Started By
Message

re: No income taxes. What would that look like?

Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:30 am to
Posted by Tiger_n_Texas
Member since Aug 2014
1303 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:30 am to
quote:

Consumption taxes on goods. Consumer spending is a major driver of the economy, making up around 70% of the American GDP. The United States' gross domestic product (GDP) in 2023 was $27.36 trillion


I really like this idea. I would add to this by taking a note from Texas. We don't get taxed on unprepared foods. It encourages better habbits such as smart spending, meal planning, and healthier eating.
Posted by trinidadtiger
Member since Jun 2017
18901 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:35 am to
quote:

Consumer spending is a major driver of the economy, making up around 70% of the American GDP. The (GDP) in 2023 was $27.36 trillion.

what % would need to be added in a consumption tax that EVERY American pays to replace that (and yes I agree with cutting spending)


So you set the value added/consumption/sales tax at 10%, theoretically you bring in 2.738 trillion (I know govt transfers etc), but just ball park.

Then you start collecting and suddenly its 3.738 trillion. Where did it come from.

Earned income tax credit where people not only get their taxes back but the taxes their employer paid in, its not earned credit, its friggin welfare and many many illegals do it.....and then say they pay taxes, well they did and got it back two fold.

The millions of people working PJs (private jobs) off the books, from your brother in law doing your deck to the kid mowing your yard.

10s of millions of illegals working off the books.
Posted by fjlee90
Baton Rouge
Member since Nov 2016
8520 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:36 am to
It looks like my household would take ~ 30k home a month.

I could be persuaded.
Posted by trinidadtiger
Member since Jun 2017
18901 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:38 am to
When we put the tariffs in NO MORE tax credits federal or local for foreign companies building factories in the US. Why the frick to we have states fighting each other, and going into debt to let foreign companies have our markets.

Taiwan semiconductor, guess what, you will be tariffed, and when you want to build in the US as you are currently doing, you give the fed govt a piece of your company in the US. OR YOU STAY IN TAIWAN, WE PULL OUR MILITARY SUPPORT, AND YOU DEAL WITH THE CHINESE.
Posted by lgtiger
LA
Member since May 2005
1462 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:38 am to
Send 60% of the bureaucrats home......to start with
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6507 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:40 am to
quote:

I think you tax money illegal immigrants are sending home. 50% sound right?


Maybe higher to discourage illegal immigration.
Posted by trinidadtiger
Member since Jun 2017
18901 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:41 am to
quote:

We should have been taxing remittances highly.


Consumption tax would catch that before they even wired it. A lot of foreigners use locals to do remitances rather than Western Union these days.
They pay a money guy here in the US, then their partner in Mexico hands the cash to the family member in Mexico, less a fee which is less than official channels.
Posted by Bayou Warrior 64
Member since Feb 2021
737 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:44 am to
quote:

You could eliminate probably 90-95% of the federal government and the average American wouldn’t even notice. In fact, they’d probably see an improvement in their quality of life.


This! 100%
Posted by SWCBonfire
South Texas
Member since Aug 2011
1411 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:45 am to
quote:

To have no income taxes, we would need to replace 2.18 trillion dollars.


To get rid of a cancer, you often have to cut off supply to the tumor and let it die.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62653 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:45 am to
quote:

No income taxes. What would that look like?
Either:
1. metric isht ton of inflation,
2. a bankrupt government,
3. or government basically going away.

LINK
quote:

Now @realDonaldTrump is advocating eliminating the income tax completely and replacing it with tariffs, which was how the federal government was funded prior to 1913. In fact, the 16th Amendment was ratified precisely to replace tariffs on the middle class with income taxes on the rich. However, in 1913, the federal government spent less than 2% of GDP. Today it spends over 24% of GDP. It's impossible to fund the massive federal government we have now with the indirect tax system we had then. If Trump wants to return to the tax system we had prior to 1913, he would need to eliminate all the government programs enacted since then. That would really make America great again.
Since the last two aren't happening... you're left with option 1.

quote:

- Eliminate income taxes and that injects 2.19 trillion into our economy every year.
So... you're leaving out the other side of the equiation. That would raise the deficit to almost $3 Trillion per year. Anyhting can look good as long as you ignore the "cost".

quote:

- cut spending
See above. No way we're cutting Social Security by 80%, and eliminating all discretionary spending.
This post was edited on 10/26/24 at 10:46 am
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6507 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:47 am to
quote:

SlidellCajun


Wow. I think we found some things we can agree on.

quote:

Our interstates are incredibly beneficial. Sure they could be fined by tolls but I’m fine with gas taxes funding. It’s appropriate.


