A stretch, but it made you think. :-)

Post #249,592 by ben_tilly 3/27/06 11:55:20 PM 3/27/06 11:56:16 PM Reply	A stretch, but it made you think. :-) Also if we taxed all sales, would we tax cases where you sold me stock? Taxing that would destroy financial markets as we know them. Cheers, Ben I have come to believe that idealism without discipline is a quick road to disaster, while discipline without idealism is pointless. -- Aaron Ward (my brother) Edited by ben_tilly March 27, 2006, 11:56:16 PM EST Expand All History
Post #249,594 by Silverlock 3/28/06 12:14:55 AM Reply	I still like a flat tax My idea of a flat tax is somewhat different than others I've seen bandied about. Call it 10%. Total. Every taxing body gets to share some of my 10% tax but 10% is it. City, state fed, whatever. They can fight over my pie. And since a corporation is a "person" in the eyes of our gov, they get a 10% tax also. Total income, no deductions, no depreciation, no loopholes. 10% of ExonMobil's profits last year would go a long way to pay for the war they wanted. And as soon as they move their corporate headquarters to some island with a population of 14,000 people, they get the special foreign sales tax. 10% of any sale of an item sold by a corp with a non-US address. ----------------------------------------- Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. Do it now.
Post #249,595 by boxley 3/28/06 12:31:17 AM Reply	not enough money there, need about 23% Any opinions expressed by me are mine alone, posted from my home computer, on my own time as a free american and do not reflect the opinions of any person or company that I have had professional relations with in the past 50 years. meep
Post #249,603 by Another Scott 3/28/06 7:46:56 AM Reply	10% tax on profits or income? [link\|http://money.cnn.com/2006/01/30/news/companies/exxon_earns/\|CNN]: For the year the company earned net income of $36.1 billion, or $33.9 billion excluding special items. That's up 31 percent from the $25.9 billion it earned on that basis year earlier. [...] While oil and gasoline prices in the fourth quarter were down from the levels seen in September, that barely dented Exxon Mobil's top line. Revenue for the quarter was $99.7 billion, up from $81.9 billion in the year-earlier quarter, and down only 1 percent from the $100.7 billion in revenue in the third quarter. Full-year revenue came to $371 billion, or just over $1 billion a day. There's an appeal to simplicity in taxing a business's income (it's easier to quantify) than profits, but some businesses have to spend a lot to make a little (e.g. grocery stores, IIRC). I think business profits (or income) should probably be taxed, if only to keep them from accumulating huge bank accounts that can be used to distort competition (see: Microsoft). But I don't know of a way to do it simply that doesn't punish firms that must sell a lot to clear a little. If it's a tax on profits, then profits must be very carefully and clearly defined. E.g. How does depreciation, investment credits, leases, losses, long-term contracts, etc., etc., get handled? Cheers, Scott. (Who agrees with Box that 10% probably isn't enough, and who should read up on [link\|http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/VAT\|VAT] - maybe that's the most transparent way to tax businesses.)
Post #249,606 by Silverlock 3/28/06 9:05:56 AM Reply	Pick some other number then I just pulled that one out of my ass. I'm not in love with it. As for the profits vs income question, if income of wage slaves is taxed, income of corps should be also. The fact that some of these giant multinationals can end up with an effective tax rate of 1 or 2 percent or even get a negative tax at the end of the year is obscene. ----------------------------------------- Impeach Bush. Impeach Cheney. Do it now.
Post #249,616 by drewk 3/28/06 10:00:14 AM Reply	Really agree with part of that As for the profits vs income question, if income of wage slaves is taxed, income of corps should be also. Except that you're looking at it backwards. Corporations deduct the cost of wages from their revenues to get their taxable income, the same way they deduct other expenses. That means the labor they have purchased is a deductable item. If that's the case, then I should be able to deduct from my taxable income the value of the labor I no longer have. Why, that means I have no taxable income! Only businesses should be paying taxes! Which, until they passed a "temporary" income tax to pay for the civil war, is exactly how it worked. === Purveyor of Doc Hope's [link\|http://DocHope.com\|fresh-baked dog biscuits and pet treats]. [link\|http://DocHope.com\|http://DocHope.com]

Welcome to IWETHEY!