DeSantis says he would welcome bill to abolish 'corrupt' IRS: 'We need something totally different'

[2012Bearcat]

DeSantis says he would welcome bill to abolish 'corrupt' IRS: 'We need something totally different'

Ron DeSantis says that he would be "welcoming" of a measure from Congress to defund the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) if he's elected president next year.

www.foxnews.com

Have we ever had a Flat Tax discussion on this board? I always thought the proposal was interesting but I don't think anyone in Washington would want it. Takes to much power away from those in Washington. With Democrats constantly preaching the wealthy do not pay their fair share I would think they would at least be interested in looking at it but who knows. What I do know is our tax system is extremely complicated, confusing, frustrating and there has to be a better way of funding government.

 

[my_2cents]

With Democrats constantly preaching the wealthy do not pay their fair share I would think they would at least be interested in looking at it but who knows.

Most Democrats have looked into what is behind flat tax proposals. And these proposals do nothing but benefit the wealthy while hurting the poor and the average American.

Because of this, most Democrats are not going to support any of the flat tax proposals that have been put forth.

However, Democrats are all for reforming our tax system. Just not reform that benefits wealthy individuals while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Most Democrats have looked into what is behind flat tax proposals. And these proposals do nothing but benefit the wealthy while hurting the poor and the average American.

Because of this, most Democrats are not going to support any of the flat tax proposals that have been put forth.

However, Democrats are all for reforming our tax system. Just not reform that benefits wealthy individuals while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans.

How does the flat tax do nothing but benefit the wealthy? Do Democrats not say the wealthy don't pay their fair share and take advantage of the tax laws to avoid paying taxes? I'm no expert but if Democrats say the current system is unfair wouldn't it make sense to look into another system that is?

 

[my_2cents]

How does the flat tax do nothing but benefit the wealthy?

Have you actually looked into what many of the flat tax proposals actually do? Or do you just here a politician talk about it and think it is a good idea?

Go do a little independent research for once and see what you discover. btw, you will have to get off your right-wing websites to do this.

Do Democrats not say the wealthy don't pay their fair share and take advantage of the tax laws to avoid paying taxes?

Yes we do. However, the flat tax proposals that are out there don't solve this problem.

I'm no expert but if Democrats say the current system is unfair wouldn't it make sense to look into another system that is?

Yes, it is called reforming the current system and putting into place laws that ensure the wealthy pay their fair share without adding placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans.

Replacing the current system with a new system that benefits the wealthy isn't the answer.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Have you actually looked into what many of the flat tax proposals actually do? Or do you just here a politician talk about it and think it is a good idea?

Go do a little independent research for once and see what you discover. btw, you will have to get off your right-wing websites to do this.


Yes we do. However, the flat tax proposals that are out there don't solve this problem.


Yes, it is called reforming the current system and putting into place laws that ensure the wealthy pay their fair share without adding placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans.

Replacing the current system with a new system that benefits the wealthy isn't the answer.

As I said I'm no expert, I did read the flat tax book years ago and thought it was interesting. What I do know is the current system is not working according to most everyone you talk to. I think it's going to take more than just reforms to find a workable solution.

 

[my_2cents]

What I do know is the current system is not working according to most everyone you talk to.

I agree, and that is why I support reforming the system. I'd be open to even replacing it as long as the new system doesn't benefit the wealthy while hurting middle and low income Americans.

 

[2012Bearcat]

I agree, and that is why I support reforming the system. I'd be open to even replacing it as long as the new system doesn't benefit the wealthy while hurting middle and low income Americans.

Hell just froze over.

 

[my_2cents]

Hell just froze over.

This has always been my position. And so far, it has been Republicans (and even some Democrats) who have stood in the way of accomplishing this.

 

[2012Bearcat]

This has always been my position. And so far, it has been Republicans (and even some Democrats) who have stood in the way of accomplishing this.

We agree the system needs reforms but I doubt we agree on how it needs to be reformed. I'm for much smaller government, less government intervention, less government dependency and in turn far less taxes. Based on your post I would assume you are the polar opposite.

 

[my_2cents]

I'm for much smaller government, less government intervention, less government dependency

Except when you aren't.

