The Glade 4.0

"Turn the lights down, the party just got wilder."
It is currently Sun Nov 24, 2024 2:56 am

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2
Author Message
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:30 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
Elmarnieh wrote:
Nope, just a tax once on a product. I buy materials tax free and turn the ore into aluminim. I ship the aluminum and sell tax free to a person who crimps it and cuts and turns it into gutters. He sells it with no tax to a contractor who takes it to your house and charges tax to put it up or he charges you tax and you put it up.

Single point single instance taxation.

Completely unworkable and frankly, stupid.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:35 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
How unworkable is it exactly considering that wholesalers don't pay tax already.

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:51 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
Elmarnieh wrote:
How unworkable is it exactly considering that wholesalers don't pay tax already.

Your proposed scheme suggests that only the first end user of the end product pays the sales tax. The inability to clearly define any of the steps in such a manner makes it incredibly open to abuse, not to mention a nightmare for any supplier/producer to track and collect taxes from those that are final users or those that are further producers. If I own a lumber yard that owns its own property, owns the mill and cuts down its own trees and sells those trees, one client might be a Ébéniste, who under your plan doesn't get charged sales tax unless he is making those components for his own use. That causes me undue problems in accurately assessing sales taxes. No thanks.

Whats more, I disagree with the concept, since every transaction that occurs is a trade of property. I don't see the reason for a distinction between raw materials, different levels of production, the first consumer and subsequent consumers.


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 3:59 pm 
Offline
adorabalicious
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 10:54 am
Posts: 5094
What does a "trade of property" have to do with user fees?

The government has the right to extort several times the value of the good out of the economy so long as the good is circulated often?

How much sense does that make?

_________________
"...but there exists also in the human heart a depraved taste for equality, which impels the weak to attempt to lower the powerful to their own level and reduces men to prefer equality in slavery to inequality with freedom." - De Tocqueville


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
 Post subject: Re:
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm 
Offline

Joined: Fri Sep 04, 2009 10:27 am
Posts: 2169
Elmarnieh wrote:
What does a "trade of property" have to do with user fees?
The government has the right to extort several times the value of the good out of the economy so long as the good is circulated often?
How much sense does that make?

A hell of a lot more sense than creating a convoluted and easily abused system as you are suggesting. An item that is never "finished" as a final product is never taxed, despite the framework that protects possession of that item, the raw materials and the transactions involved in the exchange of that product being utilized at each step.

Under what other method of collecting revenue are you suggesting be implemented in conjunction with this sales tax? Are services to be taxed?


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:07 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Khross wrote:
Rynar wrote:
Khross wrote:
No taxes, property or otherwise, should be levied against the land or its transactional value now or later. Discussion over.
I had understood, perhaps wrongly, that you were a proponent of a sales (consumption) tax.
Land must be fundamentally exemption from all forms of taxation, especially serial and transactional taxation.


Ditto, mofos.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:08 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
RangerDave wrote:
Khross wrote:
Land must be fundamentally exemption from all forms of taxation, especially serial and transactional taxation.


What if the scenario were changed so it was about some tangible asset other than land - say, a piece of furniture or artwork?


Get back to you from home later.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:36 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
DFK! wrote:
Khross wrote:
Rynar wrote:
I had understood, perhaps wrongly, that you were a proponent of a sales (consumption) tax.
Land must be fundamentally exemption from all forms of taxation, especially serial and transactional taxation.


Ditto, mofos.


I have no problem with this, but I would like to see the reasoning better articulated.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:14 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
Rynar wrote:
DFK! wrote:
Khross wrote:
Land must be fundamentally exemption from all forms of taxation, especially serial and transactional taxation.


Ditto, mofos.


I have no problem with this, but I would like to see the reasoning better articulated.


I'll sit here and wait for Khross, because its about 50/50 he'll have the same reason as I do, and explain it "better."

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 5:42 pm 
Offline
Commence Primary Ignition
User avatar

Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:59 am
Posts: 15740
Location: Combat Information Center
Inheritance of land should not be taxed. Sale of land should be taxed as a sale, but only proportionally to the costs of protecting the land of the nation.

The government is obligated to defend all land from criminal action, outside attack, and to assist in its protection and recovery in the event of disaster. Therefore, the tax on the sale of land should be proportional to the amount of public funds spent on such activities.

If, for example, the net amount of public income that is spent on defense, law enforcement, and emergency services is 40%, then the sale of land should be taxed at 40% of the normal sales tax rate.

_________________
"Hysterical children shrieking about right-wing anything need to go sit in the corner and be quiet while the adults are talking."


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 6:11 pm 
Offline
Not a F'n Boy Scout
User avatar

Joined: Tue Sep 15, 2009 12:10 pm
Posts: 5202
Diamondeye wrote:
Inheritance of land should not be taxed. Sale of land should be taxed as a sale, but only proportionally to the costs of protecting the land of the nation.

The government is obligated to defend all land from criminal action, outside attack, and to assist in its protection and recovery in the event of disaster. Therefore, the tax on the sale of land should be proportional to the amount of public funds spent on such activities.

If, for example, the net amount of public income that is spent on defense, law enforcement, and emergency services is 40%, then the sale of land should be taxed at 40% of the normal sales tax rate.


I agree with parts of this in principle. In addition to no inheritance tax, I would also suspend all property taxes. Normal sales (consumption) taxes, of a uniform rate with all other sales (consuption) taxes should be applied as they are to all other goods and services. What you are purchasing with those sales taxes is the protection of contract and property law, and the costs associated with them. Including the military, the court system, the police, and the infrastructure those several things obviously require.

This is a one time tax, and does not logically lend itself in any way to the notion of government owning property. Instead it lends itself exclusively to the notion of government protecting those property rights.

_________________
Quote:
19 Yet she became more and more promiscuous as she recalled the days of her youth, when she was a prostitute in Egypt. 20 There she lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses.

Ezekiel 23:19-20 


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
PostPosted: Tue Jul 27, 2010 11:36 pm 
Offline
The Game Master.
User avatar

Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 10:01 pm
Posts: 3729
RangerDave wrote:
Scenario: [snip] Replacing land with.... Art.

Question 1: If I sell the Art in Year 10 for $500k in cash, what amount, if any, do you think I should pay taxes on? What amount, if any, should the purchaser pay taxes on? What is the basis for your answer?


The only tax that should be levied is sales tax, and should be on the sale price. No tax on your income should be levied, because taxing income is deleterious to motivation.

RD wrote:
Question 2: If I trade the Art in Year 10 for some other tangible asset with a fair market value of $500k, what amount, if any, do you think I should pay taxes on? What amount, if any, should the counterparty to the trade (i.e. the recipient of the land) pay taxes on? In each case, what is the basis for your answer?


The exchange is a two-part sale, and should have a sales tax levied on the total value of the exchange.

RD wrote:
Question 3: If I hire someone as an employee in Year 10 and compensate them by deeding the Art to them rather than paying a cash salary, what amount, if any, do you think I should pay taxes on? What amount, if any, do you think the employee should pay taxes on? In each case, what is the basis for your answer?


Not sure I fully get what you mean by this question, but no tax should be levied on income. Instead, this should be viewed as a barter, as above, and sales tax should be levied on the total transaction amount.



I should note that I am not determining who is responsible for the sales tax: buyer, seller, or a mix. I'd leave that to others.

_________________
“The duty of a patriot is to protect his country from its government.” - Thomas Paine


Top
 Profile  
Reply with quote  
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 37 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2

All times are UTC - 6 hours [ DST ]


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 317 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group