Give me one legitimate argument against a flat tax

Give me one legitimate argument against a flat tax.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/channel/UCAL3JXZSzSm8AlZyD3nQdBA
youtube.com/watch?v=9xXYeQL-5z0
politifact.com/georgia/statements/2011/apr/20/tom-graves/tax-burden-overwhelmingly-wealthy-congressman-says/
dailysignal.com/2015/04/15/how-much-do-the-top-1-percent-pay-of-all-taxes/
cnbc.com/2013/12/11/the-rich-do-not-pay-the-most-taxes-they-pay-all-the-taxes.html
taxfoundation.org/new-irs-data-wealthy-paid-55-percent-income-taxes-2014/
youtube.com/watch?v=Mcf9CLMQuRQ
youtube.com/watch?v=iYJKd0rkKss
youtube.com/watch?v=_3J5wkJFJzE
youtube.com/watch?v=0LGQz3XFQWc
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

the wealthy use more government services then the poor

a main function of the government is to protect property, otherwise that property is not really yours

rich people have more property to protect, they use more services, therefore they should pay more in taxes for those services

>the wealthy use more government services then the poor
Exsqueeze me?

None. Many parties here wants that as well. It sounds like a good idea.

Frasier is the best show to watch while suffering a hangover

Get ready to get your mind blown

youtube.com/channel/UCAL3JXZSzSm8AlZyD3nQdBA

Why are so retarded? How many gallons of communist jew cum did you just drink before posting here?

Compulsory taxation is immoral. It is wrong to take something that doesn't belong to you. The government should depend on voluntary contributions. Still, the flat tax might be less of a headache than what we have now.

They already pay more with a flat tax.

Taxation is theft, and theft is undesirable to the victim - which in the case you're discussing is the vast majority of people.

yeah we watch that sometimes with a friend who is into smithing. This channel is rad too

youtube.com/watch?v=9xXYeQL-5z0

Too much noice for hangover

Accountant here:
Flat tax saves a ton of time and money
>less time to process on both sides
>have to pay accountants less for tax planning purposes
>have to pay accountants less because it takes less time
>less businesses trying to fudge numbers and loopholes to make their bracket lower, and therefore less government/private audit hours

I don't think it's worth it though

thanks for the sweet channel

most americans live paycheck to paycheck, a flat tax fucks them over. I'm not a liberal either, no real economist thinks a flat tax is a good idea

>no real economist thinks a flat tax is a good idea
Many economist here says it would create thousands of jobs, if we introduced a flat tax

how does it fuck them over?

...therefore we must ensure monopoly of rich and principle of "might makes right", while poor would be enslaved by cabals of magnates

I have no problem with noise while hangover, I just want to stay in bed because my head aches when I move

If you're talking about a flat tax on income then it effects the poor more than the wealthy. Example 10% tax on 30k means that person now has 27k vs a 100k person who now has 90k left over.

The 100k person is paying over triple what the 30k person is. As a matter of brute fact.

i never beat this game

I always get stuck on the part where Niles blathers on and on

Poor people pay way more relative to their income to SS withholding than they would with a flat tax. Why aren't you protesting SS?

I love this game

To play devil's advocate with a few of your points
>have to pay accountans less because it takes less time
Realistically you wouldn't have to pay accountants almost anything since the tax code being much simpler would cause people to not even need them tax time.
>less businesses trying to fudge numbers and loopholes to make their bracket lower, and therefore less government/private audit hours
businesses would still try to fudge the numbers so they pay less this wouldn't change. Private audits wouldn't necessarily take that much less time as much of an audit is testing for payables/receivables and other stuff.

However, I do agree with your point of less time and would say you'd have to pay accountants close to 0 for tax planning purpose depending how you see the flat tax being implemented (i'm assuming OP might mean a X% tax on everything here so idk)

crack smoking niggers arent equal to billionaires who contribute tons to the economy.

A dollar to a rich man is worth less than a dollar to a poor man.

A flat tax would be like having tossed salad and scambled eggs.

A dollar to a crack head is worth more than a dollar to a monk aesthetic, despite the fact that the crack head makes more money.
"X is worth more to Y than Z" is not a good argument for a universal policy.

Yes but a person with lower income will have less disposable income. A person making 90K (after tax) will have much more wiggle room on a budget than a person making 27K after tax. I'm not arguing who pays more i'm pointing out a flat tax (according to economics) would hurt a lower class person more.

The person who makes more money has more freedom in their life? What an absurd notion.

Literally the richest 500 people in america pay more taxes than the rest of america combined.

What is or isn't "disposable income" depends on countless factors besides income, and yet you want a tax based on income.
You want people's money stolen in greater or lesser amounts based on how you feel they'll get by? You'd help them out the most by not taking ANY of their property away in the first place. Think of how much poor people pay into SS witholding that is just swallowed by government bureaucracy.

