From: Bill Graham on

"SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
news:4ab5de38$0$1590$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
> Ray Fischer wrote:
>> Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>> THE MORE YOU MAKE THE GREATER PERCENTAGE OF YOUR INCOME THAT YOU HAVE TO
>>> PAY. That's regressive taxation in anyone's book.
>>
>> As usual, graham is wrong on both counts.
>>
>> A "regressive" tax structure charges more for LOWER incomes.
>>
>> The very welathy can actually pay a LOWER tax rate because their
>> income is not always in the form of salaries.
>
> Sales tax, and the horribly misnamed "FairTax" are the most regressive
> because lower income people spend a far greater portion of their income on
> taxable goods than rich people.
>
> For a national retail tax to generate the same amount of money as the
> current income tax it would need to be set at about 25%, and that assumes
> that consumption (legal consumption) remains at the current levels, which
> it won't.
>
> Sales taxes are bad from another perspective, they encourage tax evasion,
> as occurs now with many on-line sales, and hurts local businesses. Also
> you can't deduct sales tax from income tax so a state like Oregon with an
> income tax high property taxes but no sales tax sends less tax money to
> the federal government than California with a high sales tax but
> relatively low property tax.

I agree with all of the above. We have no sales taxes here in Oregon, and I
campaign to keep it that way all the time. In California they were 8% and it
was a royal PITA, as well as being very expensive to purchase any big ticket
items such as an automobile.....I purchases all my cars and motorcycles up
here in Oregon. In California, they even were charging the sales tax on some
foods......All, "fast foods| had to pay the tax. So they were even using the
sales taxes to control morality, assuming it is "immoral" to eat fast food.
To me, this was carrying "big brotherism" to a ridiculous extreme, and it is
one of the chief reasons why I left that state as soon as I possibly could.

From: Bill Graham on

"Miles Bader" <miles(a)gnu.org> wrote in message
news:874oqyqats.fsf(a)catnip.gol.com...
> rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) writes:
>> The very welathy can actually pay a LOWER tax rate because their
>> income is not always in the form of salaries.
>
> Ah.. that must be why the repubs are forever trying to get rid of
> capital gains taxes...
>
> -Miles
>
Yes.....We republicans believe in investing our money for our futures, and
capitol gains taxes are just having to give some of its growth back to the
government, so they discourage saving, which is criminal, to me. The
government wants us to do what they do with every dime they get their hands
on.....SPEND IT!

From: Bill Graham on

"mikey4" <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote in message
news:h958td$20k$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>
> "SMS" <scharf.steven(a)geemail.com> wrote in message
> news:4ab5de38$0$1590$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>> Ray Fischer wrote:
>>> Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>>> THE MORE YOU MAKE THE GREATER PERCENTAGE OF YOUR INCOME THAT YOU HAVE
>>>> TO PAY. That's regressive taxation in anyone's book.
>>>
>>> As usual, graham is wrong on both counts.
>>>
>>> A "regressive" tax structure charges more for LOWER incomes.
>>>
>>> The very welathy can actually pay a LOWER tax rate because their
>>> income is not always in the form of salaries.
>>
>> Sales tax, and the horribly misnamed "FairTax" are the most regressive
>> because lower income people spend a far greater portion of their income
>> on taxable goods than rich people.
>>
> Then *all* taxes are regressive as the lower income group has less in
> their pocket after the taxes then the higher income group.
>
How about just charging people for the government services they use? If the
Army doesn't fight harder for Bill Gates than it does for anyone else, then
they shouldn't charge him any more than anyone else.....How about them
apples?

