IRS Systems Hacked
-
@MattSpeller said:
Things I'd throw out that might be worth investigating to make the planet a more awesome place to live for humans:
- Much shorter work week (24h/4day?)
- Reasonable minimum living wage
- Universal healthcare
- Greater emphasis on the arts and cultural events
- Less societal emphasis on climbing the ladder to succeed; avoid the Peter Principle
Some of these things are good, some coincide with the paying people to stay home, but some undermine the economic theory. Now you might not agree with the theory, but the basics of the theory is that 2% of the population produce everything and 98% are in the way. If we kept the 98% home, the 2% could produce even more and everyone would win. Life would improve for ~100% of the people.
Things like shortening the work week don't fix the issue, they actually make it harder for the 2% to get done what needs to be done. Creative types are crippled by forced short work weeks - they aren't allowed to create when inspiration strikes. That's a problem. Forced long weeks don't help either. But when you don't force a work week companies are free to allow the top performers to decide on what is best for them instead of forcing them into averaged that are set based on the needs of the people who are not producing.
-
Dammit, wrong browser.
-
Not that anyone is going to implement a system like this, it is too drastic. But it makes for a very interesting thought experiment. That a to economist feels that this is true, enough that the US government has him on payroll to guide secret agencies, it's worth considering. And what are the ramifications of it? Things like massive "circular" economic systems where millions and millions of workers are put into jobs just to create other jobs just to keep people "out of the way" while feeling like they aren't being shuffled out of the way is really quite possible, plausible and, honestly, probably likely.
And it isn't about an elite 2%, it's about 2% at the moment. Kids under a certain age all in the 98%. As are the elderly over a certain age. Of people in their prime years, the percentage is way higher of people who are productive. People move in and out of the 2% at different stages of their life, I would assume. It is not that 2% of humans are useful - it is that 2% of any given population is productive "right now."
-
@MattSpeller said:
@IRJ Why would a flat tax be better than greater taxes for people who make more?
I could buy into it for simplicity, etc. Would depend if it included capital gains / investment income etc I suppose.
I am for a flat sales tax. Items like food, water, and bare essentials would not be subject to the flat sales tax. So people who need the bare necessities would not be penalized. The more you buy, the more tax you pay.
-
@IRJ said:
I am for a flat sales tax. Items like food, water, and bare essentials would not be subject to the flat sales tax. So people who need the bare necessities would not be penalized. The more you buy, the more tax you pay.
Nearly all of the US has a flat sales tax now. Do you mean instead of other taxes? Like raise the sales tax and eliminate all other taxes?
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
I am for a flat sales tax. Items like food, water, and bare essentials would not be subject to the flat sales tax. So people who need the bare necessities would not be penalized. The more you buy, the more tax you pay.
Nearly all of the US has a flat sales tax now. Do you mean instead of other taxes? Like raise the sales tax and eliminate all other taxes?
Yeah, something like 21%
-
@IRJ said:
Yeah, something like 21%
So some tax issues with that. Not that I don't like the idea but....
My current tax rate was 52% last time I calculated it. That's a huge tax cut if only part of my income (not the food, not the housing, etc.) were taxed. My overall tax rate with 21% sales tax would be closer to 15% tops, maybe less. Also, the government would have to wait an average of three to six months before getting it. So the drop in tax rate overall would be staggering between the tax delay and the drop in tax rate.
But here is the bigger kicker.... currently I continue to pay US income tax while living abroad while paying sales tax in Europe. But if we moved to sales tax only as a source of taxation, I would instantly become completely tax free and my 52% income tax would drop, effectively, to zero tax!
Now that's just me, but it is the first example that I have at hand. And while that would rock for me. You can see how it would completely cripple the US government if any large number of people had a way to do this and anyone with a significant income does. So all of the people you want to tax the most are the ones who can most easily use this to go to zero tax. The US would, overnight, become an enormous tax haven. No large economy has ever done such a thing.
-
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
Yeah, something like 21%
So some tax issues with that. Not that I don't like the idea but....
My current tax rate was 52% last time I calculated it. That's a huge tax cut if only part of my income (not the food, not the housing, etc.) were taxed. My overall tax rate with 21% sales tax would be closer to 15% tops, maybe less. Also, the government would have to wait an average of three to six months before getting it. So the drop in tax rate overall would be staggering between the tax delay and the drop in tax rate.
But here is the bigger kicker.... currently I continue to pay US income tax while living abroad while paying sales tax in Europe. But if we moved to sales tax only as a source of taxation, I would instantly become completely tax free and my 52% income tax would drop, effectively, to zero tax!
Now that's just me, but it is the first example that I have at hand. And while that would rock for me. You can see how it would completely cripple the US government if any large number of people had a way to do this and anyone with a significant income does. So all of the people you want to tax the most are the ones who can most easily use this to go to zero tax. The US would, overnight, become an enormous tax haven. No large economy has ever done such a thing.