That isn't even remotely true though.

You gotta use the sausage you get from the kitchen on Niles and Eddie will distract him

(you)
I never said that. OP asked for an argument against that and all I was doing was stating an argument against the flat tax. I never said I didn't want a flat tax so I don't see where you're getting that from. I personally think paying into SS should be optional as i'd much rather have the money now to invest than invest it in the boomer ponzi scheme.

politifact.com/georgia/statements/2011/apr/20/tom-graves/tax-burden-overwhelmingly-wealthy-congressman-says/

dailysignal.com/2015/04/15/how-much-do-the-top-1-percent-pay-of-all-taxes/

cnbc.com/2013/12/11/the-rich-do-not-pay-the-most-taxes-they-pay-all-the-taxes.html

taxfoundation.org/new-irs-data-wealthy-paid-55-percent-income-taxes-2014/

If you're arguing a flat tax is worse for the poor, the morally charitable implication is that you don't want people to be worse off, and thus would favor the status quo over a flat tax.
In arguments we're supposed to be charitable in our assumptions - it would be uncharitable to you to not assume you don't want people to be worse off.

You're only looking at the income tax, which is a significant minority of taxes taken.

There won't be enough money for the programs and then nigs chimp out

So you're saying they pay even more.

Civilization is somewhat stochastic we want to reduce the role of luck in quality of life of the average citizen.... That's because being subject to the whims of chance is an uncomfortable idea to us. It seems unfair.

To reduce the role of luck, when a person wins really big, we should take from his winnings and pass it out to those who lost really big.

The big winners don't win as much as they would have, but they still win big. So they're happy.

At the same time, the big losers don't suffer a catastrophic loss, so that they can continue playing a part in civilization.

A progressive tax is a stabilizing force. ... and generally a good idea in a well developed economy.

No - they pay way less as an observation on the whole.
The largest tax people pay is in payroll tax, which is far and away paid for by Average Joe and not Richie Rich.
The majority of sales tax is paid for by not-super rich people, the majority of property taxes are paid for by not-super rich people, the majority of licensing and the added costs of import-restrictions and price floors on agricultural products are paid for by not-super rich people.
I can keep going.

>the wealthy use more government services then the poor

prevent sequestration will reduces the velocity of money, which is a major problem now. If anything upper bands needs to be increased and lower need a decrease with no distinction for capital

i think we should try a flat tax. it can't be any worse than the clusterfuck of a tax system we have right now.

Go away Rawls.

Idk who that is, but nodanargument

There's nothing immoral about the reality of chance, while it is actively immoral to threaten people with violence if they don't hand over their stuff.
There's an argument.

You not knowing who Rawls is is pretty sad though.

For him? Or for me?

Your proposition is immoral though. The purpose of having a civilization is to better the lives of those participating in it.... otherwise we would just give up on the project.

The purpose of morality ought to be to make people interested in bettering that civilization. A morality which tends to destabilize society is a broken morality, if you ask me. Such a morality will lead to suffering in the long run.

"Civilization" isn't a thing people do. It's a descriptive term denoting a state of affairs wherein some people live in some proximity to one another and have generally non-hostile relations.
People's interests are best served when they choose what to do with their time and energy instead of having it violently stolen from them.
You would be better off with all the money you've paid into the payroll tax than you are without it, and that's the case for each and every person.

But I mean the government is a real thing. The army they control is a real thing. They really are protecting us from foreign armies.

There must be something real about this connection.

We wouldn't all be better off if the US got conquered by russia. Maybe some of us would be...

How many "foreign armies" do you know who have an interest in invading the country they do the very most trade with?

Government makes protection of your property your responsibility.

Problem solved.

niggers need 420 lynching

youtube.com/watch?v=Mcf9CLMQuRQ

There was a fraiser snes game?

nah it's just a meme

They do with a flat tax.

>Give me one legitimate argument against a flat tax.
It pisses off the poor instead of killing them all off.

Class genocide is the only way. Anyone 30+ who has negative net worth and a sub 100 IQ, should be removed. We don't have time for that shit.

This. Fuckin drains on society.

Sure, punish the productive for being productive and then reward the unproductive for being unproductive. You earn what you earn.

If big losers can't be productive members of society then they can fuck off, don't expect the "winners" to pay for their bad decisions.

>they use more services
uhh...
No that's niggers.

there should have been

People live paycheck to paycheck because they live at the edge of their means, not below them. Or beyond their means on a sea of (((credit card debt))) just waiting for one small fiscal setback to snowball into a disaster.

Lots!

There are many countries who are in competition with eachother. Many things are easier to take than to buy.

