Originally Posted by dewilson58 (Post 2309368)

Actually it is...........by definition.

Some people are offended by the word, but it's accurate and correct.

Originally Posted by Proveone (Post 2309409)

Wrong! Fair tax refers to billionaires, who some pay little to no taxes, to some corporations who pay 8 %, when someone who earns $11,000 a year pays 10%. $44,000 to $95,000 pay 22%. Fair tax means billionaires and corporations should pay what the rest of us pay proportionately. The national debt should be paid buy the billionaires, who received tax breaks, and the people who passed the tax breaks. Stop parroting what you hear on unreliable sources.

Originally Posted by LonnyP (Post 2309453)

I think it has to do with the billionaires paying less taxes than a teacher making 60k a year, or perhaps those that only have to pay into SS up to earnings on 160k, even if they earn 450k.

Originally Posted by GoRedSox! (Post 2309519)

Social Security has made it so that senior citizens went from being the demographic group most likely to live in poverty in 1935 to the demographic group least likely to live in poverty.

Some folks say they could have done better investing on their own then what they’ll get from Social Security. That’s true. But many would also have done worse, and many may not have invested at all.

And Social Security is not just about retirement. It provides income to families with kids who lose a parent. It provides income to the permanently disabled and Medicare provides health coverage to the permanently disabled and those with end stage renal disease. We might do better than Social Security for retirement, but it would be almost impossible to replicate the lifelong safety net for situations described in this paragraph.

As for your “fair share,” that is subjective for sure. But I think we can start with the wealthiest should at least pay the same percentage of their income as everyone else. Warren Buffett has said many times that his secretary pays a higher tax rate than he does. That being said, oppressive taxes on the rich will not solve our dilemma. There must be some combination of more revenue and less spending to balance the budget. It was done 4 straight years in the late 90’s and that’s it for many decades.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 2309520)

Yup - that begins with all of the people who mow your lawn, do your pesticides, the "handyman," the guy who resurfaces your driveway, the person who will come to your house to fix your golf cart, and everyone else who prefers that you pay them in cash. Cash payment = easier to not include in income when it's time to send your forms in to the IRS.

Originally Posted by OrangeBlossomBaby (Post 2309529)

rustyp is suggesting that people who get paid cash, should be the FIRST people to look at, when it comes to solving the "fair share" payments of taxes. Some who agree, might even be trying to say "them thar illeguls" without actually saying "them thar illeguls," which is nasty (especially since it's their bosses who are doing the illegal thing by hiring them in the first place).

I pointed out why he's shooting himself in the foot when he suggests such a thing.

There are wealthy people who have so many write-offs and deductions and back doors to tax avoidance measures, that they pay no income tax at all. One wealthy person's income tax will be enough to cover all "them thar illeguls" income tax in a year. Two wealthy person's income tax will cover them, AND the retirees who don't want Social Security to know they're still working (and thus reduce their monthly check), AND the single women who can't make ends meet without a side gig like making soap or other crafts.

Three wealthy people? Fuggedaboudit. Now we're getting into "paying an entire small town's expenses for 6 months."

I agree that if you work and genuinely earn a certain minimum income, you should be accountable to pay income tax on it. But the little guy who gets $500/week mowing lawns in The Villages is not the first guy I'd go to, to set the example.

Originally Posted by manaboutown (Post 2309535)

If he/she works 50 weeks a year he/she makes $25,000. US income tax starts at 10% at $11,000 for a single filer who gets at least the standard deduction of $13,850 so if the mower is a single person he/she may owe enough income tax to buy a few Big Macs.

Originally Posted by Shipping up to Boston (Post 2309558)

Agree. This is not a political statement....just an example. Mitt Romney, former Governor of MA and a candidate for POTUS at that time, got pinched for hiring a landscaper who employed undocumented workers. I’m sure there are dozens of other examples as well. It just shows there is no socioeconomic barrier when it comes to saving money....or taxes

Originally Posted by JMintzer (Post 2309595)

Are you suggesting he hired that company because he knew they hired undocumented workers, just to save money?

That said, are we to examine the Green Cards of every employee of every company with whom we do business?

Some say that would be racist...