West Seattle Blog...

WSB Forum » Open Discussion

(117 posts)

Flat Tax might just be fairer

Started 10 months ago by kootchman
Latest reply from kootchman

kootchman
Member Profile

At first impulse, a flat tax seems regressive. The advantage of a flat tax however is it is transparant. Unlike a progressive tax, which plagues us with a system so complex and riff with exceptions, a flat tax covers the bases of ease of enforcement and simplicity. An income tax shortfall...whatever the reasons..means increased sales and use taxes. Those are truly the most regressive taxes. An income of 25K a year with a sales tax rate (just for illustration) 9% is a crushing burden. It is a mild effect on a household income of 250K. A poverty line base can be established for the underemployed. If ya start with "new" tax code, flat tax...it is less susceptible to influence and manipulation. The first exception to a flat tax, is the second page on the way to another 178,000 page tax code.

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

our tax code is...incredulous..hedge funds under capital gains instead of income...many, many other things..a revision of tax code seems sensible, doesn't it?

or..we could just go one better....

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/07/21/opinion/21kristof.html?_r=1&nl=todaysheadlines&emc=tha212

Posted 10 months ago #
tom kelley
Member Profile

I never understood why more people didn't support Steve Forbes when he advocated doing away with the IRS and the income tax.
The fact that many of us have to pay a professional to figure out our tax burden tells us all one needs to know about the absurdity of the system created by our politicians. They've created a catalog of loopholes for special interests. That's why my campaign season mantra is,"Vote for no incumbent!"

Posted 10 months ago #
skeeter
Member Profile

Whether a flat tax is more or less fair than a progressive income tax is a matter of opinion. So I’ll leave that alone for now.

What I can tell you with absolute certainty is that a flat income tax is NOT simpler. The complexity of our income tax code, regulations, and court decisions, is not a result of have more than one tax bracket. The complexity of our tax laws comes from determining WHAT income is and WHAT deductions are. The tax laws are incredibly complex because (a) so many taxpayers try to find loopholes that congress has to close and (b) so many special interests convince congress to give a specific industry a tax break and (c) so many deductions are allowed to encourage or discourage a behavior.

Again – a flat tax would not make our tax system simpler. The complexity comes from trying to determine taxable income in the first place. Once you determine your taxable income, it takes about 3 minutes for a human (or .002 seconds for a computer) to run the taxable income through the various brackets and determine income tax liability.

Posted 10 months ago #
Bostonman
Member Profile

To an extent Skeeter. If you have a flat tax based off gross income (not adjusted gross income) then you are eliminating the exclusions you are talking about. Most of the wealthy americans report high gross income but are able to get it to low amounts by the time they reach the AGI (adjusted gross income). From it is reduced by standard exemptions, itemized deductions to get to taxable income. Then you figure out what you owe which is further reduced by education and child credits and a number of other items to get your true tax liability.

Enact a flat tax based off gross income with no deductions or exemptions and you eliminate the opportunity for people to reduce the tax liabiliy. You don't need to have a complicated tax code.

I personally would like to see a flat federal income tax and a national sales tax combination. The only thing I worry about it the ability of the government to raise it all the time. We should also remove the cap on SSI contributions. There is no reason you shouldn't be paying the approx 6.3% on all your income.

The tax code is complicated because the government wants it to be complicated not because it needs to be.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

I posted this before...but from the pen of one of the most powerful financier of all time. I make no comment on the merits, just that the observation is time tested to be true.

Andrew Mellon

"The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid. The high rates inevitably put pressure upon the taxpayer to withdraw his capital from productive business."

Congress believes, that the way to induce a behavior or inhibit one, is by the tax code. Stick or carrot. Human nature will prevail, a revolt against the stick or some carrot of their own.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

I can take any WSB'r...with an identical income, and I assure you, not a one of us will have the same adjusted gross income, and pay the same amount of taxes. A flat tax truly puts the onus on the individual or family to be self determinant. If you want five kids..great, go ahead. But, be prepared to make lifestyle adjustments that fit your family planning strategy. If you choose to have a second vacation home and no kids, fine too. Because of the existing disparity between "adjusted gross incomes"... the IRS itself makes "guesstimates" on the levels of non comlpliance and accepts cheating as unavoidable and hopefully controllable. You can bet in economic downtimes, this first quarter of 2012 is not going to be "winter" any longer... it is the Season of Big Whoppers!

