GOP Poverty Creators Plan to Increase Taxes on 22.9 Million Poor and Middle Class Families

I keep forgetting the name of the richest CEO in Somalia. That has to be the richest, most successful SOB on the planet with no taxes or regulations on him.

Someone help me out here?

Originally posted by nunyadammm
reply to post by Henley

 

I find it hard to respond to your post without laughing or getting mad at you for even asking such questions when I do.

So why did you then

Originally posted by Henley

Originally posted by nunyadammm
reply to post by Henley

 

I find it hard to respond to your post without laughing or getting mad at you for even asking such questions when I do.

So why did you then

edit on 4-8-2012 by Henley because: (no reason given)

Why would I do something that is hard to do?
Because I am still interested in the same goal I was and finding out it is hard to get there does not deter me.
I do lots of things that are hard to do.

Nunya, I realize your two posts in this response were directed to "Henley;" however, I think you bring up some good points.

Originally posted by nunyadammm

Originally posted by Henley
#4 Keep in mind that higher taxes on an employer will and/or

#1 - Add to the unemployment rate.
#2 - Provide lower wages.
#3 - Put some companies out of business.

Sigh.
You forgot

#4 - Reduce CEO compensation.
I guess you would have a huge problem with the richest guys at the top of a company taking home less money. You want the hourly workers to take home less money instead.

That sounds like an idea, I guess.
Now make it not a horrible one.

I have to say that I believe Henley was correct in what s/he said about increased taxes on the (I'm presuming) small business owner as that is what was being discussed prior to the comment. Burdensome taxing and regulations DO result in the reduction of salaries, the closing of businesses and the adding to the ever growing unemployment; and, of course, it IS the small business owner that provides most of the jobs in our Country.

That said, I also agree with what I believe your point to be about excessive pay at the top of the ladder, though I believe that to be far, far more prevalent in large corporations rather than in the small business sector. I'm curious what your answer is to the #4 that you added of "Reduce CEO compensation." How could that be done?

I, too, don't think it is right when there is a crony system that rewards those who have not paid their dues - we see it in our government every day. But it seems a moral issue to me. And how do we mandate morals?

Originally posted by nunyadammm
Have you looked at the growing chasm between CEO pay and employee pay over the last 50 years?

I've looked. It's enormous. I don't know how anyone (we'll say a big bank executive) with a conscience can take home, for example, a $5 mil a year salary and a $10 mil a year bonus while he or she knows the lowly teller dealing with all the customers on the ground floor is making $8 an hour and barely managing to squeak by. HOW do those people look at themselves in the mirror? HOW do they sleep? It's something beyond my ability to understand that those high-end CEOs can walk past the employees that struggle to make ends meet knowing that they, themselves, have not a financial care in the world. I can't see that they even have a heart.

But how do we fix it? If we were to pass laws limiting pay, we're opening a Pandora's Box that will, eventually, affect everyone and not to the good. We have history to show us how seemingly "good" ideas can quickly become very, very bad ideas.

So, since it is something you seem to feel very strongly about, perhaps you've considered some solutions that I have not. If so, I would be very interested in hearing them.

Thanks,

SeesFar

Originally posted by nunyadammm
I keep forgetting the name of the richest CEO in Somalia. That has to be the richest, most successful SOB on the planet with no taxes or regulations on him.

Someone help me out here?

Mustafa Tarambi Hussein?

Is that who you're looking for? I'm a little confused, as I don't know how it applies to the conversation, but I'm sure you had a reason for asking.

Originally posted by SeesFar

Originally posted by nunyadammm
I keep forgetting the name of the richest CEO in Somalia. That has to be the richest, most successful SOB on the planet with no taxes or regulations on him.

Someone help me out here?

Mustafa Tarambi Hussein?

Is that who you're looking for? I'm a little confused, as I don't know how it applies to the conversation, but I'm sure you had a reason for asking.

