(12-01-2011 07:39 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 08:54 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 12:43 AM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  

(11-30-2011 07:31 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(11-30-2011 01:27 PM)UM2001GRAD Wrote:  This is untrue. Only deep ignorance of economics would cause someone to make a such a ridiculous blanket statement.

No..it is your ignorance that is amazing. Business taxes are part of overhead and are including into pricing of products or services. This is a simple undeniable fact. Only individual pay taxes...period.

It's awesome to watch a moron use terms like overhead when they have no idea what that actually means.

Unlike you...I actually RUN a GD business. I am fully aware of what overhead entails in the REAL world. All you do is spew out nonsense from a GD book. The more you post the more embarrassed every UM graduate becomes.

You always know you're talking to a real idiot when they start talking about things "in the real world". Hey junior, the items that make up overhead aren't different "in the real world".

Stop embarrassing yourself DUMGrad. When you run a GD business successfully for over 25 years and provide jobs for over 100 workers?...Then..I'll be happy to listen to your opinion about what we should be basing our overhead upon. Until then...STFU asswipe.

I just don't understand you righties. You just seem to be clueless morons. All a consumption tax will do is 1. cut down on consumption and 2. tax the low and middle income considerably more and the wealthy much less. [/quote]

So the rich would suddenly consume less and the poor more? If I keep repeating what you say maybe you'll see how ridiculous it is.

(12-02-2011 11:39 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 03:50 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

I just don't understand you righties. You just seem to be clueless morons. All a consumption tax will do is 1. cut down on consumption and 2. tax the low and middle income considerably more and the wealthy much less.

So the rich would suddenly consume less and the poor more? If I keep repeating what you say maybe you'll see how ridiculous it is.

[/quote]

I think he was referring to total tax as a percentage of net income.

(12-02-2011 11:53 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 11:39 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 03:50 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

I just don't understand you righties. You just seem to be clueless morons. All a consumption tax will do is 1. cut down on consumption and 2. tax the low and middle income considerably more and the wealthy much less.

So the rich would suddenly consume less and the poor more? If I keep repeating what you say maybe you'll see how ridiculous it is.

I think he was referring to total tax as a percentage of net income.
[/quote]

If you have read any of his posts he doesn't know what he's referring to most of the time. I've asked him to elaborate some on his posts and he can't.

(12-02-2011 11:53 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 11:39 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 03:50 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

I just don't understand you righties. You just seem to be clueless morons. All a consumption tax will do is 1. cut down on consumption and 2. tax the low and middle income considerably more and the wealthy much less.

So the rich would suddenly consume less and the poor more? If I keep repeating what you say maybe you'll see how ridiculous it is.

I think he was referring to total tax as a percentage of net income.
[/quote]

Robert is totally lost on this issue. NO way in hell will consumption by the poor decrease if they get a monthly prebate check.. plus the additional money that has been withheld for taxes from their paychecks. They will consider this a windfall and spend the hell out of it.

What WILL happen is that the middle and upper class will start to SAVE some of this instead of considering it a windfall. That would be a great thing. Americans are NOT saving today. Consumption in this regard would most likely increase short term in a response to spurge spending and then return to former levels and savings would increase...Consumption would not decrease..period.

If it moves, tax it.
If it keeps moving, regulate it.
If it stops moving, subsidize it.

(12-02-2011 10:00 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  If it moves, tax it.
If it keeps moving, regulate it.
If it stops moving, subsidize it.

This. sadness IMO

(12-02-2011 09:43 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 11:53 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 11:39 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 03:50 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

I just don't understand you righties. You just seem to be clueless morons. All a consumption tax will do is 1. cut down on consumption and 2. tax the low and middle income considerably more and the wealthy much less.

So the rich would suddenly consume less and the poor more? If I keep repeating what you say maybe you'll see how ridiculous it is.

I think he was referring to total tax as a percentage of net income.

Robert is totally lost on this issue. NO way in hell will consumption by the poor decrease if they get a monthly prebate check.. plus the additional money that has been withheld for taxes from their paychecks. They will consider this a windfall and spend the hell out of it.

What WILL happen is that the middle and upper class will start to SAVE some of this instead of considering it a windfall. That would be a great thing. Americans are NOT saving today. Consumption in this regard would most likely increase short term in a response to spurge spending and then return to former levels and savings would increase...Consumption would not decrease..period.




[/quote]

Does paying down debt count as "saving" ?? Isn't that what happened with the Bush's "Let's send everyone a check!" stimulus plan? Most people sent the money to Visa/Mastercard/Amex/etc.

(12-03-2011 10:50 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 09:43 PM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 11:53 AM)AtlanticLeague Wrote:  

(12-02-2011 11:39 AM)ImMoreAwesomeThanYou Wrote:  

(12-01-2011 03:50 AM)RobertN Wrote:  

I just don't understand you righties. You just seem to be clueless morons. All a consumption tax will do is 1. cut down on consumption and 2. tax the low and middle income considerably more and the wealthy much less.

So the rich would suddenly consume less and the poor more? If I keep repeating what you say maybe you'll see how ridiculous it is.

I think he was referring to total tax as a percentage of net income.

Robert is totally lost on this issue. NO way in hell will consumption by the poor decrease if they get a monthly prebate check.. plus the additional money that has been withheld for taxes from their paychecks. They will consider this a windfall and spend the hell out of it.

What WILL happen is that the middle and upper class will start to SAVE some of this instead of considering it a windfall. That would be a great thing. Americans are NOT saving today. Consumption in this regard would most likely increase short term in a response to spurge spending and then return to former levels and savings would increase...Consumption would not decrease..period.

Does paying down debt count as "saving" ?? Isn't that what happened with the Bush's "Let's send everyone a check!" stimulus plan? Most people sent the money to Visa/Mastercard/Amex/etc.
[/quote]

I would consider this what one does with a windfall. Keep in mind we are not talking about a one time check. We are talking adding both withholding and the prebate back to peoples monthly incomes. Yes..I would expect them to pay off some bills...spend some and save some of the extra. All are good things..IMO. This tax system would be a godsend for many poor and working poor families.

IMO there is no better example that shows why the Democrats really do not care that much about the poor and working poor more than their refusal to look at this type of tax proposal. It would do more for them than ALL their damn socialist programs have ever done. That is what they fear from this.