Posted 10 months ago #
Mark32
Member Profile

Thank you Bostonman.

The only thing I would add is that all income is treated equally including interest & capital gains.

Posted 10 months ago #
DP
Member Profile

Andrew Mellon: "The history of taxation shows that taxes which are inherently excessive are not paid . . . "

Let me go ahead and guess what constituted inherently excessive in Andrew "Powerful Financier" Mellon's mind.

Umm . . .

Was it any tax that applied to him?

Yeah . . .

http://tinyurl.com/um-yeah-kootchman

Posted 10 months ago #
hammerhead
Member Profile

OMG the insanity. URGH I guess no matter what, I am screwed. Here I thought a flat tax would be good, but from what I am reading and I am of course not getting. I just give up. Take my money.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Wow..common ground? Here? I will toss my hat in that ring in a NY minute. The thread that connects us all is being unraveled over this issue. Do you have any notion of how discouraging it is when I see or hear just stupidity. ( You can open it up and put in Reagan, Bush et al... but... that liberal progressive congressman from the 7th district..The":houseguest"?.?.. the pearly white, well heeled, connected members ... (y'know the ones...of the Rainier Club). Tell lme how progressive this is...he sticks in an earmark for $250,000 to replace the windows and sills for this bastion of elitism...while Seattle schools, homeless, transit, issues run on fumes. Now 250K probably seems "chump change".. to some. To me, that represents close to ten years of personal income taxes... I spent ten years working my arse off..so he can lay out a cool quarter million to the wealthiest, most exclusive club in Seattle. THAT is what makes a taxpayer just turn away in disgust...and he defended it....as just his job providing constituent services... never mind the fact that he was convicted for his crime and owed over 300K in fines and legal costs for his illegal wiretap release of private Boehner and Gingrich phone conversations..lost his appeal... and who rode to his rescue? ..hell Murdoch just followed his example. At least Murdoch apologized and owned up... Not McDermott...oh no...

"A defense fund set up to help pay McDermott's legal expenses has collected $351,000 in contributions since it started in 2000, according to congressional filings. Labor unions, liberal interest groups, political-action committees and individual Democrats account for most of the donations"

You all think this came free? Noooooooo he knows how to make the taxpayer pay for his crime... earmarks for his generous whitey friends at the club... so shallow, so callous...and then he has the gall to call those asking for fiscal restraint self interested, callous and uncaring... Is the is "progressive" that attended the House Party? The man of such high principals? Christ my wallet just reflexively snaps shut when I hear of this blatant cronyism... but, you will all elect him again. He has more in common with Rupert Murdoch than progressives. Would that make you feel alturistic, making a difference, helping he less fortunate knowing that 1/3 of your working life's taxes went to replace windows at Seattle's most exclusive, elitist club houses? Makes me feel like a sucker.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Just refrain for one minute deflecting this to Republican cronyism...yes, I admit they are the same stripe...but this my fellow bloggers is NOT progressive politics, liberalism...this is naked corruption.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Uh DP...you might want to see the whole context...and what he was attempting... it was a first stab at "across the board" tax obligations...this was in the context of trying to eliminate the deficit from WWI...and make the federal government pay from revenues, not deficit borrowing..AND he was surprisingly successful. He suggested a maximum tax rate of 24%...and EVERYONE pay something...the lowest rate was 1/2 of one per cent. If you know his history, he had long ago established the majority of his fortune...long before the 16th Amendment established the income tax...he was appointed the US Treasury Secretary..serving at the request of one Warren G Harding..he served ten years, the third longest serving treasury secretary....he was also the third largest taxpayer in the United States at the time of his appointment... he continued national service until his death...hardly a pay raise

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

But...here is the simplicity of "inherently excessive"... whatever it takes to cover the current liabilities of the federal government. A "reasonable" time to redeem and retire the national debt. I am guessing we are in the 20 year range at this point.... but open for debate. If it takes 22%... so be it. If we go adventuring...Viet Nam, Iraq, Libya...we pay the "war tax" needed. What becomes inherently excessive is when the national outcry is loud enough to say whooo horse... the truth is at least we will know if there is a pony underneath the pile of horse poopy. The earmarks stop and we finally get a federal budget that rises and falls with our collective fates.

