The Axiom, "Free Trade Benefits All" does not hold up in today's world. It has to be "Fair Trade". The case for permanent Import Duties on China

[Danlxyz + 63]

39 minutes ago, Jan van Eck said:

Sure it could.  But, since those are predicated on the calculations of the 1040, how do you propose to calculate those line items if there is no 1040?  Or, does everyone who wants the credits have to file a 1040 anyway, even though the income tax is abolished, in which case you have this unequal burdens on the society?   You see the problems.  

It is not that complicated.If you want to qualify for medicaid or other programs you need your income from wages and other income, so keep the W2 and 1099 reporting requirements. All you would need is gross income and you could figure earned income and investment income.

The main EITC tests for kids to be qualified  are 1) Age, 2)Relationship, and 3) Residence. There are other tests such as tie breakers etc but those are already set out and could stay the same. So all you need is gross income,earned income and investment income cant be too high. If the kids meet the 3 tests then you qualify. This might be 2 or 3 pages to answer all the questions. That is less than FASF or other applications for federal programs.

Why do this instead of a 1040? You only apply if you have kids living with you who are under a certain age and related to you. No one else need apply. The Tax Foundation  says only about 20% of tax returns claim EITC. Also you don't have to get into questions about dependency or adjustments or deductions or expenses (unless self employed).

[Jan van Eck + 7,558]

2 hours ago, Danlxyz said:

It is not that complicated.If you want to qualify for medicaid or other programs you need your income from wages and other income, so keep the W2 and 1099 reporting requirements. All you would need is gross income and you could figure earned income and investment income

I think we are going around in circles here.  If you eliminate the personal income tax then you eliminate the need for employers to maintain and issue W-2 and 1099 papers.  Now if you gear an EITC on those documents, you require all employers to keep all records on all earned income of everybody for a program that you state only 20% ever apply for.  That is the imposition of a serious burden where at least one good reason for disposing of the personal income tax is to dispose of the document generation attached with it.

the other problem for continuing the W-2 and 1099 charade is that it hands the various intelligence agencies exact information about everyone's income, whether they apply for EITC or not.  All that personal data then gets stored by those Fed agencies inside massive computers, there to be tapped on and used for abuse and liberty suppression.  It is bad enough that this situation already exists today, and we have seen how it was abused, particularly by Richard Nixon, the man who has committed so much abuse and so seriously harmed people for gratuitous, petty and paranoid reasons.  And now you propose to institutionalize and perpetuate this data retention, even though the underlying tax itself has been discarded?  That is not rational. Leave it with you, gotta get off this sub-topic.  Cheers.

[Danlxyz + 63]

Companies have to keep records anyway and computers make filings easy.

But I agree with you. This dog has about been beaten to death.

Regards

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

You hot the nail on the head. Ultimately it is the voter's responsibility to drain the swamp.

[BenFranklin'sSpectacles + 762]

On 8/4/2019 at 9:02 AM, Jan van Eck said:

Although the use of "Nike" is a generalized stand-in, and with the caveat that there is no evidence presented that the actual Nike Corp. is engaging in these third-country shenanigans, nonetheless the suggestion by Meredith that the corporation is engaging in misbehaviour is accurate.  What these corporate managers are doing is taking the position that anybody who pays US taxes is a fool.  So (very expensive) accountants et al are hired specifically to figure out ways to avoid paying taxes - thus undermining the US Treasury and US economic health, but advancing their own individual interests.  To illustrate, GE Capital pays its tax attorneys a salary of $1 million a year specifically to figure out ways to make sure that GE pays nothing in taxes.  Instead of simply paying the attributed tax and hiring competent engineers and managers, you get this distortion of corporate aims and focus to avoid taxes.  Huge amounts of corporate management effort goes into this avoidance behaviour inside the USA.  It is a logical result of Byzantine tax laws, but it is also destructive of the US Treasury.  

 The country is better off if Nike and GE pay their tax bills.  That said, the country is also better off if both concentrate their manufacturing inside the USA in the first place. 

TIL I'm a moron for becoming an engineer.  Should have studied accounting. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

I disagree. The job of the elected official is never to obstruct, you can disagree all you want as long as you propose a viable alternative solution!

Anyone can moan and complain, but that doesn't get us anywhere!

