Home » Uncategorized » 15% Tax Policy: Creating a Failed State

15% Tax Policy: Creating a Failed State

The 15% tax policy was created by a people who do not understand the other side.
The other side being the people who do not have the means to create policies.Sure, taxing everyone 15% sounds fair. The more income, the more tax, and *supposedly* vice-versa.

However, what’s not being taken into account is that 15% taxation on those who currently don’t pay taxes (and on those who currently pay a smaller percent) could be a disastrous policy creating an even greater divide between the poorest and the wealthiest.

Take a salary of $13000. Currently, this worker is not paying taxes. They’re barely making any money as it is. Now, strip them of 15% of their income for a mandatory tax. Those hundreds, on that salary, could make the difference between paying bills and paying bills without incurring a bank overdraft.

Alternatively, consider the effects on the wealthiest. Someone like Romney who makes $42 million a year, currently, is paying around 30% taxes on that income. At the end of the day, is that cutting into their means to survive? Is it cutting into their very basics, such as food, housing, and clothing? Not at all! Reducing their tax to 15% “to make it fair” is only adding more into their bank. Sure, more capital will allow them more freedom to do the things they want to, and everyone should have the freedom to use their earnings for their own means, however let’s weigh in on which means deserve more protection.

The argument of which is more important: achieving the basics versus achieving complete self autonomy has been decided by the self-actualization pyramid which placed the basics in a much more weighty role than self-autonomy. Self-actualization is a very valid concept and it is no secret that the wealthy have much more means to achieve it.

Yet, as a society, should we place equal importance on a person’s ability to achieve complete self-actualization as we do on a person’s ability to meet their most basic needs? Should our policy give equal weight to the plight of the rich versus the plight of the poor? The 15% tax model does exactly this.

Taking in this reasoning, we have assessed what is really at-stake for each class group concerning this tax model. Now, let’s assess the pains. The person with a $13k salary will experience a lot of pain when almost $2k is automatically removed for a mandatory tax. On the other hand, the person with the $42 million salary will lose $6.3 million to the mandatory tax (assuming he doesn’t finagle his income to show up as less than his actual profits). While the difference of losing $2k to losing $6.3 million is significant, the man with the $42 million salary will still have $35.7 million to add to his name, for that single year, whereas the man with the $13k salary will only have $11k remaining, of which every single penny is going to his basic needs.

The current tax policy does its best to allow everyone the fair chance to attain a reasonable salary, while taking the excess and injecting it into the poverty level. This is a message right from our constitution which ensures this society will do what it can to help everyone achieve life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness while blocking entities from attaining too much power. It is a cycle that has worked for a long time (although it could work better). A policy that can work so long as greed is kept at bay, but unfortunately recent events have caused the poor to want more and the rich to give less. The Obama administration inspired the tax code to bend a little more in favor of the poor and this has caused the delicate balance, the dam holding back the greed, to crack.

Now we are seeing the rich and poor fighting tooth and nail to create policies that will benefit their class. The 15% tax policy might sound fair, but will it really create a cycle that funnels money appropriately?

For now, let us all remember that the world rotates. Without a balance of North and South, East and West, everything will return to the center… and no one is prepared for that. We can’t make all the poor wealthy and we can’t make all the rich poor. However, what we can do is retain the delicate balance that funnels money in a cycle that meets everyone’s needs.

We cannot do that if we force everyone to pay a mandatory 15% tax.

7 thoughts on “15% Tax Policy: Creating a Failed State

  1. Nice explanation of this argument against a plat tax.

    You know I haven’t heard anyone bring this up but a flat tax be, utiliizing one the GOP’s favorite phrases, a “job killer”? How many people are employed as tax accountants? How many people depend on tax season for a significant portion of their annual income?

    Just thought it’d be interesting to hear a response to that from the pro-flat tax side.

    • I myself depend on tax returns for larger expenses like fixing my car or paying off a credit card. These purchases go directly into the community and into removing some of the debt. Surprisingly, I have found myself on the other side of this tax argument as well, mostly due to being moved by Ron Paul’s speeches. I do have to wonder what would happen if we really ended the fed, removed the federal reserve, brought all the troops home, and ended the income tax entirely. I am not completely against government and I’m definitely not against taxation. The government provides many jobs, and most of them cushy with lots of vacation time and decent pay. With all the government spending cuts, the first people affected were the workers. In Miami-Dade, transit employees were trimmed to the point where there is almost no one operating behind the scenes. The worst part about this method is that it becomes a survival of the fittest. The only administrative transit employees remaining are just a few fat cats getting grossly overpaid in comparison to the services they actually contribute.

      Bill Gates recently said it would take a contribution from everyone in this country to end the snowballing of our debt, implying that he is for taxing the 49% who currently pay no taxes. In my view, lowering taxes on the rich and raising taxes on the poor would certainly be a job killer because it would drastically cut into the funds that poorer people have to spend on anything. Although I don’t have actual numbers to look at, I truly believe that the federal government would make less money in tax revenues if they were to significantly drop the rates on the rich.

    • I’m proposing that we maintain the current tax strategy, giving larger breaks to the poor and middle class who have been most affected by this economic downturn. I am also proposing we try to repair the delicate balance between favoring the rich or the poor, and put into place a provisional taxation policy on the “Buffet Billionaires” to help us in this period of economic downturn and be rewarded when we get back on top. Like in the last depression when we turned to our citizens to buy stocks and bonds for America, we need to ask them for their help again. It is not by fault of the rich that we have reached this depression and we cannot turn to savages and start looting from them without their consent. They have a right to protect their assets. However, in this time, it would be a good and strong policy to make friends with the rich and get them to help us out of this hole in return for us helping them when we get out of this hole, which we surely will!

      I see Romney’s entire candidacy as a way for the rich to ensure their safety and rights be protected, but as an insult to the middle and poorer classes. The middle and poorer classes are the ones who put capital into the pockets of most of our richest citizens…

      I hope you get my point by now. Not sure how to wrap it up.

      • I completely understand what you’re saying, and I’m glad to discover that you aren’t one of those I so commonly hear blaming the rich for the current economic climate. I also agree, in part, with your wish that they be the ones that help pave the way back to economic prosperity through their financial contribution. Buttttttt, understand that they (at least some of them) are the reason we have enjoyed the economic freedom and security that has characterized the United States for so long, not the government. Paying taxes to an institution that grossly inefficient is a terrible idea, in my opinion. Private corporations know what they’re doing, and we should allow and encourage them to invest in their businesses, not raise their taxes to pay for an unaccountable bureaucracy.

        Thanks for taking the time to reply 🙂

  2. I think taxes should be according to income. A person earning less than $50,000. should pay a flat tax rate of 5%. Everyone else should pay 15%. We already pay tolls, local taxes, and so much extra money, that it is only fair.
    This would be fair.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s