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

Kootchman, Murdoch hasn't fessed up to anything, as far as I'm concerned. To say that he's sorry, but didn't know it was going on? Give me an effing break...this is Rupert Murdoch we're talking about. He didn't get his bazillions of dollars by not knowing what's going on!

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

He accepted responsibility and apologized. That is far more than McDermott did. As far as the scorecard, McDermott was found guilty, twice.. I am not betting more is not to come . This has been McDermotts modus operandi for his entire career. He is a master at bribing his constituents with their own money. At least Murdoch is throwing his own money around for his sins.. McDemott... eternal wetted finger in the air...testing, ever testing the most favorable winds. He knows his constituents though. What about the quarter million to Seattles most wealthy,most connected ? Is that the state of progressive politics? Can't see the connection as to why we no longer trust our taxes to the government?

Posted 10 months ago #
waynster
Member Profile

Flat tax works except when it comes down to one thing. Loopholes and deductions... do you think the republicans will leave theses special items out of any new tax structure.... pipe dreams is all its about. Big business and the rich will cry foul if they leave theses items out. Now kootch you say your not in bed with the tea baggers and main stream gop. Would you support a flat tax with loopholes and deductions for the rich and call it fair for the middle class......?

Posted 10 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

well, kootch, since you didn't provide any links to your allegations against dr. mcdermott, i'll just have to do my own research.

in the larger picture, i'll agree with you in spirit, but i'll phrase it a different way:

do you think that the founding fathers intended for congress to be comprised solely of rich people? or for our economy to work almost exclusively for their benefit? should life be hard for the bottom 95% simply because they don't have equal means? over half of the members of congress are in the top 1% of income earners, and we, the people, pay for their health care - for life - regardless of how many terms the "serve." you can't deny that 1% is a tiny fraction of our population, or that they're benefiting from our generosity, can you? that's hardly representative government, in my opinion.

if congress was a true reflection of the population, there would be a lot more maids, sales clerks, and burger-flippers in there, and our laws and tax codes would be a lot more fair to the general population.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

That;s easy

http://www.seattlepi.com/local/article/McDermott-to-appeal-judge-s-order-to-pay-600-000-1159955.php

http://realclearpolitics.blogs.time.com/2007/05/01/mcdermott_loses_again

http://blogs.seattleweekly.com/dailyweekly/2009/06/mcd_backpedals_slips_on_rainie.php

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2009366972_rainierclub22m.html

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

kman..I'll say it one more time...Murdoch apologized...he did not say "The buck stops here". He simply denied knowing anything. When has that ever been construed as taking responsibility?

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Yes, in fact THEY DID intend to to allow only rich white folks hold elective office. Wrong, but that is our origins... Now that you mention it. They were concerned that a relatively illiterate, unlearned population would be less than capable of self government. That was an easy one! That is why we have an electoral college, which although apportioned to the states...was in fact completely free legally, to ignore the results of the general election and vote for whomever they pleased. I believe the term was "overriding paternalism" In fact it is still true today in some states, members of the electoral college do not have to vote for the majority general election populist vote...although by tradition they do, redblack that was too easy..that was 5th grade social studies... The founders, largely products of the "age of enlightenment were very concerned the "average" citizen was incapable of rational self government. Seems in the main, they were right... when 85% of most American cannot identify five European countries on an untitled map..78 per cent couldn't identify the Med, .... ever watch "Jaywalking" with Jay Leno? In the interest of laughing your ass off...and maybe wondering how many of the "common folk" we really want in public office... then you can cry and wonder what the hell are we doing paying for public education sometimes... watch it I dare you especially the sections on government, history, I know a lot of barristas who fit this to a "T" !!! Oh PLEASE do watch!

http://www.ebaumsworld.com/video/watch/80691723/

As another fact...during the constitutional convention many New England States wanted ONLY propertied landowners to have the vote, being prime facie evidence of "industrious virtue" The infamous Say .. ever hear of the 3/5ths rule?

Ummmm women were granted sufferege in what year?

"It's been established that the Founders did not trust the people and thus created a "filtering system" to remove the people from the election, but nonetheless, the electoral college have 2 essential purposes:

Read more:

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Why_did_the_Founding_Fathers_create_the_electoral_college#ixzz1SquJ5TF5

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

I watched the testimony.

