Buffs35
Well-known member
until we limit the way the crooks - on both sides - spend the tax revenue, none of this matters.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Take this as you will though the estimate used in the article posted above notes the following:
"The burden of complying with the tax code is staggering, currently estimated to consume 6.5 billion hours at a cost of about $313 billion per year, equal to 1.4 percent of GDP.[1] Most of the burden is due to complicated business taxes that consume the time and energy of entrepreneurs and small business owners as well as massive tax departments at many large businesses. The estimate does not include the cost of tax planning, which is a significant industry on its own. Nor does it include the administrative costs and challenges that have clearly overwhelmed the IRS in recent years. Last year, for instance, the IRS answered only about 10 percent of the 73 million phone calls it received from taxpayers asking for help.[2]"
Again, I'm on a different plain than you (and Wllm) with respect to the, "Poor" and the bogeyman "Rich".And I need 25,000 of the 40k workers to make what I got from the one billionaire. That isn't a good ratio for the billionaire if the other 25,000 people start to feel something is unfair to them.
Not sure I would put any wager on those numbers being right, but simplicity is always better in my view. The core of the problem is there are too many people not making enough money. People see what they want to see in the chart below, but the bottom 60% had less income than the top 1%.We estimate that the reform would increase long-run GDP by 2.3 percent, raise wages by 1.3 percent, and add 1.3 million full-time equivalent jobs.
Maybe. But a lot of Americans have their head on backwards these days.I'd say their head is on backwards.
Which is the logic that brought us red October, the French Revolution, etcAgain, I'm on a different plain than you (and Wllm) with respect to the, "Poor" and the bogeyman "Rich".
Using your comment above... If 25,000 40k salary workers become upset that one citizen paid the SAME amount as 25,000 citizens... I'd say their head is on backwards.
So, honest question(s), what are you advocating for exactly? What do you think needs to change?Which is the logic that brought us red October, the French Revolution, etc
Good faith bipartisan budget negations. Mandatory balanced budget, except under emergency situations which must be approved by 2/3 majority of congress.So, honest question(s), what are you advocating for exactly? What do you think needs to change?
Two things:The idea that we as a country can not come up with a rational and fair system to pay for the things that we want is absurd. Post card tax returns need not be a unicorn. Devising a fair system (1) is not the problem the problem are politicians with a interest in retaining their power and the ability to enrich themselves. I have come to believe that many of our problems could be fixed by term limits (2). Y'all don't want princes I don't want Kings and Queens.
Perhaps I should have said "more fairer." but I get what you mean.Two things:
1. There are too many definitions of fair lol. Everyone pays the same percentage is "fair." Everyone pays the same dollar amount is "fair." Etc.
2. You mean when you want to know the best plan for the current problems we face you don't run to the nearest septuagenarian and ask what they think we should do??? Don't they all get sharper with age? Wisdom and all that?
I'm a fan of term and age limits. I'll tell you outright I don't know what the numbers are, but I wouldn't be upset with something like no more than 4 terms or any individual position or a total combined 10 years in any government position.
Hence the "or total combined 10 years . . ." part.Perhaps I should have said "more fairer." but I get what you mean.
4 terms as a Senator would be 24 years , too long
GotchaHence the "or total combined 10 years . . ." part.
I am skeptical about term limits - especially when short - as it further shifts power to staff, lobbyists and adminstrative leviathan. Age limits are a no brainer. So, I could live with 15 yrs of cumulative govt elected service at all levels (18 if 2 term president) and age 70 cap (74 if second term president).Two things:
1. There are too many definitions of fair lol. Everyone pays the same percentage is "fair." Everyone pays the same dollar amount is "fair." Etc.
2. You mean when you want to know the best plan for the current problems we face you don't run to the nearest septuagenarian and ask what they think we should do??? Don't they all get sharper with age? Wisdom and all that?
I'm a fan of term and age limits. I'll tell you outright I don't know what the numbers are, but I wouldn't be upset with something like no more than 4 terms or any individual position or a total combined 10 years in any government position.
*must be able to convert a .pdf to .docI am skeptical about term limits - especially when short - as it further shifts power to staff, lobbyists and adminstrative leviathan. Age limits are a no brainer. So, I could live with 15 yrs of service (18 if 2 term president) and age 70 cap (74 if second term president).
Must be able to closely estimate cost of gas in represented state capital, a gallon of milk from Kroger/Publix/Food City/etc., and a bag of rice.*must be able to convert a .pdf to .doc
Your skepticism of term limits is understandable, there is reason to believe that an entirely different set of problems comes with them. I am not so sure that it shifts power to staff and lobbyist. Staff should change with new folks and the power that the lobbyist have should be somewhat diminished, making deals with someone who isn't going to be around theoretically would not be as lucrative. I will concede that the road to hell is paved with good intention so... However the current system is not serving the American people very well.I am skeptical about term limits - especially when short - as it further shifts power to staff, lobbyists and adminstrative leviathan. Age limits are a no brainer. So, I could live with 15 yrs of cumulative govt elected service at all levels (18 if 2 term president) and age 70 cap (74 if second term president).
I am not a big fan of litmus tests, but I absolutely have - zero tolerance for sexual harassment claims. Trump/Clinton/Johnson/Kennedy etc. have no place leading our nation.*must be able to convert a .pdf to .doc
Dementia screening before you run for office?I am not a big fan of litmus tests, but I absolutely have - zero tolerance for sexual harassment claims. Trump/Clinton/Johnson/Kennedy etc. have no place leading our nation.
They must go on TV and explain over the course of 15-20 minutes unscripted how an unemployed 19 yr old living in Arkansas who is good with his hands but not really a “classroom” person should go about getting a job, saving for a house down payment, secure medical insurance, save for kids college and their own retirement in the real world 2023 economy with actual numbers, no platitudes. If they say the word “bootstraps” they get 15 lashes in the parking lot afterwards. They also have to contrast that advice by explaining why a 30 yr old $800k a year hedge fund yo-yo gets to tax-free “carry interest” $50million of equity of a business he just finished moving all the manufacturing jobs to Asia.Must be able to closely estimate cost of gas in represented state capital, a gallon of milk from Kroger/Publix/Food City/etc., and a bag of rice.