GOP had held the white house, but I am a little queasy about the central planners running amok.
ParticipantYou know the Che flag is a real turn-off and ticks me off. I was leaning towards none of the above, but something tells me every freak crack-pot out there who’s had to sit out most national elections, has finally found a nice smile, and smooth talker to “represent”. At least Bill Clinton could bring back Reagan Democrats.
I would totally support Obama if the GOP had held the white house, but I am a little queasy about the central planners running amok.
ParticipantYou know the Che flag is a real turn-off and ticks me off. I was leaning towards none of the above, but something tells me every freak crack-pot out there who’s had to sit out most national elections, has finally found a nice smile, and smooth talker to “represent”. At least Bill Clinton could bring back Reagan Democrats.
I would totally support Obama if the GOP had held the white house, but I am a little queasy about the central planners running amok.
-
AuthorPosts