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

well, thanks, Kman..now I know where I stand. I make relatively little money (and live on it, by the way, having discovered the difference between need and want), so I suppose that puts me in league with the illiterati, the unlearned population. What a stinking way to describe our country, and what a stinking way to believe that our country should run, and be run. Not having money has nothing to do with having brains, having common sense. And..wow...when did you come up with the technology to time warp yourself back to meetings with founding fathers so you know first hand exactly what they were thinking?

I'm cranky this morning, and I don't like what you're postulating. And the electoral college?? Maybe it was good for then...things change ! Just like giving women the vote was change...but...oh, gee, maybe you don't think we are capable of intelligent thought in order to vote...or do you welcome change? Inquiring minds want to know...since you brought it up.

Posted 10 months ago #
dbsea
Member Profile

This sure is one BIG can of worms.

I could write for days about this. But I am very pessimistic about our ability to raise quality people and think it will become harder and harder as time goes by. A less capable and productive population supporting an ever larger and more needy population.

Man, I'm going to go cheer myself up and watch a movie. Maybe Soylent Green or Planet of the Apes.

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

dbsea...you aren't the only one that thinks about this...an educated populace is an informed populace. And..it's countered with taking public education funds away...when did that ever make sense? I shake my head...

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Jeesus H Cristo....Jan ya always miss the "it was wrong, but that is the origins"..... part of a post. I cited sources, a quiick summary cause afterall.... this is a running blogalog... not my masters dissertation. Jaywalking is "funny" and there is an underlying tragedy. Both co-exist. You would be dead on correct to say while we also have the brightest and best amongst us...and there are some stunning young men and women of accomplishment...I am just "bummed out".... in the lexicon of my day, at the astonishingly acceptable level of ignorance "out there".. I remember well, the student subscription to the NY Times...and the groups we had that were responsible to summarize once a week, the evolutions of that country. To this day I can name all the principal actors in the Congolese liberation movement. Others had Cuba, some Red China and Formosa...etc... we are talking 4th grade here. PS 33 Queens NYC... not a Lakeland, or Bush School. Is it money? Good lord, that information and more is right at the kids fingertips. National Geographic, The Discovery Channel, have stunning documentaries of depth and complexity. The History Channel... one of my favorites... (can't remember the name) where a team of investigators takes an aritifact and reveals the context and provenance... this stuff is out there is abundance.... I would be aghast if my offspring would be so content to be so damn ignorant. I am sorry...but there is an underlying intellectual poverty that money is not going to solve. If you are asked who wrote the autobiography of Malcolm X and can't answer the question... or "who will write you autobiogrpahy and the answer is "probably my best friend"..is that a lack of money? What country is the Panama Canal located in... "I dunno".. let alone the engineering innovations, or the driving politics of the time...the advances in "field medicine". The consequences of the canal, the political intrigue and usurptiion of governments and territory to insure we had control....without any of that context we find our asses right back in Nam, Libya, Iraq...repeating over and over again the same mistakes. It's not money.... it's a cultural pathology...I did a two year stint tutoring at High Point..the texts were fine..the kid natively bright enough... most could learn, most has access to resources... the public library is full of references... It ain't money... it's something else, something we as a society refuse to address, have no courage to...

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

oops lots of typos...sorry....

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

I remember our civics classes, our history classes. In civics we learned how the gov't. works, , both federally and statewise...and how to do things like write a check, balance a checkbook, how to vote, took trips to the local prison, so as not to end up there. Now entire school districts want to drop history classes as irrelevant...go figure. Technology is a great thing to a point. When high school graduates go on to college, and cannot write a paper with correct grammar,or can't put together a bibliography or when they write with shortened words ala texting, because that's what's accepted, that's just wrong.

As I said this morning, Kman, I was cranky...so my apologies.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

As to the time warp... you can read the letters of Jefferson Adams, Hancock, and others... the time warp machine is the penning of those that were there...that's good enough for me... heck McCullough will even cite and source them, or j Kerns Goodwin...and others.

Posted 10 months ago #
DP
Member Profile

So, kootch . . . who did write the autobiography of Malcolm X?

Hint: It wasn't Malcolm X.

Posted 10 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

well, shucks, kootch. you got me. thomas jefferson must be rolling in his grave knowing that the slaves and the rabble turned all socialist and decided to educate themselves.

and now the barbarians want real economic equality and fairness under the law, same as their masters.

btw, the preamble doesn't say "we, the aristocratic landed gentry;" it says, "we, the people."