Is he the richest and most successful SOB on the planet?
How do you not see why I asked? I explained it in my question.

Originally posted by nunyadammm

Originally posted by SeesFar

Originally posted by nunyadammm
I keep forgetting the name of the richest CEO in Somalia. That has to be the richest, most successful SOB on the planet with no taxes or regulations on him.

Someone help me out here?

Mustafa Tarambi Hussein?

Is that who you're looking for? I'm a little confused, as I don't know how it applies to the conversation, but I'm sure you had a reason for asking.

Is he the richest and most successful SOB on the planet?
How do you not see why I asked? I explained it in my question.

My apology. Your question, as you can clearly see was "Someone help me out here?" If you believe that another can discern how that question applies to the conversation, then you might want to reconsider because it's rather vague.

I thought I was helping you out as it seemed you genuinely didn't remember something and apparently didn't want to Google the answer for yourself.

I asked you (n a previous post) what I thought were valid questions to what I thought was a valid post you made and then I did my best to assist you in something for which YOU requested help.

Are you attempting to participate in a discussion or just being in a bad mood? I'm genuinely confused by your non-response as well as your response.

reply to post by MassOccurs

Yes, our job is to take care of the poor, but when you give money to them and they don't become better stewards with the gift you gave, then it's useless.

Originally posted by SeesFar
Nunya, I realize your two posts in this response were directed to "Henley;" however, I think you bring up some good points.

Hey it is all about open discussion and I would hope anyone that has anything to say in regard to anything I type does no matter who I addressed it to.

I have to say that I believe Henley was correct in what s/he said about increased taxes on the (I'm presuming) small business owner as that is what was being discussed prior to the comment. Burdensome taxing and regulations DO result in the reduction of salaries, the closing of businesses and the adding to the ever growing unemployment; and, of course, it IS the small business owner that provides most of the jobs in our Country.

That seems in-congruent with the rest of your post here. People keep just using the term "small business" as an emotional catch-all when the reality is small business bringing in a certain level of revenue. Do you know how many multimillion dollar businesses are classified as "small business" without having anything small about them?

It is so you get that "mom and pop" feeling and some fake sympathy for what is actually millionaires who are increasing their take home pay and doing whatever they can to stop any increase in take home by the people that labor for them

These "small businesses" can afford more taxes a lot better than actual poor and middle class people can. I am not going to feel bad if a CEO has to own one fewer homes.

That said, I also agree with what I believe your point to be about excessive pay at the top of the ladder, though I believe that to be far, far more prevalent in large corporations rather than in the small business sector. I'm curious what your answer is to the #4 that you added of "Reduce CEO compensation." How could that be done?

Taxing them.
Why is it that the only options spoken of are between taxing the workers more or taxing the company more? Rich people can pay taxes too.

Originally posted by SeesFar
I, too, don't think it is right when there is a crony system that rewards those who have not paid their dues - we see it in our government every day. But it seems a moral issue to me. And how do we mandate morals?

Morals are mandated all the time, everyday. That is pretty much what our legal system does. Hell, you know as well as I do this is a big Republican talking point about not raising taxes on poor rich people and they cannot mandate enough morality on women.
Priests can get viagara to treat nothing but nuns cannot get birth control to help prevent cancer and treat other hormonal issues not associated in any way with sex. But I digress.

Originally posted by nunyadammm
Have you looked at the growing chasm between CEO pay and employee pay over the last 50 years?

I've looked. It's enormous. I don't know how anyone (we'll say a big bank executive) with a conscience can take home, for example, a $5 mil a year salary and a $10 mil a year bonus while he or she knows the lowly teller dealing with all the customers on the ground floor is making $8 an hour and barely managing to squeak by. HOW do those people look at themselves in the mirror? HOW do they sleep? It's something beyond my ability to understand that those high-end CEOs can walk past the employees that struggle to make ends meet knowing that they, themselves, have not a financial care in the world. I can't see that they even have a heart.

