Meet the real Herman Cain

[CarmelHP]

The state already does that, regarding the monitoring of sales tax.

If you want to have the state collect the Fair tax, I'll get on board with you.

No, the state does not already do that. Not all states, and Indiana does not do it for all Internet and interstate sales, plus it doesn't do it for what would be a 30+% tax when federal and state rates are combined. There 's a much bigger incentive to evade 30% in taxes than 7%. I want the state to decide what method it wants to choose to collect taxes. That's what federalism is all about.

 

[CarmelHP]

My bad. Either way, it's still an income tax.

I'm perfectly willing to see it gone too.

 

[ATOMonkey]

No, the state does not already do that. Not all states, and Indiana does not do it for all Internet and interstate sales, plus it doesn't do it for what would be a 30+% tax when federal and state rates are combined. There 's a much bigger incentive to evade 30% in taxes than 7%. I want the state to decide what method it wants to choose to collect taxes. That's what federalism is all about.

Fair enough. I can go either way state vs federal collectors.

Counter argument would be that it's easier to keep track of a couple hundred thousand businesses, than several million individuals.

Also, one tax with one rate is much easier to audit, than several taxes at various rates with multiple exemptions. To cheat a sales tax, you'd have to do a LOT of cash sales, and carry 2 sets of books showing a low(er) invetory turn.

I still argue that whoever is receiving the taxes should be collecting them, so that money passes through as few hands as possible. Just my personal opinion, as Federalism (in regards to Federal Taxation) isn't a huge issue to me, since Uncle Sugar still gets his tribute one way or the other.

A sales tax is the least intrusive kind of tax, and the fairtax (minus the prebate) is the simplest.

 

[GREEN607]

What on earth are you ranting about?

Ron Paul's credibility was attacked based on the fact that his paycheck comes from tax dollars. I simply pointed out that the person who said this also derived his paycheck from tax dollars for a period of time.

I'm not sure how this translates to ingratitude or a lack of common sense. But please, don't let me interrupt a good rant. Rage on.

You are entitled to your opinion.... and I am entitled to mine. YOU drew the comaprison between legislators being paid with 'tax dollars' and members of our military, being paid with 'tax dollars'.

I call a spade, a spade. And it's my opinion, that yours was a moronic post and moronic comparison. There is no comparison! Thus, my questioning your "common sense"....

The members of our Armed Forces, live their job. They are required to live where 'command' says they will live; report to duty when 'command' tells them to report; perform whatever tasks 'command' decides they need to perform, etc. And they do it, not only as they are told..... but they do it with pride, as the front line of defense of Liberty against 'would be' oppressors and invaders.

Legislators, by design of the initial Congress and our Constitution..... were never meant to be full-time employees of the federal government, or their State, etc. How we, the American people, ever let this get out of control the way it has in the last 50-60 years.... is beyond me. Today, the legislators (unlike the soldiers) feel that they have the right to 'regulate' much of our lives..... in areas they have no business. They are out of control, and believe they have the right to tell the American people what we can do..... and in far too many instances, what we must do. All of this is just a small portion of why government is too big & powerful, and needs to be scaled back.

Ron Paul is no exception. His position in Washington D.C. is far less important than that of any active member of our Armed Forces. So, I stand by my original post. Have a nice day!

 

[ATOMonkey]

I think you need to thump your chest a bit more to get the point across. Maybe add a little more hubris on top of it.

 

[CarmelHP]

A sales tax is the least intrusive kind of tax, ...

That's what makes it so insidious. I don't want government taking more money more transparently. It invites inattention from the taxpayer. That's what's so treacherous about payroll withholding also. You don't see them taking it. I don't want taxes being collected by a distant, anonymous, federal apparatus that runs automatically.

 

[ATOMonkey]

That's what makes it so insidious. I don't want government taking more money more transparently. It invites inattention from the taxpayer. That's what's so treacherous about payroll withholding also. You don't see them taking it. I don't want taxes being collected by a distant, anonymous, federal apparatus that runs automatically.

It's a trade off I guess. I completely agree with what you're saying though. If we had to pay taxes like all of our other bills, people would be much more apt to sit up and take notice.

However, I don't want to **** away a ton of money on tax compliance either just to keep the electorate awake.