Posted 10 months ago #
WorldCitizen
Member Profile

Well, just a side note here. I happen to think a flat tax is the ONLY fair tax system. One exemption only...and it's for everyone. No tax on the first ($35,000...$45,000...not sure what the best number here is, but high enough to make sure the poverty stricken folks aren't totally screwed).

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Flat tax means EVERYONE... the first exemption is the start of a new 173, 000 page tax code.. We already have 47 per cent of the population receiving more benefits than they are putting into the game.

Posted 10 months ago #
redblack
Member Profile

yeah? you try living on $20,000 per year without assistance. you want the fed to take 17% of that?

don't be a totally heartless a-hole, kootch. it makes the baby jesus cry.

and think about this: if your numbers are accurate (and i doubt that they are) that means that almost half of the land of the free and the home of the brave lives below the poverty line.

so whose wealth got redistributed where?

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

"I am taxpayer" is in fact an empowering statement. A flat tax becomes a universal statement. Then we all know, exactly what the "true" cost of our government is. None of us do today. Our Congress has no idea, I have no idea, and we have no metric to measure how efficient our government really is. For over a century we had a national helium reserve...yes, a reserve to fill helium barrage ballons to protect ourselves from WWI era attack ariplanes...flying at 150mph, at altitudes of 1200 feet...a flat tax means that given choice of adding fresh vegetables, fruits, to school lunches when compared to storing helium, we all know that there is trade off to be made before we raise taxes from 18 to 18,002 per cent. It is the insidious creep of expenses and programs hidden from sight and buried in hundreds of thousands of tax code that shields the rat warren of special interests from sunlight.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

I love when you doubt my figures redblack...

http://finance.yahoo.com/news/Nearly-half-of-US-households-apf-1105567323.html?x=0

Stop being such a knee jerk reactionary.... the "tax the rich" doesn't fly anymore.

States are dependent on the federal government for money. Food Stamps, school lunches, transportation funding.. all of those goodies. The feds have to collect that money. That is a cost. It involves IRS, Treasury, GAO, regulators, enforcement, audits... FYI it cost about 12 cents to collect one income tax dollar. ( yes and F-22 Raptors, CVN class aircraft carriers) .. then it costs another 18 cents to disburse it....again, another set of rules and regulations and audits.... how is it my friend that the the US Department of Agriculture has 3 employees for every working farm, (defined as sole income, be it family or corporate farm)... that is the equivalent of 10 full combat divisions, or 2 fully supported combat brigades,or 112,000 employees,take your pick...then, to "reward" states for political fealty, the whole process is repeated again..., and again, at the county, city level. The results the monies collected are absorbed by governments as overhead. Only then can we talk about finally writing checks. You think all those USDA folks are out in the field checking food safety, inspecting plants, checking refrigerant rail cars...etc... OR inspecting imported foods for DDT, and other banned toxins? Noooo sir they are in big offices administrating "the rules". The states end up receiving pennies on the dollar.... NOW...comes the big ax on the poor... the states cannot meet all these federal mandates...they get "matching" funds for many programs... how do they make up for the shortfall?... Sales taxes... EVERYONE pays them... if you make $1,000 bucks a year you DO pay sales taxes... rent? You pay property taxes...via your rent... every study shows local, state taxes ARE the most regressive of all taxes. I hired a local WS resident.... sorta fits the demographic of a tobacco user..(lower to poor income class) $50 bucks for 4 hours of unskilled labor. Being addicted myself...I also buy nicotine... soo... a Gatorade and a pack of smokes cost my assistant... about $10 bucks.... most of it sales and sin taxes.... before he went home he was 10 bucks lighter...tell me again how a flat tax is soooo regressive?

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

well, then, maybe our gov't. needs an independent audit to search out the waste and fraud. Sorta like a business goes through. Someone not beholden to constituents, or whatever. Get rid of those antiquated things like helium reserves...or 30 dollar hammers, etc., etc. And getting rid of Mr. Cheney's private business, and on and on...instead of taking it away from Medicaid, Medicare, SS...just a thought !

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

oops...double post :)!

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

JanS....amazing you should mention that... when Congress tried to audit Fannie Mae and freddy Mac cause it started to stink....before the banks decided to collaterlize all that those junk mortgages.... the collapse that vaporized 1/3 of the expected equity that most middle class folks used in retirement.... or the subsequent 4,000 point drop in the stock market after TARP was let loose, guess what? Congress flat out blocked the audit...ten years before the "collapse".... Congress auditing its own creations? Congress auditing the very institutions and special interests it creates to insure re-election?