No I do not see that either. I have known rich and greedy people who somehow get to a point where people are not really people anymore. Everything is a commodity to be bought, sold, or held at value for a time. I never knew them well enough to know when or how that humanity left them if was ever there.

But how do we fix it? If we were to pass laws limiting pay, we're opening a Pandora's Box that will, eventually, affect everyone and not to the good. We have history to show us how seemingly "good" ideas can quickly become very, very bad ideas.

I do not see a reason that pay should ever have to be limited or taxed at 100% for any amount. There are billions of untaxed US dollars in overseas banks. I do not have any money in those banks. None of the normal wage earning folks I know have money in those banks. Who does? Whoever it is is not paying enough in taxes.

So, since it is something you seem to feel very strongly about, perhaps you've considered some solutions that I have not. If so, I would be very interested in hearing them.

Thanks,

SeesFar

I would be happy to expand on any of that if you like.
and no...
Thank you.

Originally posted by SeesFar
My apology. Your question, as you can clearly see was "Someone help me out here?" If you believe that another can discern how that question applies to the conversation, then you might want to reconsider because it's rather vague.

I thought I was helping you out as it seemed you genuinely didn't remember something and apparently didn't want to Google the answer for yourself.

I asked you (n a previous post) what I thought were valid questions to what I thought was a valid post you made and then I did my best to assist you in something for which YOU requested help.

Are you attempting to participate in a discussion or just being in a bad mood? I'm genuinely confused by your non-response as well as your response.

OK, you are right. I now see how exactly you were actually seeing it and responding. My apologies for the tone of my response. The argument for many pages now regarding the topic has been about the choice to or not to tax and or regulate businesses or rich people or "job creators." So I was just curious how rich and successful does one get to be in a place with no taxes or regulation.

reply to post by SeesFar


ya...we, the little guys, should sacrifice more....

I've spent months eating one meal every other day just making sure that my kids were fed......result, I sacrificed the muscle tissue in my abdomin as my body as my body cannibalised it because I was working my arse off burning more energy than I took in.

then, I ended up with a hernia, that seemed to interfer with my digestive system, so now, I can't eat enough to come up with the calories I need....

I sacrificed my ability to walk in my own backyard!!!

I sacrifice every day, providing for my grown children, along with still spending my only day the past three weeks doing about ten loads of clothes, because they can't get a job that will pay for them to live on their own!!!

I think I sacrifced enough, demand more sacrifice from me, and quite frankly, everyone will get much, much less from me!!!

and, well, I am sick and tired of this over half the population doesn't pay taxes!! who the heck are these half of the population??? this family has been borderline social service eligible for most of my kid's childhoods, ya know, too rich to get any help, too poor to support the family!!! we have usually ended up owing the gov't money at the end of the year, every year!!!!!! so, who are these 50%??? we make under the mean income, and I am currently having extra money taking out of my check just to avoid having a huge tax bill coming at us in april, from the fed, from property taxes, taxes on the vehilcles, taxes out the wazoo!!!

my guess is that the 50%, at least many of them, are making more money than me, can afford to incur medical expenses to begin with so they can deduct them, can afford new energy efficient solar panels, appliances, ect....and they are getting their obligation down to zero through tax deductions and tax credits!!!

but one thing is for sure....we pay taxes!!!

demand more, and they will end up getting less!!!!

reply to post by nunyadammm


this is a problem that no law can fix....
just look how their attempts have worked out when it comes to fixing proverty!!!

every necissity that they have subsidized for the poor have seen an inflation rate far above the norm!!

every attempt the gov't can make will have a way to exploit and there are too many greedy sob's in the country that will be willing to exploit them to the max to come up with more money!!

and it doesn't help when the most greedy are sitting in washington either as elected officials or lobbyist, or bankers, they seem to switch from on area to the other....back and forth....in and out....

the cure has to come from the inside of us.....all or use, including the greedy exploiters, who will only come around after their world crashes around them and they are faced with losing what they have also!

so, well, let it crash and burn!