Some things would have to be figured out for sure. Of course most of the really wealthy don't pay much in taxes these days with all the crazy tax breaks they get. It would be nice to get rid of all the IRS employees. That alone would save some dough.
I have seen it proposed that people with incomes lower than X amount are exempt from the flat tax. Sure there is no easy answer, but the system as it is now sucks.
-
@IRJ said:
@scottalanmiller said:
@IRJ said:
Yeah, something like 21%
So some tax issues with that. Not that I don't like the idea but....
My current tax rate was 52% last time I calculated it. That's a huge tax cut if only part of my income (not the food, not the housing, etc.) were taxed. My overall tax rate with 21% sales tax would be closer to 15% tops, maybe less. Also, the government would have to wait an average of three to six months before getting it. So the drop in tax rate overall would be staggering between the tax delay and the drop in tax rate.
But here is the bigger kicker.... currently I continue to pay US income tax while living abroad while paying sales tax in Europe. But if we moved to sales tax only as a source of taxation, I would instantly become completely tax free and my 52% income tax would drop, effectively, to zero tax!
Now that's just me, but it is the first example that I have at hand. And while that would rock for me. You can see how it would completely cripple the US government if any large number of people had a way to do this and anyone with a significant income does. So all of the people you want to tax the most are the ones who can most easily use this to go to zero tax. The US would, overnight, become an enormous tax haven. No large economy has ever done such a thing.
Some things would have to be figured out for sure. Of course most of the really wealthy don't pay much in taxes these days with all the crazy tax breaks they get. It would be nice to get rid of all the IRS employees. That alone would save some dough.
I have seen it proposed that people with incomes lower than X amount are exempt from the flat tax. Sure there is no easy answer, but the system as it is now sucks.
That's a tiny handful that don't pay heavy taxes. Only the .00001%. But the majority of the nation's wealthy pay very high taxes. There is a reason why affluent Americans don't stay and get out of taxes but instead head to other shores where the taxes are lower.
-
@IRJ said:
I have seen it proposed that people with incomes lower than X amount are exempt from the flat tax. Sure there is no easy answer, but the system as it is now sucks.
Flat tax is the best answer I have seen. It's flat, it's easy, it's for everyone. No surprises when you make $1 more than last year. Some salaries have to adjust just a little to make up for it (minimum wage might go up 20% or whatever) but the basics still work.
If you want income and sales tax, that can work to balance how money is being spent too since flat tax hits a single income, family of four differently than sales tax does (high food and housing cost, for example.) But if you only do sales tax, people will just buy elsewhere, stop buying or whatever.
You can't avoid income, but you can avoid buying.
-
By the way, if anyone ever accuses Americans of being consumer driven, send them to visit Morocco. The consumerism lifestyle is mind boggling. There is nothing but consumerism there. It's like nothing you've ever seen. Life revolves completely around "stuff".
-
I hate it when a good topic goes off topic, but even worst when it is about politics/religion.....
-
@Aaron-Studer said:
I hate it when a good topic goes off topic, but even worst when it is about politics/religion.....
I hate it when an organic discussion gets taken into "being off topic" land so that we have to discuss how topics and conversations work and try to define what "on" or "off" topic is yet again. There are two schools of thought, it seems: one that conversations can't happen and there can be no discussion outside of a narrow context that pretty much means no ongoing conversation or two that the only off topic post is one saying something is off topic.
Given that the topic is about a government tax agency, talking about governments and taxes is a completely natural extension of the original conversation. Is there something more about the original post that needs to be said? Or is it just that you want the thread to stop and no one get to talk about things? What's the desired outcome of the "no off topic" remarks?
If there is something that you want to say that is "on topic" to you, there is nothing keeping you from commenting on the OP. If you feel that the topic has strayed dramatically, just quote the OP and make a comment from that point. The topic only feels like it is straying because there is little or nothing left to say that is a direct response to the OP and instead the interest is in responding to the responses.
So I don't feel that this went off topic. The community is a conversation and this is how conversations work. No one started a "new" topic that wasn't led from the post before it.
-
@Aaron-Studer said:
I hate it when a good topic goes off topic, but even worst when it is about politics/religion.....
And it's not allowed but seems to happen a lot in these topics. http://mangolassi.it/topic/60/our-community-guidelines/4
-
@thecreativeone91 said:
@Aaron-Studer said:
I hate it when a good topic goes off topic, but even worst when it is about politics/religion.....
And it's not allowed but seems to happen a lot in these topics. http://mangolassi.it/topic/60/our-community-guidelines/4
Well when IT and government collide....
-
Sadly, in many cases, government and religion are part of IT. Mostly because IT is everywhere, including in government and religion. Nothing wrong with that per se but the problem is is that keeping government and religion out of all IT discussions is akin to keeping business out of it. But in many cases business, religion or politics are the context of IT.