From: Bill Graham on

"tony cooper" <tony_cooper213(a)earthlink.net> wrote in message
news:r0dcb59gicjklk4hpv4s6qcc4lcggg2e05(a)4ax.com...
> On 20 Sep 2009 04:39:55 GMT, rfischer(a)sonic.net (Ray Fischer) wrote:
>
>>Bill Graham <weg9(a)comcast.net> wrote:
>>>THE MORE YOU MAKE THE GREATER PERCENTAGE OF YOUR INCOME THAT YOU HAVE TO
>>>PAY. That's regressive taxation in anyone's book.
>>
>>As usual, graham is wrong on both counts.
>>
>>A "regressive" tax structure charges more for LOWER incomes.
>
> Not really. When a tax is the *same* for all income levels it can be
> a "regressive" tax structure because it takes a greater portion of the
> income of lower income earner than it does of the higher income
> earner.
>
>
>
>>The very welathy can actually pay a LOWER tax rate because their
>>income is not always in the form of salaries.
>
Does the high income earner need the soldier to shoot more bullets for him
in battle than the low income earner? - If not, then why should he pay more
in taxes?

From: Bill Graham on

"Neil Harrington" <not(a)home.today> wrote in message
news:_LGdnek6-oaz2ivXnZ2dnUVZ_u-dnZ2d(a)giganews.com...
>
> "mikey4" <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote in message
> news:h95791$ph0$1(a)news.eternal-september.org...
>>
>> "Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>> news:4ab5b318$0$1646$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>"John A." <john(a)nowhere.invalid> wrote in message
>>>>news:d1tab5hf131605ho26snc94pnn779hibf2(a)4ax.com...
>>>>> On Sat, 19 Sep 2009 17:28:54 -0500, "mikey4" <lakediver(a)dd..net>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>news:4ab55678$0$1607$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>>>>>> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>news:4ab51946$0$1630$742ec2ed(a)news.sonic.net...
>>>>>>>>> mikey4 <lakediver(a)dd..net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>"Ray Fischer" <rfischer(a)sonic.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>> Neil Harrington <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>"David Ruether" <d_ruether(a)thotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>>>>> "Neil Harrington" <secret(a)illumnati.net> wrote in message
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Much the same with the latest ACORN scandal, which stunk so
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> badly
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> even Democrats in Congress finally voted to stop funding
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> ACORN.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> But
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> never even heard about it from ABC, CBS or NBC, did you?
>>>>>>>>>>>>> [Nonsense deleted...]
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> What was shown on tape from a *few* ACORN locations (but where
>>>>>>>>>>>>> were the reportings of the ones that threw out these
>>>>>>>>>>>>> imposters?)
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>What makes you think ANY of the ACORN offices did or would do
>>>>>>>>>>>>any
>>>>>>>>>>>>differently from the ones on tape? ACORN is rotten and corrupt
>>>>>>>>>>>>to
>>>>>>>>>>>>the
>>>>>>>>>>>>core.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> If that's true then it must also be true of the Republican party
>>>>>>>>>>> given
>>>>>>>>>>> the number of Republicans who have been shown to be lying,
>>>>>>>>>>> philandering hypocrites.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>Just like the lefttards
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Never trust a man who gives online retorts with *no* substance.
>>>>>>>>> mikey in <h8rvun$1hb$1(a)news.eternal-september.org>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>Snip away ray
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Run away, hypocrite.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It's always so easy to argue against you rightards jut by throwing
>>>>>>> your own words back at you.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>ok got it, which post are you referring to? or can't you post the
>>>>>>entire
>>>>>>text here.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> The message ID is h8rvun$1hb$1(a)news.eternal-september.org
>>>>>
>>>>> If your news reader can't get you to the article using that, try this:
>>>>>
>>>>http://groups.google.com/group/rec.photo.digital/browse_thread/thread/16c602542978b515/51ec3250dbeab29b?hl=en&q=#51ec3250dbeab29b
>>>>
>>>>Thank you John for posting the link, the only part that post that is me
>>>>is
>>>>the header.
>>>
>>> mikey tries to deny hos own words.
>>>
>>> Nothing but a rightard coward.
>>>
>>> --
>> Sorry to disappoint you once again ray. What is under that header are
>> pieces of several different posts, none of which are mine.
>
> Mikey, you're wasting your time. Talking sense to Fischer is never going
> to get you anything sensible in return -- all Fischer can do is repeat the
> same bullshit he has already repeated over and over, as he has done here.
> He's totally worthless. I have just killfiled him and suggest you do the
> same.
I kill filed him over a year ago. If he had tried to defend his position
with logical arguments I would not have done such a thing, but all he did
was call me names......