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=34591

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

To make it fair...Maxine Waters, Bawy Fwank, Chuck Schumer, are as likely to audit low income waste fraud and abuse as the republicans, (democrates with defense plants and bases) are the DoD... remember the base closures audit? When a full 1/3 of the WW2 era bases were to go under the ax?... what happened? Fast forward a couple more decades.... we now have over 900 military bases ... then we had then....so much for government audits

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

We have so many military bases, the old private...who in used to do a month of KP...or a month of base maintenance...mowing lawns, paiinting buildings, parking lot stripes, etc... supervised by a corporal... now replaced by over a million civilians under contract...to do basic base maintenance....for all you old war dogs out there... you all remember that month every year where every line company while reforming for deployment waiting for the new NCO's, officers, or boot camp graduates..or after a year overseas.. you got assigned to "mess and maintenance"? Not now.... we have a unionized, federally funded, civilian work force for all that

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

Posted 10 months ago #
JoB
Member Profile

kootchman..
time for a little update to the rant.
we don't have a unionized, federally funded work force for all of that.
we have subcontractors.
whose employees are paid squat in the good old US of A

if they work on bases overseas
they are likely to have better benefits and better wages than the average soldier
but only because companies have to bonus them to get them to go..

one step further..

we subcontract the work on bases that used to be done by enlisted men and women because voluntary enrollment in the military is down.. way down.

lots of flag waving happening these days
but very little honoring of the men and women fulfilling their obligation to their country through military service..

it doens't take a rocket scientist to figure out that the military is not the path to future success that it once was.

as for all of those contracts...

i wonder who knew someone who was related to "someone" who held the offices that allocate those contracts? hmmmm.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

JoB ... overseas is a seperate issue... but in the good ole USA....just like all those federal office buidings....Davis Bacon rules.

"The Davis-Bacon and Related Acts, apply to contractors and subcontractors performing on federally funded or assisted contracts in excess of $2,000 for the construction, alteration, or repair (including painting and decorating) of public buildings or public works. "

As one example.... and there more.... plenty more to cover food service workers, PX workers etc. Funny, if there are so fewer Soldiers, (post draft, the all volunteer force bty..(the US Navy is the larget it has been in decades} .is much smaller, and get paid accordingly) which further proves the point. if the miltary core is now so much smaller, why such a larger civilian work force? Tell an E-3 truck driver in Irag making 35K a year that a Blackwater driver making 150K, (no income taxes, MUCH more liberal rules of engagement, also,by treaty, NOT subject to Iraqi civil authority, and not subject to the UCMJ either!) ... you are dead wrong on most counts.

Posted 10 months ago #
WorldCitizen
Member Profile

Ugh, seriously man (Kootch), flat tax is a good idea. No need to ruin a good idea with making an initial starting point for the taxes the equivalent of a "173,000 page tax code". Not everything is a slippery slope just because it doesn't fit your inflexible idea of what should be.

It's simple. No need to make it complex.

Oh yeah and the idea of what constitutes income should be as simple. Correct me if I'm missing something here, but I think you can answer the question of "What constitutes Income?" by answering another question: "Did you have the money before? No? Then it's income."

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

As to carer path...again, you are wrong. The Marine Corps retention rate has met all its goals.. the pay grades are striking. My primary MOS...my rank, AND my secondary MOS skills...two now deemed critical... would have qualified me for a "re-enlistment" bonus of over $60,000 cash money"...PLUS my base pay...35,000K, plus, 3,000 annual combat pay...in todays "all volunteer"force. In fact, a career path is relatively assured. One the old "shit birds" get one chance at a first term enlistment...if they do well, they are invited to stay...if not, thanked for their service and not offered a re-enlistment contract. Look at the average age of a front line grunt....vs Nam'.... Marines typically have fewer married cause' we deploy overseas much more than the Army, and being an amphibious capable corps, often embarked on US Navy ships, we have unaccompanied tours..we can't take wives and kiddies... The Army has two year tours, like Germany, Korea, etc...and do have dependents with them. Nevertheless, ALL branches of service, inclusive, is on average, 6 years older today then back then...they ARE indeed on career paths... so you are factually incorrect. It costs too much to train and equip a modern soldier to not have a career track open. Also..no coincidence the casualties rates a lower..cause they are too expensive to replace.. we lost more men in the first 12 hours D-Day then Afghanistan and Iraq (both wars) combined. A good enlisted .. HS school grad,,, reasonably should hit E-7 and retire at half pay should be right around $ 35-40 K .. FULL benefit package.... and if they stay the full 30 years... 55-60K.... now add that only 10% of of troopies are exposed to hostile fire...seems like a an ok career path to me...a viable one at least.