 

[steveh_131]

You are entitled to your opinion.... and I am entitled to mine. YOU drew the comaprison between legislators being paid with 'tax dollars' and members of our military, being paid with 'tax dollars'.

I call a spade, a spade. And it's my opinion, that yours was a moronic post and moronic comparison. There is no comparison! Thus, my questioning your "common sense"....

The members of our Armed Forces, live their job. They are required to live where 'command' says they will live; report to duty when 'command' tells them to report; perform whatever tasks 'command' decides they need to perform, etc. And they do it, not only as they are told..... but they do it with pride, as the front line of defense of Liberty against 'would be' oppressors and invaders.

Legislators, by design of the initial Congress and our Constitution..... were never meant to be full-time employees of the federal government, or their State, etc. How we, the American people, ever let this get out of control the way it has in the last 50-60 years.... is beyond me. Today, the legislators (unlike the soldiers) feel that they have the right to 'regulate' much of our lives..... in areas they have no business. They are out of control, and believe they have the right to tell the American people what we can do..... and in far too many instances, what we must do. All of this is just a small portion of why government is too big & powerful, and needs to be scaled back.

Ron Paul is no exception. His position in Washington D.C. is far less important than that of any active member of our Armed Forces. So, I stand by my original post. Have a nice day!

I don't even know where to start with this. I have no desire to debate with you whether or not politicians ought to be paid. I'm inclined to agree with you. Nevertheless, it's a paid position and someone has to do it. I'm not going to discount a candidate simply because they collected a paycheck out of tax dollars any more than I would discount a service member who collected one.

That said, Ron Paul is one of the few who declines to collect a Congressional Pension, calling it "immoral". So by this standard, you should support him more than the rest.

 

[GREEN607]

I think you need to thump your chest a bit more to get the point across. Maybe add a little more hubris on top of it.

Thump my chest? Hubris? Do you even know what that word means?

I was never a member of the military. By the time I had decided to try to join the Air Force.... I had a 9-inch surgical steel plate in my arm, and was denied 'serving'. So there is no hubris involved.....

But I am proud of those who do serve. They are heroes.

 

[ATOMonkey]

Thump my chest? Hubris? Do you even know what that word means?

I was never a member of the military. By the time I had decided to try to join the Air Force.... I had a 9-inch surgical steel plate in my arm, and was denied 'serving'. So there is no hubris involved.....

But I am proud of those who do serve. They are heroes.

Ah, now it makes sense.

My apologies.

 

[steveh_131]

Ah, now it makes sense.

Yes it certainly does.

 

[g00n24]

So...we're going to fundamentally change the tax system but we just have to accept the way income tax is set up? And what you wrote made sense to you?

It's really not that hard to understand. Once everyone is paying taxes, then more people will realize how bad spending is which requires taxation. People in America = votes.
More people that don't like paying taxes (because now they have to pay them) = more people not liking the things they are paying taxes for = more votes for cutting back spending = less taxes needed = closer to not needing income tax

 

[hornadylnl]

It's really not that hard to understand. Once everyone is paying taxes, then more people will realize how bad spending is which requires taxation. People in America = votes.
More people that don't like paying taxes (because now they have to pay them) = more people not liking the things they are paying taxes for = more votes for cutting back spending = less taxes needed = closer to not needing income tax

No, the 47% who weren't paying taxes before will just work that much harder to vote out those who raised their taxes.

 

[Effingham]

Here's a basic question about tax.

Can anyone think of a tax that, once instituted, was actually repealed? I mean, COMPLETELY done away with?

I can't.

 

[CarmelHP]

Here's a basic question about tax.

Can anyone think of a tax that, once instituted, was actually repealed? I mean, COMPLETELY done away with?

I can't.

The 1898 telephone tax to fund the Spanish-American War was finally repealed.

 

[tnek]

This is where he was bought and paid for. When you hear him talk about monetary policy and the federal reserve, it's more of the same.

Sad, because the rest of his history is very impressive... until he sells his soul to the central bank.

So are you another paul supporter? Pretty obvious.

 

[WWIIIDefender]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4o038RvQW90&feature=feedu

 

[Prometheus]

So are you another paul supporter? Pretty obvious.

You can't refute the facts... so what are you trying to accomplish?

 

[csaws]

Why has Bobby Jindahl (spelling?) not gotten in yet?