Flashermac Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 There already is a "national peace corps". It's called VISTA (Volunteers in Service to America). Vols spend a year in Appalachia, an inner city, an Indian reservation or with migrant workers. I have some friends who've done it. The one thing I have always despised about the Clinton types and other anti-VN War protestors is that they were absolutely NOT WILLING to do anything themselves. Did you see them joing VISTA? Going into the Peace Corps? Hell, no. They were too busy making money or just plain screwing around doing whatever they felt like. My impression of a good many anti-war protestors was they would not have been out there with banners if there had not been national conscription and they didn't have to worry about being drafted. Bobby Kennedy argued for national service at 18. No student deferments and no exemptions. In return, you'd get your college education paid for. Always made good sense to me. http://www.americorps.org/about/programs/vista.asp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Central Scrutinizer Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Flash, Yes, but VISTA, as you say, is voluntary. My idea would be to make it compulsary for all. And to expand on it. Cent Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flashermac Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 I believe you mean the CCC. p.s. There was also a CMT (Civilian Military Training). One of my friends trained two summers as a high school student and new graduate with the 6th US Cavalry in north Georgia. Got make a mounted charge through the Chickamauga battlefield. He liked the Army so much he joined the Navy in WWII. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 So, your plan is 10% income tax on personal & corps, no exemptions, right? What about capital gains? Would it be taxed? At what rate? Regards, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rchapstick Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 Just captial gains? Good lord, it goes far beyond that. What about (in no particular order, and hardly exhaustive): Business: PP&E Depreciation Foreign earned income (already taxed abroad, not repatriated) Goodwill Interest costs/income Treatment of R&D (capitalized? expensed?) Timing of revenue realization Timing of cost realization Expensing of stock options etc. etc. Personal 401K's, IRA's (existing, new) 529 accounts Interest income from government bonds Capital losses and gains AMT Foreign earned income Deductibility of state and local taxes Insurance proceeds etc etc etc The problem with simplifying the tax code is that, at present, the tax code is used to encourage certain economic decisions (buy a house, save for retirement, buy gov't bonds, etc). Take away those incentives and you take away the behavior. As a B-School Finance professor once told me: "To evade taxes is illegal. To avoid taxes is ... (insert dramatic pause)... your civic duty". Don't get me wrong, I would make out like a bandit on HH's 10% flat tax scheme. So if someone in the gov't wants to implement it, then fine by me. I just think the discussion of a flat tax is an exercise in intellectual masturbation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.. Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 And of course, 10% would NOT be the number. Studies of the Armey flat tax proposal in the 90s found that a tax rate of more than 22% would be required to avoid expanding the deficit. And that was then, this is now, and with BushCo's empire-building, you can bet the number is now more like 28%. With the flat tax plan's elimination of all deductions, including mortgage interest, charitable contributions, state and local taxes, and medical expenses, a 22+% flat tax with Armey's personal exemptions would mean higher taxes for millions of middle-income and poor working families, and much lower taxes for the wealthy investor class. A certain non-starter in my humble opinion. Just read some Adam Smith for his thoughts on why the wealthy should pay more in taxes. Cheers, SD Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangkoktraveler Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 You are saying a flat tax probably would be 28% but I got a feeling medicare and Social Security (which I consider a tax) would be added on top of the 28%. Social Security and Medicare is at 15% (employer and employee contribution) which means a real flat tax of 43%. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rchapstick Posted June 12, 2008 Report Share Posted June 12, 2008 And of course, 10% would NOT be the number. I say we draft HH to oust McCain at the convention. I'll vote for him and his 10% flat tax in a heartbeat! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cavanami Posted June 13, 2008 Author Report Share Posted June 13, 2008 Another idea... 1. all politicians get paid a salary of $1 per year, but they get a xx% bonus calculated on the $$$ they SAVE each year (lower tax, lower spending, etc), making they EARN their outlandish paychecks! 2. Since we MUST buy our oil/gas from a few select oil companies, effectively making them a monopoly, we must have some avenue to have their HUGE profits controlled. The fix...that's a tough one... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh_Hoy Posted June 13, 2008 Report Share Posted June 13, 2008 And of course' date=' 10% would NOT be the number. [/quote'] I say we draft HH to oust McCain at the convention. I'll vote for him and his 10% flat tax in a heartbeat! I appreciate the thought. And "read my lips"...10% on all sources of gross income for individuals and businesses. Warning to tax attorney's, tax accountants, and 70% of IRS employees: start job hunting right now! HH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.