My apology for not responding sooner – life got in the way a little bit. I appreciate you responding to me because I believe you have some good points and we share some concerns and frustrations.

Originally posted by nunyadammm
Hey it is all about open discussion and I would hope anyone that has anything to say in regard to anything I type does no matter who I addressed it to.

Thank you; I agree.

Originally posted by nunyadammm
That seems in-congruent with the rest of your post here. People keep just using the term "small business" as an emotional catch-all when the reality is small business bringing in a certain level of revenue. Do you know how many multimillion dollar businesses are classified as "small business" without having anything small about them?

Perhaps we just have some confusion between us on that a small business is? Small business does bring in a certain level of revenue; otherwise, what would be the point of being a small business owner?

To clarify, I’m talking about the truly small business – those who employee 50 people or less. The IRS (as in ‘the government’) has changed laws so that certain big businesses can ‘legally’ qualify as a small business. I am disappointed in our government in many, many ways and this is one of the ways in which I am GREATLY disappointed in them. The TRUE small business is as punished by tax laws benefiting the wealthy as the middle income earners are.

I know that MANY small businesses, on paper (tax returns) APPEAR to be “multimillion dollar” businesses – if we go with the presumption that more than one million dollars qualifies as “multimillion.” I also know that my friend who owns that small business I described in an earlier post appears on her tax return to be a “multimillionaire” (as in “earning” slightly over one million dollars); however, by the time she pays salaries (not tax deductible), matches the tax contributions of each employee, pays slightly more than half of the insurance premium for each employee, pays for the building, the supplies, paid vacations and sick time for her employees, bonuses, the personal property taxes, etc. her ACTUAL income is less than $100,000 per year. I think that’s awful. She sacrificed to achieve a dream; her dream provides about 11 jobs, but at the end of each year, she only makes about $30,000 more than her highest paid employee but only she bears the burden/worry.

Originally posted by nunyadammm
It is so you get that "mom and pop" feeling and some fake sympathy for what is actually millionaires who are increasing their take home pay and doing whatever they can to stop any increase in take home by the people that labor for them

Nope; it has everything to do with what I hope clarified my position.

Originally posted by nunyadammm
These "small businesses" can afford more taxes a lot better than actual poor and middle class people can. I am not going to feel bad if a CEO has to own one fewer homes.

Nor will I feel badly if one of the uber rich has to own one less house or even live in a smaller one. Yes, SOME of the (not really small) small businesses CAN afford more taxes – those are the ones benefiting from the IRS loopholes. Who made the IRS loopholes? The government.

Here’s a good article from a few days ago that clearly gives their opinion about those tax laws they are making.

This article is much older but is another good example of what politicians are willing to do for themselves or friends in their district.

Originally posted by nunyadammm
Taxing them.
Why is it that the only options spoken of are between taxing the workers more or taxing the company more? Rich people can pay taxes too.

Because that is what suits those in positions of power (Congressmen, lobbyists, giant corporations who buy Congressmen and pay lobbyists). It’s not a Democrat vs Republican thing – they ALL profit from it. Nearly every one of them has a business; they’re not barred from insider trading; they have different rules to live by, so they implement the rules that will better help THEM – not us!

And that is why I believe the income tax should be done away with and a flat tax implemented, instead. A flat tax that would offer NO loopholes. The rich CAN afford more and they WILL buy more, therefore they WOULD pay more taxes under a flat tax. Put the flat tax on vacations, tanning beds, day spas, liquor, etc. Put it on everything except houses, land and food. The poor and middle class will continue to buy what they can buy which, of course, is less than the rich, so they would pay less tax. Then, if we could all set aside our political differences enough to demand our government spend LESS, we might get somewhere.

Originally posted by dawnstar
reply to post by SeesFar

 

ya...we, the little guys, should sacrifice more....

