 sj |
||
|
||
BS: A modest proposal for Republicans
|
|
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: dick greenhaus Date: 28 Feb 09 - 03:31 PM Kendall- How about taxing corporations AND shareholders? (just being difficult) |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: kendall Date: 28 Feb 09 - 03:02 PM No, but taxing churches AND the parishioners doesn't seem fair to me. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: dick greenhaus Date: 28 Feb 09 - 01:03 PM oh.But real estate taxes aren't Federal, are they? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: kendall Date: 28 Feb 09 - 07:25 AM Dick, the real estate they own is worth millions. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: CarolC Date: 28 Feb 09 - 02:06 AM The idea is to remove the tax exempt status. If they don't have anything to pay taxes on without the tax exempt status, then it's a non-issue for them. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: dick greenhaus Date: 27 Feb 09 - 11:56 PM Not that I'm a particular fan of churches, but what should they be paying taxes on? Bingo, maybe. But I don't believe that most churches are profit-making organizations. Please correct me if I'm wrong. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Riginslinger Date: 27 Feb 09 - 10:42 PM No no, kendall! The organization itself should be paying taxes, just like a business or any other center of entertaiment is required to pay taxes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: kendall Date: 27 Feb 09 - 10:11 PM They do, as individuals. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: GUEST,CarolC Date: 27 Feb 09 - 09:44 PM Many churches (and other religious groups) are already involved in politics from the pulpit. They have ways of getting around the law. For instance, some of them say that their adherents must vote for someone who is against abortion. Then they provide the names of the candidates who are against abortion. I think, as long as these religious groups are already involved in politics, they should be paying taxes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: kendall Date: 27 Feb 09 - 01:52 PM Seems to me that taxing churches would be double taxation. Everyone who belongs to a church already pays taxes as an individual. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Amos Date: 26 Feb 09 - 11:14 PM I like the leeching metaphor, Bobert. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: MarkS Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:56 PM Are there no Democrats in the banking and corporate private sector? |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Donuel Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:53 PM Maybe that was too harsh... If the thirsty child is Republican they could have all the sweat they want. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Donuel Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:45 PM Did you know that in this year Exon profits ACTUALLY outnumbers all the other New York Stock Exchange companies in profit. What if... (in the voice of Steve Martin) The private sector {not big goverment} (in this case Exon) ACTUALLY contributed to the well being of this country and its citizens like the Republicans always say they do. Exon could bail out all the investment banks...and the Republian House could vote to cancel all CDO debts and hedge fund bond insurance scams. Wall Street could then return all the money lost in the crash and maybe start selling sub prime mortage derivitives for huge expanses of lunar and Martian real estate. They could then donate all their profit to the US Treasury to pay off the money we owe China. We could then borrow new untold trillions and make the banks liquid worldwide. Boom times and low prices would allow teenagers to afford mortgages for mansions powered by Federally granted green energy technologies. naaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaww The Republican banking and corporate private sector does NOT give a rat's ass about our country or its citizens and would not give the sweat off their balls to a child dieing of thirst. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Bobert Date: 26 Feb 09 - 07:47 PM Well, one thing is for sure... The US is the only developed nation that does not provide national health care... It spend 17% of its GNP on health care and lists 28th in th world on life expectancy and not too much better on infant mortality... And another uncomfortable fact is that most new jobs are being created by small businesses that cannot afford to provide health isnurance because they are too small to qualify as a "group"... That means that many couples without children are paying upwards of a $1000 amonth for just health insurance... Now, if we had national health care we could afford to pay more taxes to cover it and still come out ahead... This is a no brainer... No, it's no free... But if we pooled our resources like other countries do into providing health care for everyone, our small businesses would be more competitive and if we modeled those reforms after countries with better life expectancy and less infant mortality we would be alot better off than we are with the current subterfuge of what is generally considered the American health care system... That system is draining the country... It is equivalent to using leeches to heal desease... The Reagan model is a complete failure and our current situation is "Exhibit A"... But worse than that, with the US being the engine that runs the world economy, we ahve also let down everyone else with 30 years of Reaganonomics... I mean, even Bill Clinton was a Reaganonomics student... We have not had one single break from this failed economic theory in 30 years and it's time to change what clearly ain't workin'... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Stringsinger Date: 26 Feb 09 - 07:18 PM Take away tax exemptions for churches and religious institutions. (That ain't so modest). Make FICA more fair to working people. I take the position offered by Thom Hartmann that jobs are not "created". They are offered to help the company or institution because that entity needs the worker. "Job creation" is a myth. Frank |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:40 AM "Then why are you pretending to disagree with me?" Pretending? That's a presumptive word! I do disagree with you in actuality, Amos. If churches are taxed and muzzled, I consider that a form of taxation without representation. If you wish to speak of taxing actual businesses or real estate the church owns which are not directly use for worship. Say a ten story office building, or a strip mall or an apartment complex, these can be discussed as a separate issue. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John P Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:36 AM Barry, I agree with Greg. Don't ask me to pay for your choices. I also agree that tax-dollar supported education and health care would solve a lot of problems. But even in that scenario, I agree with Greg again, that anyone with more than two kids should have to pay through the nose for them. A big part of the problem with health care and with tax revenues in this country is that we evolved an economic system that depended on everyone having jobs. If you don't have a job, you don't get health insurance. And all those employed people paying taxes is what gave the government the money to take care of things that we can't expect private enterprise to take care of. But then our business "leaders" were allowed to ship most of our middle-class jobs overseas, and not replace the existing economic model with anything else. Retail sales clerks don't make enough money to support our government with taxes, much less be a real middle class. Our economy was built on manufacturing jobs and those are mostly gone. Our economy was dismantled so a bunch of overly rich folks could become even more overly rich. Short-term profits instead of a sustainable economic system. I think one of the most important duties of our government is to reverse this trend, or to replace our system with something that works in the absence of good jobs. That, of course, is not sustainable either. One option might be to require that any goods or services that are sold the United States be produced, shipped, sold, and supported by people who are being paid according to United States' labor laws. Suddenly it wouldn't be cheaper to do the manufacturing in China. My ex-inlaws are big time patriots, America First types who shop almost exclusively at Wall-Mart. Pretty funny in a tragic sort of way. They probably hate that we owe so many billions to China . . . |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Greg F. Date: 26 Feb 09 - 10:05 AM ...we also pay for 2 kids to go to college, another kid who has high medical bills... Another way to handle that is have fewer kids, if you can't afford 'em. PS: There should be no deductions whatsoever for more than 2 children & for every child over 3 a couple has they should have to pay a substantial additional tax premium. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Amos Date: 25 Feb 09 - 09:58 PM John: Then why are you pretending to disagree with me? All I am saying is there is no taxation without representation involved--that would be a bogus claim. The people in churches, like the people in pharmacies and pool parlors, represent their interest on the commons, one way or another. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Feb 09 - 08:48 PM Free at the point of use. Paid for out of taxation, as I said. The same way roads and the police and fire services, for example. Why stop there? Good question. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 25 Feb 09 - 07:07 PM Free, free, free, freee, freeee! That's the ticket, everything Freeeeeee. Why stop there? Food, Cars, Houses, Clothing, Haircuts, Music...ooh I got carried away; music already is free, if you know what to do. McH--if taxes pay for it, it ain't free!!!!!! |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: McGrath of Harlow Date: 25 Feb 09 - 06:48 PM "...we also pay for 2 kids to go to college, another kid who has high medical bills on top of my own high medical bills. While some single tax payer in the same bracket pays the same taxes? I want some deducts..." Free education and free health care for all, paid out of taxation, is the way to solve that one. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Donuel Date: 25 Feb 09 - 04:02 PM Dick is correct the 10,000 page tax code needs a clean sweep 20 pages should be enough We all know that mergers do not make jobs. We know that take overs do not make jobs. We need to stop rewarding all the laws that made Wall Street criminals immune to prosecution as well as making laws to serve our country above corporate motives for profit at any cost to the the nation. Proving you make jobs will require oversight and more jobs to do the oversight. its a win win |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 25 Feb 09 - 12:50 PM A church paying taxes has all the rights Amos has, and if those rights COINCIDE with their belief, that is the cost of taxation. No one is speaking of proselytizing with tax $$$ except Amos. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Amos Date: 25 Feb 09 - 12:42 PM There is no rule that says churches cannot lobby in their interest as organizations--for example, to influence the laws governing charitable activity, etc. The dividing line in AMerican policy is between religion and state, for very good reason. PROSELYTIZING through political action is not the same as voting or lobbying, John. There is a huge fundamental difference. Hiding one as the other is just duplicity. If the Church of Rome or the American Episcopal Church paid taxes on American real estate to the American government, because they use American highways, social security, and other benefits of Federal organization, they have the right to try and get the government to support business propositions int heir interest. But NOT on pseudo-religious grounds--that way lies insanity. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 25 Feb 09 - 11:01 AM "If my wife & I are in your 6.25% rate but we also pay for 2 kids to go to college, another kid who has high medical bills on top of my own high medical bills. While some single tax payer in the same bracket pays the same taxes? I want some deducts, please." Barry, this statement, and millions like it, are why any meaningful tax reform is nigh impossible. You want deductions for your kids; I want interest and tax deductions on my home. Somebody else wants a deduction for expenses they incur on their job. So on down the line. The deduction is that some amount of money--my example is 25K--is tax free. No system is perfect for every person or family. But what we have now is thousands of pages of regulations that no one understands. Even IRS employees don't understand; studies have shown that the same return will be evaluated differently by different IRS employees if a taxpayer has a question...or, shudder, an audit. The goal is to find a system that is fairest in application to the greatest number of taxpayers, and is easily implemented. ________________________________________ "I pay taxes & still get no representation,...." Please amplify. Are you not a citizen, therefore ineligible to vote? Do you generally vote the losing candidate or losing side of a proposition? Are you eligible to vote, but don't? ________________________________________ To those of you who gainsay the idea that taxing churches and keeping them out of the political sphere is taxation without representation, you are wrong. It is true that churches are businesses; I believe many are corporations or the equivalent. If General Motors or XYZ Co. are allowed to lobby, are allowed to inform their employees of a political position...but not coerce them into a specific vote...then why not church leadership? If churches pay taxes, and the membership is not able to deduct membership donations, then those churches are not separated from the government, and should be allowed to take part actively in the political system. This is not to say that religious law is to be the law of the land, but that churches should be able to lobby for laws or support candidates, whose aims seem in concert with their religiosity. I contend that either we have a separation clause, or we don't; we don't if churches are taxed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John P Date: 25 Feb 09 - 09:59 AM My proposal for Republicans is to admit that trickle down doesn't work (they've had 30 years of it and it still doesn't work), deregulation doesn't work (just look around us), starving the government doesn't work (who's going to pay the regulators who could have kept us out of this mess, not to mention the bill for their war?), and big business doesn't have our best interests in mind (corporations that exist only to produce income for investors cannot possibly have a social conscience). So, Republicans, the best thing you could do for our country right now is to get out of the way. If it wasn't so tragic it would have been laughable hearing all the congressional Republicans pissing and moaning about the stimulus bill because it reversed the course they've had us on since Reagan. Get the message, folks: your policies don't work. John P |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Barry Finn Date: 25 Feb 09 - 09:32 AM But John on the Coast, I pay taxes & still get no representation, let the churches pay. If they support charities let them take a deduct for what they spend, just like everyone & evry corp does. They are IMHO a business & should be paying taxes too. It is unlawful for a business to (like had been done in the past) to unduly pressure an employee to support a canidate of a political cause, same can be said for the churh ,,,,while they pay taxes. John, I find no fault with your above graph, of course it's never so black & white. If my wife & I are in your 6.25% rate but we also pay for 2 kids to go to college, another kid who has high medical bills on top of my own high medical bills. While some single tax payer in the same bracket pays the same taxes? I want some deducts, please. Dick, "trickle down" is exactly what it says = they eat cake while we got the crumbs! "Off with their heads". Barry |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Amos Date: 25 Feb 09 - 08:32 AM It would not be taxation without representation. There's a dostonction to be made between the establishment of a relligion, as religion, and the operation of the organization. People who go to a church also go to grovery stores, and visit chiropractors, who are taxed as businesses. The God business need not be exempt. Its individuals already vote, so there's no absence of representation. A |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 24 Feb 09 - 09:39 PM Rigenslinger, if churches pay taxes are they permitted to take part in the political process? May clergy endorse candidates and local and state ballot measures? Would they be permitted to sermonize on legislative bills in Congress? If not, why not? They would be disenfranchised taxpayers if not. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Riginslinger Date: 24 Feb 09 - 09:32 PM "Include corporations, churches..." That's the key, Rapiare, tax churches. They've been getting a free ride for way too long. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Bobert Date: 24 Feb 09 - 07:54 PM Back in college I had a wonderfull economics teacher, Mrs. Snellings... Yeah, she had the book that thr college had told her that she would have to use but she would occasionally go into these very serious rant/monolugues about economic theory that was not in the book and not on the tests... One day the issue of taxes came up and she spent the next half an hour explaining how since WW II that over all taxes hadn't deviated more than 1%... Huh???... Yeah, this woman was way beyonf her time... She rattled off figures from her head and what it came down to is that the tax rate had remained at 54% during all those years... Yeah, this included taxes that are hidden in products we buy, it included sales taxes, corporate taxes and all the hidden taxes that folks have no clue that they pay... Now that is a very intersting concept... Hey, I am not an economist though (haha) I once once certified to teach it at the high school level, but I think there is some merit to Dr. Snellings observations... So, that being the case, if we do need 54% (okay, it might have been 53%, I can't remember the exact percnetage other thasn it was on the plus side of 50%) to run our various governemnts (local, sate, federal) then if we don't tax at that level then how do these levels of governemnt do what we all (or most of us) expect of governemnt??? I think this is an appropriate question to ask... I mean, do we run Sicial Security thru the shreader??? Do we board up the Pentagon??? Do we lay off half our firemen??? Or policemen??? I think what we have seen since my college days is an attempt to chip off a couple three percentage points from that number that Dr, Snellings spoke of back in the 60's and I'd just point to where it has brought us... I donno??? I do know that I wish Dr. Snellings were here to post to this thread... B~ |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 24 Feb 09 - 07:22 PM Well, Rapaire, I'm not so sure about churches. Not that I haven't broached the issue myself. The reason has nothing to do with the sacredness of religious institutions, but of the current interpretation of the 1st Amendment. If churches were taxed, but unable to participate actively in the political process, would that not be a form of 'taxation without representation?' Last year, Steven Waldman, author of "Founding Faith" (a terrific analysis of what the Framers thought about religion in the public aquare) and a founder of beliefnet.com, was Scholar-in-Residence at the Synagogue my family attends. During a Q&A, I A'd whether or not an organization as ours should be exempted from taxes. The Rabbi's and the president's heads snapped toward me so quickly as to look like they had been pole-axed. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Rapparee Date: 24 Feb 09 - 06:58 PM I've thought the same thing for years. Include corporations, churches -- everyone and every company. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: John on the Sunset Coast Date: 24 Feb 09 - 06:49 PM I'll go you one better, Mr. G. We tax ALL income, earned and investment. No deductions period. Exempt from taxes a basic, no frills living standard. Set the tax rate at a reasonable percentage for everybody above that rate. For example: Exempted Income, $25,000 Assume tax rate beginning at $25,001 of 12.5% Earnings Tax Effec Tax Rate 30,000 625. 2.01% 50,000 3125. 6.25 125,000 12500. 10.00 500,000 62500. 11.90 1,500,000 184375. 12.30 You can see as income gets higher, the effective tax rate becomes asymtotic to the actual tax rate of 12.5%. It satisfies the concept of the rich paying at a higher effective rate than a poorer person, and everyone who makes more than the exempted minimum pays a fair share. Of course the rate could be 10% or 15%, or any reasonable rate, and the exemption could be a bit higher or lower. Then we'd have to decide if a married couple would be required to file jointly or if they could file separately. Would a couple each making $20K be allowed to file separately and pay no taxes, or be required to combine household income and pay taxes on 15K of their combined 40,000 income? I think some form closely resembling this program is eminently fair. Only a CPA or an IRS person would hate this type of taxation, because everybody who can do basic arithmetic, would be able to prepare their own taxes. |
|
Subject: RE: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: Amos Date: 24 Feb 09 - 06:01 PM It would be like turning on the kitchen light in Hell's Kitchen to see them cockaroaches scurrying... A |
|
Subject: BS: A modest proposal for Republicans From: dick greenhaus Date: 24 Feb 09 - 05:18 PM inc the prevailing GOP view is that cutting higher-income taxes creates jobs--AKA Trickledown--and the Democrats don't think this works,I offer the following compromise proposal: Eliminate all tax breaks for the wealthy; then offer rebates to those who can demonstrate that they're creating jobs. |
