Depends on how it is administered. The 'Fair Tax' proposal for replacing income/payroll tax with sales tax and having a system of 'prebates' (credits for low earners), would produce a massive net-economic benefit which would likely do far more than equalize the benefits, because people would be paying small-zero tax straight out of their pocket except when they make purchases, and could still get some additional top-up down the line.
Much higher GDP, domestic investment and consumption etc... Although that is a hypothetical idea and has some critics, as laid out in the above link. However, it could help preserve the more beneficial welfare in the form of cash transfers whilst giving everyone an extraordinary tax cut.
In terms of Social Security precisely, though, I think it would be better if it could be replaced with private saving after your elaboration and the long term difficulties in keeping Social Security . However I feel that you may need to have some sort of automatic enrolment scheme in place for employees. Getting people to save early would be crucial, but there would have to be some compulsion to force the habit considering that Social Security has probably changed attitudes towards saving which won't go away overnight. And you couldn't phase out Social Security too quickly unless you want to doom 30/40+ people who have been paying into it. That would be unfair.
Oh, it definitely has to be a slow phase out with a president who knows how articulate proper rhetoric. But, yea I don't deny that consumption has a far weaker negative effect on GDP. But statistical studies have still found the effect is marked. Look to tax foundation. I would much rather have a fair tax than an income tax.
@DarthSkywalker
This left me scratching my head a little. The fact that the EITC means many people take more than they pay in is to be expected with the EITC. That's because the EITC is a variant of negative income tax. Effectively, many on the lower end of the spectrum pay a negative rate of tax because of these benefits, which makes them richer than they would be otherwise. This means that even if you were to get rid of all the depressing taxes along with the benefits, those poor people who pay negative rates of tax will inevitably be worse off, because they would be breaking even at best whereas now they are net-benefiting.
(please log in to view the image)
Poor people only start net paying in when you factor in other taxes like payroll, but that could be replaced with a sales tax with a net benefit. And since the whole point of the EITC and other welfare payments is to supplement the incomes of poorer individuals, it is not surprising that they benefit more than those in the middle and upper percentiles.
Although that being said, the other issues that you pointed out about the EITC were fair. But this isn't, imo, because programs like the EITC are supposed to relieve the tax burden for the poor, not necessarily those higher up on the income ladder. The CATO Institute also seems to assume that expanding the EITC would immediately require tax rises. But we know that governments can run modest budget deficits without raising the alarm of investors.
Last edited by lazybones on Jan 13th, 2018 at 05:25 PM
Correction: They use the word 'ultimately'. But I don't think this is even right. Unless the EITC was expanded to a totally untenable degree which caused debt interest to spiral, thus necessitating tax rises. But realistically, a government would be more targeted and sensible with its expansion and wouldn't even need to borrow if they simply reallocated spending from other programs into the EITC. It's not as straightforward as they make it.
Last edited by lazybones on Jan 13th, 2018 at 05:50 PM
Okay lefftists on the forum: you best get to work trying to dismiss each and every one of those companies. I hope for your sake that 99% of them have announced lay offs as well so you can act like this isn't a big deal. Go for it. I look forward to your report on all 164 companies.
Oh and for fun:
New video interweaves liberals bashing tax reform with news of company bonuses and raises
Lmfao, oh leftists...Nancy, at the end, calling the savings "crumbs" and "pathetic". Same person who lauded $40 savings years ago lol, same exact person.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Last edited by Surtur on Jan 15th, 2018 at 04:14 PM
Yet in the past $40 was something for Nancy Pelosi to celebrate. Weird, how now amounts around 5 times more than that are crumbs to her.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
164 companies represent a grand total of 0.00059% of the 28 million businesses in America. And let's not forget the pesky fact that this tax plan will raise middle class taxes over time and likely produce only a minuscule amount of growth in exchange for 1.5 trillion more in debt. Even the traditionally free market think-tank, the Tax Foundation, has growth failing to reach the targets set.
[b](please log in to view the image)
(please log in to view the image)
So, uh, congratulations on your victory.
Last edited by lazybones on Jan 16th, 2018 at 09:31 PM
__________________ Chicken Boo, what's the matter with you? You don't act like the other chickens do. You wear a disguise to look like human guys, but you're not a man you're a Chicken Boo.
Is the curtain expected to be pulled away within the next 2-3 years, or do calculations have the ramifications of the new Tax Plan not really being felt until very much later?
Because you were trying to pass those raises off as a 'big deal' when they're an absolute drop in the ocean and clearly just optics. In the medium-long term, the bill will do very little at all and potentially hurt low-middle income people. You can delude yourself all you want, but this tax reform bill was an utter joke of a reform.
KMC Community Forums
Jan 11th, 2018 10:57 PM