I agree. That puts the funding on the people who drive on it. It is a consumption tax.

quote:

Fema- after Katrina, they were hugely helpful in what I went through.


Here they have to clean up the waste. I know people who were not really in construction just knew a few things making 1000s of dollars per day by simply painting and fixing up small things in homes for displaced people.

I remember the guy tried to get me in on it, but I had no time. Literally, a house was being rented out to the gov and the gov fixed his home and payed for all of the labor and material. All of it.

He literally went to a home where the "displaced" lady was threatening to go to the media if they did not fix what they demanded. It was stupid stuff.. a drip in a sink.. a tear in the flooring..

quote:

Military- without our military, we’re cooked.



One of the things laid out in the Constitution


Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62653 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:48 am to
quote:

No we wouldn’t. We cut the government down. You could eliminate probably 90-95% of the federal government and the average American wouldn’t even notice.
I'm pretty sure they'd notice if you eliminated Social Security. Because you'd have to do that. And still wouldn't get down to 75% of current size, just because of debt service on the current debt (presuming none was added in the future).
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6507 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:50 am to
quote:

The federal government is likened to the NFL, whereas the states are the owners and the fed gub is Roger Goodell. The states give the power to Roger, pay Roger,

and can take it away.


No, it's not anything like that at all. The US constitution:

Article I, Section 8, Clause 1

The Congress shall have Power To lay and collect Taxes, Duties, Imposts and Excises, to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States; but all Duties, Imposts and Excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6507 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:53 am to
quote:

quote:
You could eliminate probably 90-95% of the federal government and the average American wouldn’t even notice. In fact, they’d probably see an improvement in their quality of life.



This! 100%


When China invaded, you would know
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62653 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:55 am to
quote:

We do not take in 5 trillion in income taxes. We take in 2.18 trillion.

Consumer spending is a major driver of the economy, making up around 70% of the American GDP. The (GDP) in 2023 was $27.36 trillion.
This sounds nice. But you haven't accounted for the fact that 46% of poeple pay $0 toward that 2.18 trillion in income taxes. Further, only 10% of taxpyaers pay 75% of that 2.18 trillion. Spreading it out, would be a massive tax increase on a huge number of taxpayers.

I'm all for it. I wish we had flat taxes (fate rate, not percentage)... but I also understand the political realities that there is ZERO political will for the masses to vote themselves a tax increase.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62653 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:55 am to
quote:

Spend 2.4 trillion less per year
What would you cut to achieve this?
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6507 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:56 am to
quote:

So... you're leaving out the other side of the equiation. That would raise the deficit to almost $3 Trillion per year. Anyhting can look good as long as you ignore the "cost".



Wrong. You are leaving out consumption taxes totally. You did not even address it.

You did not address the tariff policy.

ETC ETC
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62653 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:57 am to
quote:

Look at the country, prior to the Civil War.

Tariffs funded the country.
You might want to check out the size of federal government then vs. now.
Posted by Taxing Authority
Houston
Member since Feb 2010
62653 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 10:59 am to
quote:

you give the fed govt a piece of your company
There's a word for that. We love our small government, don't we?
Posted by BCreed1
Alabama
Member since Jan 2024
6507 posts
Posted on 10/26/24 at 11:00 am to
quote:

This sounds nice. But you haven't accounted for the fact that 46% of poeple pay $0 toward that 2.18 trillion in income taxes.



Sure I did. Under a consumption tax, they would pay. Are you thinking those that do not pay income taxes don't shop?


quote:

Further, only 10% of taxpyaers pay 75% of that 2.18 trillion. Spreading it out, would be a massive tax increase on a huge number of taxpayers.



No sir it would not. In order for your thought to be accurate you have to ignore who spend more money. Does the person who pays nothing spend more than those 10% responsible for 75% of the income tax?

first pageprev pagePage 4 of 9Next pagelast page

Back to top
logoFollow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News
Follow us on X, Facebook and Instagram to get the latest updates on LSU Football and Recruiting.

FacebookXInstagram