We agree the system needs reforms but I doubt we agree on how it needs to be reformed.

Probably so, if you support reforms that will benefit the wealthy while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans, as most Republican policy makers do. If this isn't what you support, then we probably could find some areas of agreement.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Except when you aren't.


Probably so, if you support reforms that will benefit the wealthy while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans, as most Republican policy makers do. If this isn't what you support, then we probably could find some areas of agreement.

Examples of when I'm for bigger government and more intervention?

I'm for everyone paying the same percentage. If a person makes $1000 a year or 1 billion a year I think they should all pay the same rate and everyone should have skin in the game. Nothing more fair than that.

 

[my_2cents]

Examples of when I'm for bigger government and more intervention?

Abortion.

Some issues related to parental rights.

First two that come to mind, I'm sure there are others.

 

[my_2cents]

I'm for everyone paying the same percentage. If a person makes $1000 a year or 1 billion a year I think they should all pay the same rate and everyone should have skin in the game. Nothing more fair than that.

But everyone paying the same percentage isn't fair. This benefits the wealthy while hurting middle and lower income Americans.

 

[2012Bearcat]

But everyone paying the same percentage isn't fair. This benefits the wealthy while hurting middle and lower income Americans.

Why wouldn't everyone paying the same rate be fair, they are all paying the exact same rate? Seems to me that would be the very definition of fair. Isn't it Democrats screaming the wealthy pay less of a percentage than everyone else, or is that another Democrat lie?

 

[my_2cents]

Why would everyone paying the same rate be fair, they are all paying the exact same rate? Seems to me that would be the very definition of fair.

But it isn't because equal doesn't mean equitable. What is equal is not always fair.

A person making more money taxed at the same rate as a person making less (or even way less) is going to greatly benefit in a flat tax system. Such a system is going to hurt the lower income person a lot more than the wealthy individual, because the lower income person has less wiggle room in his/her budget. A flat tax system leaves that lower income person with even less to make ends meet.

Again, a flat tax benefits the wealthy while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans. This is why many wealthy American and their policy makers favor a flat tax system. They get it. Why don't you?

Isn't it Democrats screaming the wealthy pay less of a percentage than everyone else, or is that another Democrat lie?

Sure, this is true for the wealthiest individuals and families but this can be fixed by simply reforming our current tax system. We don't have to create a new system which just creates a new way to burden middle and lower income Americans.

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

Most Democrats have looked into what is behind flat tax proposals. And these proposals do nothing but benefit the wealthy while hurting the poor and the average American.

Because of this, most Democrats are not going to support any of the flat tax proposals that have been put forth.

However, Democrats are all for reforming our tax system. Just not reform that benefits wealthy individuals while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans.

Hand out another stimulus.

 

[davidallen]

Examples of when I'm for bigger government and more intervention?
...

Bodily autonomy is but one example. You are quite fine with politicians telling us what procedures we can and can not have. Is there any more egregious example of government intervention into ones personal life?

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

Bodily autonomy is but one example. You are quite fine with politicians telling us what procedures we can and can not have. Is there any more egregious example of government intervention into ones personal life?

Do you use pledge or olive oil when polishing whisper's sack? 😁

 

[Ponca Dan]

Bodily autonomy is but one example. You are quite fine with politicians telling us what procedures we can and can not have. Is there any more egregious example of government intervention into ones personal life?

To whose bodily autonomy are you referring? You mean something like using the police power of the state to force people to take the Covid vaccine, close their businesses, imprison themselves in their own homes, that kind of thing? I don’t think he was for that. But you’re right that is as egregious an example of government intervention into one’s personal life as there is.

 

[my_2cents]

To whose bodily autonomy are you referring? You mean something like using the police power of the state to force people to take the Covid vaccine, close their businesses, imprison themselves in their own homes, that kind of thing? I don’t think he was for that.

No, he probably wasn't for that. But he is in favor of bigger government and more intervention as it relates to other issues involving bodily autonomy.

And you, of course, know this.

 

[LAY THE WOODY]

No, he probably wasn't for that. But he is in favor of bigger government and more intervention as it relates to other issues involving bodily autonomy.

And you, of course, know this.

Joe wants to shower.