I've spent months eating one meal every other day just making sure that my kids were fed......result, I sacrificed the muscle tissue in my abdomin as my body as my body cannibalised it because I was working my arse off burning more energy than I took in.

then, I ended up with a hernia, that seemed to interfer with my digestive system, so now, I can't eat enough to come up with the calories I need....

I sacrificed my ability to walk in my own backyard!!!

I sacrifice every day, providing for my grown children, along with still spending my only day the past three weeks doing about ten loads of clothes, because they can't get a job that will pay for them to live on their own!!!

I think I sacrifced enough, demand more sacrifice from me, and quite frankly, everyone will get much, much less from me!!!

and, well, I am sick and tired of this over half the population doesn't pay taxes!! who the heck are these half of the population??? this family has been borderline social service eligible for most of my kid's childhoods, ya know, too rich to get any help, too poor to support the family!!! we have usually ended up owing the gov't money at the end of the year, every year!!!!!! so, who are these 50%??? we make under the mean income, and I am currently having extra money taking out of my check just to avoid having a huge tax bill coming at us in april, from the fed, from property taxes, taxes on the vehilcles, taxes out the wazoo!!!

my guess is that the 50%, at least many of them, are making more money than me, can afford to incur medical expenses to begin with so they can deduct them, can afford new energy efficient solar panels, appliances, ect....and they are getting their obligation down to zero through tax deductions and tax credits!!!

but one thing is for sure....we pay taxes!!!

demand more, and they will end up getting less!!!!

I was not talking about you, personally, sacrificing more - I was talking about all of us Americans sacrificing more if we want to make a change. It sounds like you have sacrificed far too much.

The rest of your post I simply cannot respond to because I'm not sure I'm interpreting it correctly and I'm afraid anything I would say might be taken wrongly. Though I will say this: If YOU are supporting your GROWN children, as you say you are (and I believe you!), then I presume you're supporting them because they are NOT working. If your GROWN children are NOT working, then why on this earth did YOU have to do 10 loads of laundry on your only day off?

Something just isn't right with that picture.

Originally posted by buster2010
By doing this they can force more people to go on government assistance. Then the GOP will cry that Obama is trying to make America a socialist country where the government has to take care of everyone.

The GOP is becoming more and more useless every time they open their mouths.

Not really. It goes back to the last Great Depression and how Corporate Fascist's almost overthrew America. The fascist's are still around and have been subsidizing the rope Communist's will use to hang themselves with.

Everyone seems to think that Communism is born out of a collapse, heck communist's have even created a plan, the cloven piven strategy. And the fascists seem to be doing everything in their power to speed the train along the obviously broken tracks. Even helped the leftist's take over the Universities and Church's via feminism and gynocentrism. Causing almost an entire generation of young men to abandon both of them. Two key pillars of society. Pillars that in the past worked to outlaw slavery, outlaw discrimination and persecution, and even end war's. Basically two things that always got into the Corporatist's way. Heck via this strategy the Corporate Fascist's already destroyed Liberalism(or rather Classical Liberalism), their only real political threat.

The reality is, the closer the Communist's think they are getting to their goal the farther off they will be. They will act more brazen and stupid, they will in the end make the perfect scapegoats. Scapegoats who actually are guilty of what they will be accused of.

And it wouldn't take that much of a drop from where we already are.

Originally posted by grey580
linky

The rich need a tax cut?
WTF are the GOP smoking?
Oh and to fund that tax cut they are going to pay for it by taxing the middle class more?

Senator Orin Hatch and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell proposed raising taxes on working families by $11 billion to make room for tax cuts for the wealthy. The two main increases affect poor and moderate income families by eliminating the child tax credit and Earned Income Credit that combined, affect 22.9 million families in 2013 alone. McConnell has complained for weeks that the wealthiest one-percent are unduly punished, and that 98% of the population has to pick up the slack in the Republican version of shared sacrifice. At a time when an overwhelming majority of Americans believe the wealthy should pay higher taxes, Republicans are taking the opposite approach and burdening middle-America to help the 2%.