No, you're denying the real role of luck in being successful. It's not a punishment, it's the price of playing.

>He never got Niles' "Double Cappuccino, half-caf, non-fat milk, w/ just enough foam to be aesthetically pleasing" on the infamous Café Nervosa level

Watch this next time lads:

youtube.com/watch?v=iYJKd0rkKss

the comfiest

shit sorry it's not the full doc

easy to download though

that's some Jack London shit

You might enjoy this
youtube.com/watch?v=_3J5wkJFJzE

>many things are easier to take than to buy
I wonder why the dozens of entire nations that have to military whatsoever - many of which don't even have any alliance with any other place - aren't invaded and pillaged...
Hmmm... really activates the almonds.
Could it be that violent bloody murders where everything is destroyed and nothing is gained isn't in most people's economic interests? Naaaah. Couldn't be - you'd be wrong if that were true, and we both understand your position is unassailable!

NO BAHDY GON CHEK THESE QUADS?!

CHECKED.

I bet you think china is our best friend faggot.

Where do you learn this bullshit?

>1 post by this ID

oh

yes, thanks

ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!

Everybody says there is this RACE problem. Everybody says this RACE problem will be solved when the third world pours into EVERY white country and ONLY into white countries.

The Netherlands and Belgium are just as crowded as Japan or Taiwan, but nobody says Japan or Taiwan will solve this RACE problem by bringing in millions of third worlders and quote assimilating unquote with them.

Everybody says the final solution to this RACE problem is for EVERY white country and ONLY white countries to “assimilate,” i.e., intermarry, with all those non-whites.

What if I said there was this RACE problem and this RACE problem would be solved only if hundreds of millions of non-blacks were brought into EVERY black country and ONLY into black countries?

How long would it take anyone to realize I’m not talking about a RACE problem. I am talking about the final solution to the BLACK problem?

And how long would it take any sane black man to notice this and what kind of psycho black man wouldn’t object to this?

But if I tell that obvious truth about the ongoing program of genocide against my race, the white race, Liberals and respectable conservatives agree that I am a naziwhowantstokillsixmillionjews.

They say they are anti-racist. What they are is anti-white.

Anti-racist is a code word for anti-white.

The average Chinese person has little to no care or regard for people thousands of miles away they don't know and will never meet.
And you have little to no regard for the average Chinese person you don't know and will never know thousands of miles away.

That's reality.

There are no seeders

>super rich
>paying tax

It's like you don't know Jews at all.

>I wonder why the dozens of entire nations that have to military whatsoever - many of which don't even have any alliance with any other place - aren't invaded and pillaged...

Are you ignoring the thousands of years of war where everybody was pillaged by everybody?

One brief moment of peace with unknown cause doesn't really demonstrate anything.

>postcount somehow correlates with knowledge/intelligence

>HURR

People were poor miserable and often starving. The people who pillaged often were armed and pillaging populations who didn't have weaponry or people in significant number to pose a terribly significant risk to the lives of the thieves and pillagers.

That is not reality now - that world is gone. It's over. Every place is connected, and only the worst cesspits in the world have any survival struggle whatsoever - the rest of us are objectively affluent.

Can't be done.

A valid argument against, that is.

I miss Super Nintendo

youtube.com/watch?v=0LGQz3XFQWc

Now the question is: Why have a government at all?

>Give me one legitimate argument against a flat tax.

Getting punished for being successful is awesome.

You're either a complete retard, or you're insufferably obtuse

There's nothing obtuse about that.
The person is making the objection in the form "x (a poor man) values y (a dollar) more than z (a rich man) values y". Except you can literally insert any kind of person in for x or y and it can be true, including the sheer opposite ((a) rich person values a dollar more than (a) poor person).

If you're talking about economics you ought to know just a bit about them BEFORE you complain about an argument using language common to the discipline.

x or z*

I remember playing Frasier, eh, it was okay. A lot more fun back then because no other games on my SNES.

Here are TWO:

Any tax on pay, is a indentured servitude. All Income taxes MUST be removed.

The Flat Tax still allows some to NOT pay their share.

>should pay more
Here's some math homework:
10% of $1,000,000 = X
10% of $25,000 = Y
Which is bigger, X or Y?
Show your work.

the POOR use more "government services" than the "rich." And the RICH ARE PAYING FOR ALL OF THAT.

Get rid of the freeloaders in this country and gov would be 1/10 the size it is now.

My only argument is taxation is theft and I don't want to engage in theft, even collectively. But from a practical political perspective it still doesn't make sense. There is no fucking way you will get them to pass a new flat tax AAAAND get rid of the current system. So, no thank you to a whole new tax on TOP of the current tax system.

Is binge watching Frasier the final redpill Sup Forums?

Define "win".

duh

I must say I like the cut of your jib.