 

[Ponca Dan]

No, he probably wasn't for that. But he is in favor of bigger government and more intervention as it relates to other issues involving bodily autonomy.

And you, of course, know this.

Until David says the word I don’t *know* for a certainty what he’s talking about. But it would be interesting to know if @davidallen was “for” the government intervention I asked about, but against another kind of bodily intervention, which he seems reluctant to name.

 

[my_2cents]

But it would be interesting to know if @davidallen was “for” the government intervention I asked about, but against another kind of bodily intervention

Why are you trying so hard to move the conversation away from @2012Bearcat's original claim and then question?

@davidallen never made the claim that he was for much smaller government, less government intervention, less government dependency. That was Bearcat.

Instead of trying to deflect and argue with David, why don't you simply respond to the accuracy of Bearcat's original claim, which is what started this particular conversation?

which he seems reluctant to name.

He isn't reluctant to name anything. We all know what it is, including you, lol!

Dang man, just stop with the silly games for once.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Why are you trying so hard to move the conversation away from @2012Bearcat's original claim and then question?

@davidallen never made the claim that he was for much smaller government, less government intervention, less government dependency. That was Bearcat.

Instead of trying to deflect and argue with David, why don't you simply respond to the accuracy of Bearcat's original claim, which is what started this particular conversation?


He isn't reluctant to name anything. We all know what it is, including you, lol!

Dang man, just stop with the silly games for once.

My original response was to David and about what David said, and had next to nothing to do with Bearcat. So the only “moving” I did was to respond to @davidallen and ask him to clarify. If the word is so hard for you to utter it must be a clarification David doesn’t want to make. Which is par for the course for David. But it would be nice to know if David’s abhorrence of government intervention into an individual’s personal bodily autonomy is universal or applies only when he wants to apply it.

 

[my_2cents]

My original response was to David and about what David said, and had next to nothing to do with Bearcat.

But @davidallen was responding to Bearcat's question. That was the topic of conversation.

So the only “moving” I did was to respond to @davidallen and ask him to clarify.

There was no need for him to clarify. Everyone knew exactly what he was talking about, including you.

Stop playing dumb.

But it would be nice to know if David’s abhorrence of government intervention into an individual’s personal bodily autonomy is universal or applies only when he wants to apply it.

Why would it be nice to know this about David and not Bearcat?

Why are you so focused on David when David has never made the type of claim Bearcat made on this thread?

Let's see you concern yourself with whether Bearcat's abhorrence of government intervention is universal, since he is the one who made the original claim to start with. Go ahead.

 

[davidallen]

Why are you trying so hard to move the conversation away from @2012Bearcat's original claim and then question?

@davidallen never made the claim that he was for much smaller government, less government intervention, less government dependency. That was Bearcat.

Instead of trying to deflect and argue with David, why don't you simply respond to the accuracy of Bearcat's original claim, which is what started this particular conversation?


He isn't reluctant to name anything. We all know what it is, including you, lol!

Dang man, just stop with the silly games for once.

Forgetful Dan. I'm on record against vaccine mandates.

 

[davidallen]

But @davidallen was responding to Bearcat's question. That was the topic of conversation.


There was no need for him to clarify. Everyone knew exactly what he was talking about, including you.

Stop playing dumb.


Why would it be nice to know this about David and not Bearcat?

Why are you so focused on David when David has never made the type of claim Bearcat made on this thread?

Let's see you concern yourself with whether Bearcat's abhorrence of government intervention is universal, since he is the one who made the original claim to start with. Go ahead.

Dan doesn't really want to argue a point per se. He wants to argue people. He's just not very good at it.

 

[my_2cents]

Forgetful Dan. I'm on record against vaccine mandates.

Dan has been forgetting a lot lately.

 

[Ponca Dan]

But @davidallen was responding to Bearcat's question. That was the topic of conversation.


There was no need for him to clarify. Everyone knew exactly what he was talking about, including you.

Stop playing dumb.


Why would it be nice to know this about David and not Bearcat?

Why are you so focused on David when David has never made the type of claim Bearcat made on this thread?

Let's see you concern yourself with whether Bearcat's abhorrence of government intervention is universal, since he is the one who made the original claim to start with. Go ahead.