Again the GOP is showing how out of touch it is with the people of the USA.
Except for the rich of course.

You have to raise taxes.

The poor and the middle class are the most expendable groups to Big Corporate.

Originally posted by SeesFar
My apology for not responding sooner – life got in the way a little bit. I appreciate you responding to me because I believe you have some good points and we share some concerns and frustrations.


Perhaps we just have some confusion between us on that a small business is? Small business does bring in a certain level of revenue; otherwise, what would be the point of being a small business owner?

To clarify, I’m talking about the truly small business – those who employee 50 people or less. The IRS (as in ‘the government’) has changed laws so that certain big businesses can ‘legally’ qualify as a small business. I am disappointed in our government in many, many ways and this is one of the ways in which I am GREATLY disappointed in them. The TRUE small business is as punished by tax laws benefiting the wealthy as the middle income earners are.

Then I guess we cannot have this conversation. If we are all using "small business" to mean something different, none of us are on the same page. I use it as it is legally defined, not what I think it should mean. You and I will not have a productive discussion if we are using the same term but mine means what all the articles posted think it means and yours means something a little nicer. That is not going to work.

The reason they changed what can qualify as a small business is pretty much the reason you are using it. The term conjures up poor Joe Shoestore when in reality it includes many multimillionaires with huge incomes. Instead of looking at them as successful businessmen, they are pittied as lowly small business owners.

I refuse to fall for it and you seemed smarter than that.

small business, big business.....
the fact is, that after they have taken care of all their operational expenses, their payroll, ect....

they are raking in over $200,000 IN PROFIT!!! and it's that profit that would be taxed, not the revenues that the companies bring in, of which alot of it is used for the operational expense of the business.
so, well, these businesses are probably doing better than the one I am working for, since I wouldn't be surprised if at the moment, to find that it is operating in the red, and the boss is throwing his own money into it......
I doubt if he is raking in that kind of profit to fund his new yacht and million dollar mansion, neither of which he owns!!!

any business raking in that kind of money for it's owners, I don't see as struggling...if they need new equipment, well, when they buy it, it's a tax deduction. if they need another employee, well, the money they bring in to pay him is not taxed, it's a deduction. that $200, 000 or whatever they would decide the amount to be would be money that they have been able to take out of the business, bring home, and use however they wished.....

everybody gripes and complains because no one wants to take these minimum wage jobs....like ya, we can all live on that little bit of money!!! well, if we can live on that....I am sure that the small business owner bring home $200,000 a year more than likely will survive!!!! heck a family of five, with most of us working, ain't bringing in $50,000, and we are surviving!!!

but, well, let's say we left the small businesses have their tax cuts, and instead did two things....
we restored the capaital gains tax to what it was before the bush reign, after alll, most of the profit that came about before the banking crisis would have fallen under that category I believe....

and we did away with the tax deductions, tax credits that are only there to serve a tiny portion of the population, and enourage people to do what the gov't wants them to....
like invest in green energy...
encourage companies set up in apple company to ship apple concentrate from across the globe....
things like that.....

heck, if we did that, maybe we might find not only do we not need to raise taxes on anyone, but well, maybe we would find some of the problems in our country solving themselves, since the gov't wouldn't be encouraging people and businesses to create them to begin with!!

by the way, at the moment, two of my three kids have jobs....they just don't make enough to actually support themselves.....by what I am reading, they aren't alone, there is an historically high percentage of young adults still living at home at the current time.....

I am in the latter part of the baby boom generation, and I am just looking at this as our big brothers and sisters getting their last jab in on us......yep, they'll get their social security, they will raid their iras and bring the value down of ours to nothing, and well, we will be stuck providing a portion of our kid's needs till we are 99 and dropping dead at work!!!

and of course, we will still be arguing over weather or not we should extend the bush tax cuts for another year.....

oh, this should get some dander up.... doubt if anyone has heard this one....
someone in congress is trying to get the minimum wage raised to $9.80 an hour.....
wtvr.com...

