(09-08-2015 11:26 AM)Leargh! Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 11:18 AM)Fo Shizzle Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 10:12 AM)gsu95 Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 09:33 AM)Fitbud Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 07:32 AM)CardFan1 Wrote:  If it weren't for Corporations, There would be No Good jobs. Government Jobs have far more Welfare than corporations ever had.

If it weren't for government, there would be no corporations.

And since corporations are people, let them pay income tax.

The flaw with that thinking is that only individuals pay income tax. Corporations pass it on to customers/individuals. Essentially YOU pay their tax when you by their goods or services. This is one of the main ideas that surround consumption tax proposals.

I believe you're confusing sales tax with income tax.

Nope.

Is the problem that people take advantage of a faulty system? Or that the system is so faulty to begin with?

I don't draw a distinction between gaming the system to avoid taxes and gaming the system to maximize benefits.

(09-08-2015 12:08 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is the problem that people take advantage of a faulty system? Or that the system is so faulty to begin with?

I don't draw a distinction between gaming the system to avoid taxes and gaming the system to maximize benefits.

Well, the second makes the first harder for the individual as one implies work and the second, not so much.

(09-08-2015 12:15 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:08 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is the problem that people take advantage of a faulty system? Or that the system is so faulty to begin with?

I don't draw a distinction between gaming the system to avoid taxes and gaming the system to maximize benefits.

Well, the second makes the first harder for the individual as one implies work and the second, not so much.

Either way it's taking a flawed system and using loopholes to the individual's benefit at the expense of the treasury. If you want to argue that one is a shade of gray lighter than the other, fine. But let's not cheer a top line reduction while condemning a bottom line reduction and pretend the end result is any different.

(09-08-2015 12:20 PM)Hitch Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:15 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:08 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is the problem that people take advantage of a faulty system? Or that the system is so faulty to begin with?

I don't draw a distinction between gaming the system to avoid taxes and gaming the system to maximize benefits.

Well, the second makes the first harder for the individual as one implies work and the second, not so much.

Either way it's taking a flawed system and using loopholes to the individual's benefit at the expense of the treasury. If you want to argue that one is a shade of gray lighter than the other, fine. But let's not cheer a top line reduction while condemning a bottom line reduction and pretend the end result is any different.

No, I agree that both are not right. I just favor work over no work. There are reasons both systems are flawed and I have a feeling both are flawed on purpose. The main reason being $$ is going to peoples/groups, etc.

(09-08-2015 12:29 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:20 PM)Hitch Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:15 PM)VA49er Wrote:  

(09-08-2015 12:08 PM)Hitch Wrote:  Is the problem that people take advantage of a faulty system? Or that the system is so faulty to begin with?

I don't draw a distinction between gaming the system to avoid taxes and gaming the system to maximize benefits.

Well, the second makes the first harder for the individual as one implies work and the second, not so much.

Either way it's taking a flawed system and using loopholes to the individual's benefit at the expense of the treasury. If you want to argue that one is a shade of gray lighter than the other, fine. But let's not cheer a top line reduction while condemning a bottom line reduction and pretend the end result is any different.

No, I agree that both are not right. I just favor work over no work. There are reasons both systems are flawed and I have a feeling both are flawed on purpose. The main reason being $$ is going to peoples/groups, etc.

I don't like the term "gaming" the system, as if people are getting anything out of it that they aren't entitled to or that the system isn't designed to allow.

That simply isn't true, especially when talking about high wealth individuals or corporations. They don't game. The system is designed for this. Tax breaks, shelters, etc are not burden abatements as much as they are burden shifting schemes. But, that is most often for good reason.

You get a tax deduction for donations, for a reason. Corporations are allowed to claim exemptions for dividends, for a reason. The list goes on and on.