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

Some people don't believe the "Nike" story.  I'm pretty sure it's right, or close enough, but don't have the data at hand. However, years ago I read about Apple in the Wall Street Journal and with no looking found Multiple smoking guns, With multiple offshore tax havens So substitute Apple for Nike and Ireland for the Cayman Islands and it's the same old story. Corporate greed aided and abetted by China Inc. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

17 hours ago, Jan van Eck said:

I do care who the people of the USA do elect, both as Executive and as the Congress, because who and how determines the short-term future of everyone here  (and that includes me).

this I guess is where we differ. I care about the longterm 5 - 10 - 15 years ahead as I have small kids. I am increasingly frustated with the shorterm view in politics. And yes, I appreciate that it is easier for me having this view as I do not need to worry about where my next meal is to come from. 

 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

18 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

There is NO QUESTION the Republican majority, (Especially the then speaker of the house Paul Ryan, who stabbed him in the back then took his Millions in bribes and disappeared) did no favors for Trump. EVERY professional politician hates Trump, regardless of their party. He represents their worst fear, a "Mr. Smith Goes to Washington" amateur with power who can't be bought.

I am sure this is true. But Trump is business man. Would you not agree that a good CEO / business man would / should put personal feelings aside and do what is good for the company? 

I ask again : Could Trump not have done more to achieve a better working relationship with congress? Could he not have behaved differently? Afterall, all that should matter is his results, rigth? This is the biggest issue I see and what makes me ask : Does he actually care about his voters? If your answer is that he is the lesser evil then fair enough; this may well be. 

 

18 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

I personally know several billionaires. They simply live on a different planet. Once you have your private jets, your yachts, and your bloated bank accounts, your attitude changes.

Exactly. 

I don't know any billionaires, but I know millionaires and I have noticed that some develop this attitude that normal rules don't apply to them.

-----------------------

I don't have an opinion on whether trump is corrupt or not, but I think that he should end the debate by releasing his tax returns because of the strong rhetoric he is using. Had he NOT climbed on the piedestal, then no problem.  

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

7 hours ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I disagree. The job of the elected official is never to obstruct, you can disagree all you want as long as you propose a viable alternative solution!

Anyone can moan and complain, but that doesn't get us anywhere!

I agree.

I assume you are equally outraged when Trump moans and obstructs ? 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

1 hour ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I agree.

I assume you are equally outraged when Trump moans and obstructs ? 

I would agree, but I can't think of an instance where he moaned and obstructed. Can you give a few examples?

Not saying he hasn't, just can't remember them.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

15 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

I would agree, but I can't think of an instance where he moaned and obstructed. Can you give a few examples?

Not saying he hasn't, just can't remember them.

government shutdowns come to mind. I don't live in the US, but from the outside it looks like it could have been handled a lot better, but everything was the other guys fault.

Obstructing - release your taxes; end the discussion and then claim the high ground and go MAGA.... 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

What? Government shutdowns now seem to happen in every administration. Obama's was the second longest running shutdown. This is NOT a Trump phenomena.

How is his refusal to release his taxes obstruction? There is not, and there has never been, a legal requirement for the President to release his tax returns!

Going MAGA is what helped get him elected. He is the AMERICAN President, what is wrong with trying to make HIS country great again?

The two examples you mentioned do NOT constitute obstruction.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

What? Government shutdowns now seem to happen in every administration. Obama's was the second longest running shutdown. This is NOT a Trump phenomena.

never said it was. I said looking at it from the outside Trumps ego got in the way; to me that is moaning and blaming the other guys. 

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

How is his refusal to release his taxes obstruction? There is not, and there has never been, a legal requirement for the President to release his tax returns!

Never said there was. 

I said Trump could close the discussion and claim the highground; I don't think Trumps voters would have a problem with Trump being rich. Then he could truly MAGA. 

Lead by example. Tell all the libtards : I showed you mine; now you show yours.

1 hour ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Going MAGA is what helped get him elected. He is the AMERICAN President, what is wrong with trying to make HIS country great again?

Nothing whatsoever. I hope he does. Personally, I am not convinced that Trumps strategy will longterm MAGA, but that is a different discussion. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

7 minutes ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

never said it was. I said looking at it from the outside Trumps ego got in the way; to me that is moaning and blaming the other guys. 

Never said there was. 

I said Trump could close the discussion and claim the highground; I don't think Trumps voters would have a problem with Trump being rich. Then he could truly MAGA. 

Lead by example. Tell all the libtards : I showed you mine; now you show yours.

Nothing whatsoever. I hope he does. Personally, I am not convinced that Trumps strategy will longterm MAGA, but that is a different discussion. 