I don’t give a whit about what Bearcat thinks about government interference. I give a whit about what @davidallen thinks about it. He’s the one whose buttons I love to push.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Dan doesn't really want to argue a point per se. He wants to argue people.

Bingo! I love to argue @davidallen. Both with him and about him.

 

[my_2cents]

Dan doesn't really want to argue a point per se. He wants to argue people.

I agree, as it relates to certain people. Which is what I what I was getting at with him.

 

[my_2cents]

I don’t give a whit about what Bearcat thinks about government interference. I give a whit about what @davidallen thinks about it. He’s the one whose buttons I love to push.

Exactly. Which is the point I was making.

Problem is, you didn't push any buttons with David. You just looked silly, as usual.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Exactly. Which is the point I was making.

Problem is, you didn't push any buttons with David. You just looked silly, as usual.

Yes, of course. I don’t push David’s buttons. Or your’s either for that matter. I just look silly to everybody.

 

[my_2cents]

Yes, of course. I don’t push David’s buttons. Or your either for that matter. I just look silly to everybody.

Wow, you are finally starting to be honest.
Even when you are trying to be sarcastic lol.

 

[Ponca Dan]

Forgetful Dan. I'm on record against vaccine mandates.

You’re right, David, I seem to forget your record of being against this government interference in an individual’s personal bodily autonomy. Would you care to refresh my memory? Just how vocal, how strident were you being toward these mostly-Democrat abuses? Were you raining hell down on the mostly-Democrat abusers, or were you covering all your bases in case a fellow Democrat called you out, and sugar-coated your tepid replies? An inquiring mind wants to know.

 

[Ostatedchi]

But it isn't because equal doesn't mean equitable. What is equal is not always fair.

A person making more money taxed at the same rate as a person making less (or even way less) is going to greatly benefit in a flat tax system. Such a system is going to hurt the lower income person a lot more than the wealthy individual, because the lower income person has less wiggle room in his/her budget. A flat tax system leaves that lower income person with even less to make ends meet.

Again, a flat tax benefits the wealthy while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans. This is why many wealthy American and their policy makers favor a flat tax system. They get it. Why don't you?


Sure, this is true for the wealthiest individuals and families but this can be fixed by simply reforming our current tax system. We don't have to create a new system which just creates a new way to burden middle and lower income Americans.

Exempt the first $36K of earnings (or whatever is considered poverty), then tax any income at 6% with no deductions.

 

[my_2cents]

Exempt the first $36K of earnings (or whatever is considered poverty), then tax any income at 6% with no deductions.

My objections still remain.

 

[2012Bearcat]

But it isn't because equal doesn't mean equitable. What is equal is not always fair.

A person making more money taxed at the same rate as a person making less (or even way less) is going to greatly benefit in a flat tax system. Such a system is going to hurt the lower income person a lot more than the wealthy individual, because the lower income person has less wiggle room in his/her budget. A flat tax system leaves that lower income person with even less to make ends meet.

Again, a flat tax benefits the wealthy while placing more burdens on middle and low income Americans. This is why many wealthy American and their policy makers favor a flat tax system. They get it. Why don't you?


Sure, this is true for the wealthiest individuals and families but this can be fixed by simply reforming our current tax system. We don't have to create a new system which just creates a new way to burden middle and lower income Americans.

It's absolutely equitable. Someone that makes more money naturally pays more in income tax than those who do not make as much. A person making 100k a year paying a 15% tax rate pays 15K in taxes, a person that makes 10K a year at the same 15% tax rate pays $1500. The wealthy pay more in dollar amount, those that don't make the same amount of money pay less, it's simple math.

 

[2012Bearcat]

Bodily autonomy is but one example. You are quite fine with politicians telling us what procedures we can and can not have. Is there any more egregious example of government intervention into ones personal life?

You must be confused. I'm not one of those completely against abortion, although I am against abortion personally. You on the left can't comprehend that for some reason and try to put everyone in the same basket.

 

[davidallen]

You must be confused. I'm not one of those completely against abortion, although I am against abortion personally. You on the left can't comprehend that for some reason and try to put everyone in the same basket.

Is abortion the only bodily autonomy issue of the day?