Thread: All things being equal would you vote for a VAT?

The question is one of how to pay for everything that we as a country like to buy and spend for. Increase the taxes on those making over $250,000 a year (sorry if there is anyone here in that catagory), decrease them for those making less and add a VAT to everything except food.

My problem with a VAT is that it would disproportionately affect those least able to afford it and IMO would slow the economy as a whole.

You know I thought that as well. I was hoping to here from our neighbors over the pond. They have been living with the direction that we are going for some time.

Although I am not sure about disproportionate. If everything else was VATed except food and there were no other state sales taxes, wouldn't that wash in the end?

Since we as a country put the people in power I guess I am saying that we as a country want some kind of answer to what is going on. I really do not give a flying fig who screwed the pooch, I just want the pooch to go away so that we as a nation can move forward. If that means an increase/decrease as stated above with the VAT then so be it. We as a nation need to be able to move forward and something is holding us back.

Originally Posted by singlewedge

Since we as a country put the people in power I guess I am saying that we as a country want some kind of answer to what is going on. I really do not give a flying fig who screwed the pooch, I just want the pooch to go away so that we as a nation can move forward. If that means an increase/decrease as stated above with the VAT then so be it. We as a nation need to be able to move forward and something is holding us back.

I apologize. I shamelessly used your thread as a soapbox for one of my many political pet peeves

Would the VAT be considered a "regressive" tax? I think that's what some have described here in regard to pinching those with less. If a VAT was 10% on $1,000, $100 means more to me for example than someone who has a million dollars. It ganks those who have little more than it does those who have more. Sounds backwards.

Also, it would shock me and fly against virtually all historical convention if a new tax was introduced and the "old tax" was actually eliminated.

"Wait! We can er, ah, implement the VAT to pay for stuff sales tax used to fund AND we can keep the sales tax to pay for things we've all as citizens of [this fine state] have been lacking! Citizens, this is the best idea yet! You should all demand that the VAT be implemented in addition to keeping "your" sales tax. Think of what we can do for [our state] that we have never been able to do before! Be joyful. Be exuberant! Rejoice and give more and more and more and more in taxes. Trust us, you'll be glad you did."

Chris L

Originally Posted by singlewedge

You know I thought that as well. I was hoping to here from our neighbors over the pond. They have been living with the direction that we are going for some time.

Although I am not sure about disproportionate. If everything else was VATed except food and there were no other state sales taxes, wouldn't that wash in the end?

I think the argument is.. The poor would be taxed on a much higher % of their income than the wealthy.

I dont know.. i am just a cog in the machine. I dont really pay attention much anymore. i just cry when i do my taxes at the end of the year.

Originally Posted by singlewedge

The question is one of how to pay for everything that we as a country like to buy and spend for.

Answer: pay for it with the money you earn

Or are you equating "country" with the big spenders in Washington? In that case, then yes by all means let's raise some more taxes. Just think of how well they do with the money we've already given them; it is a no-brainer that they should be entrusted with as much of our money as we can hand over to them

Originally Posted by hoglahoo

Answer: pay for it with the money you earn

Or are you equating "country" with the big spenders in Washington? In that case, then yes by all means let's raise some more taxes. Just think of how well they do with the money we've already given them; it is a no-brainer that they should be entrusted with as much of our money as we can hand over to them

Do I detect a note of sarcasm?

I think the inherent problem with this kind of tax is that it's not progressive. There are lots of tax loop holes for the wealthy who can afford the tax whereas the less well off, who are expending a much higher percentage of their daily income have no respite. People get used to paying more though.

The worst tax was the British Poll Tax though. Everybody pays the same amount or else they're not allowed to vote!