Originally posted by nunyadammm

Then I guess we cannot have this conversation. If we are all using "small business" to mean something different, none of us are on the same page. I use it as it is legally defined, not what I think it should mean. You and I will not have a productive discussion if we are using the same term but mine means what all the articles posted think it means and yours means something a little nicer. That is not going to work.

The reason they changed what can qualify as a small business is pretty much the reason you are using it. The term conjures up poor Joe Shoestore when in reality it includes many multimillionaires with huge incomes. Instead of looking at them as successful businessmen, they are pittied as lowly small business owners.

I refuse to fall for it and you seemed smarter than that.

edit on 7-8-2012 by nunyadammm because: (no reason given)

Sure we could have the conversation; you're just choosing not to. By doing so, you've just illustrated the entire point of what IS the bottom line problem of the entire Country - virtually none of us ARE on the same page. The 'same page' is one of the main destination goals we all need to work together to achieve. Unless and until a preponderance of the population gets on the same page, we are stuck in this self-perpetuating cycle. We can't have it all 'his' way or 'her' way or 'their' way - we, the citizens of this Country, need to make it OUR way and we will never achieve that without civil discourse.

You define 'small business' according to the articles; those articles use the IRS definition of 'small business.' Where did the IRS definition come from? It came from Congress. What is the only thing that will 'fix' it? The only thing that will fix it is the public ~ folks like me and you ~ working through these issues and surface disagreements so that understandings are reached, distinctions are clarified and then spreading the truth to others.

I absolutely believe we all have more in common than we currently think we do.

I never said the IRS code didn't WRONGLY include "many multimillionaires with huge incomes;" I said the laws that made it possible for those large corporations to be counted as a 'small business' were unjust and self-serving and punished the true small business owner as much as they punished the working classes.

What in my post caused you to draw the erroneous conclusion that I "fell for it?" I don't fall for it; I speak out against it. The distinction MUST be made between what is a TRUE small business and separate them from those who are using Congressionally created semantics and loopholes to qualify as one when they are NOT one.

You didn't address the flat tax issues at all and that's one option that really would make things more fair across the board - it would increase revenue to support what FEW services the government was implemented to oversee, while simultaneously collecting more from the ultra wealthy as well as relieving some of the burden upon the working class. If there was a law that simply stated "You pay 12% tax on EVERYTHING you buy except homes, land and food" our revenue would go up dramatically.

People are upset about illegal immigration from all over the world and those people working under the table, never paying any tax at all but "magically" qualifying to collect Social Security when they retire after having never contributed a cent toward it. People are angry and frustrated by the drug trafficking in this Country and those people don't exactly file tax returns and pay their portion, either. A flat tax would ensure that EVERYONE pays tax and those who SPEND more money because they HAVE more money would PAY more tax. No confusing IRS books to work through, no loop holes, no need to even file a tax return - just pay the tax on what you purchase.

A productive conversation happens when 2 or more people who initially do NOT agree work through that initial disagreement to find common ground, to identify where they DO agree, and to find answers. Any people who begin by agreeing with each other can easily have a 'productive' conversation because they already agree ~ whether they are correct in what they agree about or not.

I am saddened that you are so willing to throw in the towel and declare our conversation 'non-productive.' This exemplifies yet another problem in our society. While I am NOT saying this is your position, what you wrote does remind me significantly of what I see (and have seen the past 40 years), which is people essentially saying "I don't agree with you and I just can't be bothered to learn whether or not I am wrong or admit that you might be right."

You more or less accused me of something - that I was on the side of business - and I showed you that I am not FOR the purpose of furthering discussion. What did you do in return? You quit. Very disappointing to me as I thought you seemed smarter than that.