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

US Army retention..... about 70%
Us Marines ... About 77%

And these are the guys who taketh and giveth life.... the Air Force and Navy except for actual air crews and pilots hardly ever are on the receiving end of kinetic energy....

USAF.. because it has the highest rate of female enlistments of all the services... has the lowest retention rate.. 68%...although after 10 years climbs to similar rates..

In short the ones the service want to stay..generally do stay with a far lower turnover rate than the civilian sector...

Where to you get you information?

Private contractors...like Blackhawk get the low skil jobs...Motor Transport was always the lowest common denominator of military skill levels.... US Force structures are not long term, long, protracted land war forces. we got "bogged" down doing nation building crap... the US military is to be candid, in the killing business...but always get the short stick of fixing what we broke. We need fewer bases.... porky pig politics ... Watch Patty Murphy throw out those old soccer mom sneaks and put on combat boots and fix bayonet when they try to close a useless, obsolete base...like Fairchild AFB..long a USAF turkey... BUT... it has 5000 civilian employees... that would solve tuition problems for UW, Western WSU, Evergreen, et al.... it is a re-fueling wing...and can be joint based almost anywhere, including existing AFB being underutilized....

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

just an aside for those who are not familiar with Bacon-Davis (raising my hand)...

here's the link: http://www.dol.gov/compliance/laws/comp-dbra.htm

prevailing rates in the same area...so if they are paying 10 bucks an hour, that's what you get..if 50 bucks an hour...that may be what you get..if I'm reading that right.

Posted 10 months ago #
JanS
Member Profile

kman..gotta love it..Patty Murray isn't the only one that is fighting things like doing away with Fairchild...but hers is the only name you bring up...again..as I see it, implying that Dems are the only ones who do that...big laugh!

(as I sit here listening to the fine gentleman from Utah - Mike Lee - explain that a vote of 5 dems and 227 Reps is "bipartisan"..and that he says he's willing to "compromise" as long as the "compromise" falls in line with what he's proposing...(he was one of the instigators of Cut, Cap, and Balance)..basically "my way or the highway". Sigh...again..it's an impasse, ain't it?

Posted 10 months ago #
kootchman
Member Profile

JanS consider it a victory lap... have ya got a current WA Republican Senator I can pillory...? I would be glad to do so.... we don't have one. I seethed at the "living skull" Slade Gordon too for his lobbying the state to pass the stadium measure too. I think you have a good point though... would ya all, just so I can spread it around...just vote for a Republican Senator ... the I can be more egalitarian... thank you all in advance. I just think a flat tax is a far more disciplined way to conduct business.... it will make us all reflect more on what the hell we are taxing and spending for. It's shameful...every "honest" attempt we support to do the right thing...for the right reasons... means in order to do so... we have to digest a lot of pork, a package of special interest perks... we HAVE more than enough resources, shamefully so... the only reason there is legitimacy in Cut, Cap, and Balance is .... the government is too large, continues to spend too much, and is putting us, our grandchildren in perpetual debt.. We need everyone to ask is raising out income tax worth what is being proposed. When half of the population pays no income taxes, and 40% actually get more in IRS refunds... just where does one go to get a participating majority to make collective decisions? I truly believe...most progressives do NOT know how fragile this country is becoming. Capital has no borders... it is transferred by wire. As the rest of the world gets wealthier, (a good thing) and it needs capital to grow, expand, develop... countries that are profligate spenders lose the capital they need. We did it as a developing nation... we gave away land, rail rights of way, created spurious finance instruments, to suck that old world money to our shores.. the only hard question to ask is what language should my grandkids be learning... in their new country of origin...if tax and special interests of all stripes keep distorting this system.

Posted 10 months ago #

RSS feed for this topic

Reply »

You must log in to post.

All contents copyright 2012, A Drink of Water and a Story Interactive. Here's how to contact us.
No photo reuse without permission.
Entries and comments feeds. ^Top^