Perhaps you are correct re the ego thing, but keep in mind he is a successful businessman and ego is part of that. For that matter, I can not think of ANY politician without a bloated ego and opinion of themselves. Did you ever have an issue with Obama's ego?

Regarding his tax return, it is a matter of privacy which all Americans should expect a right to. If he filed jointly with his wife, should her details be put out there as well? As there is no legal requirement for Trump to release his tax returns, it could be argued that he IS taking the high ground. Keep in mind that it took Obama over a year to release his birth certificate!

It seems to me that the Democrats in the House are holding Trump to excessive requirements never required ofany preceding   Presidents. Those that DID release this info were never required to do so.

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

16 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

 I can not think of ANY politician without a bloated ego and opinion of themselves.

That is probably true. But Trump ran on being different. 

 

16 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Did you ever have an issue with Obama's ego?

I am not an O'bama cheerleader. 

 

16 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

As there is no legal requirement for Trump to release his tax returns, it could be argued that he IS taking the high ground.

I am pretty sure a quick duck duck go search will show several interviews where Trump indicates that he would. 

16 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

Keep in mind that it took Obama over a year to release his birth certificate!

Best defense is an offense? 

But he released it though, didn't he? 

16 minutes ago, Douglas Buckland said:

It seems to me that the Democrats in the House are holding Trump to excessive requirements never required ofany preceding   Presidents.

other presidents have released their tax returns so there is a precedent. Would you not agree? 

https://www.taxnotes.com/presidential-tax-returns

-------------------------------------

All I am saying is that if you make bold claims you should be prepared to back them up. Don't bring bullets if you ain't prepared to shoot. 

 

Edited August 7, 2019 by Rasmus Jorgensen

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

4 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I am sure this is true. But Trump is business man. Would you not agree that a good CEO / business man would / should put personal feelings aside and do what is good for the company? 

I ask again : Could Trump not have done more to achieve a better working relationship with congress? Could he not have behaved differently? Afterall, all that should matter is his results, rigth? This is the biggest issue I see and what makes me ask : Does he actually care about his voters? If your answer is that he is the lesser evil then fair enough; this may well be. 

Exactly. 

I don't know any billionaires, but I know millionaires and I have noticed that some develop this attitude that normal rules don't apply to them.

-----------------------

I don't have an opinion on whether trump is corrupt or not, but I think that he should end the debate by releasing his tax returns because of the strong rhetoric he is using. Had he NOT climbed on the piedestal, then no problem.  

There's a vast difference between a politician and a businessman. In business you can FIRE employees, not so easy to fire politicians. Trump famously ran the most successful reality show in history for something line 14 years where someone got fired every week. I knew one of the contestants back before it morphed to the celebrity angle. He had worked for Cisco, made plenty of money and wanted the challenge of going far. He made it to one of the final rounds, but eventually got the axe. I asked him about it and he admitted he'd have fired himself at that point in time. In the business world we know the rules, and know how to play by them. 

In a business environment, CEO's are respected, if not for their accomplishments, for their position. I know several CEO's who wouldn't touch politics with a ten foot pole. I've posted here before about it, but Kennedy passed a law in 1963 called the Civil Service Act. It made it virtually impossible to fire a civil servant, even for cause. 

So let's look at DC shall we? You have 535 elected representatives, none of whom can be fired, except by their voters (back to this in a bit). You have about a million bunglecrats working for the various agencies, none of whom can be fired either. The president, ostensibly in charge of the whole mess, can fire 0.00001% of the people under him. The Wall Street Journal ran a wonderful story several years back where they compared staying employed with the federal government with the private sector. The turnover numbers were laughable, something like 10% versus 0.003%  even funnier was the government response, "our employees are that excellent". In China they call a government job, "the golden bowl", and trust me, it's the same here. 

So what makes up the swamp? Over a million underworked and overpaid bunglecrats ostensibly answering to 435 congressmen and 100 senators, who have no direct power over them either, but CONTROL THE PURSE. The president, contrary to your contention elsewhere has no power over the purse by our laws, he can only spend what was budgeted last year. Therefore government shutdowns begin and end with Congress. 

How do you fire a Congress critter? Vote them out of office. How easy is that? The numbers say, virtually impossible. Even though Congress has an abysmal approval rating, perhaps one point above axe murderers, INDIVIDUALLY Congress members easily win "approvals" above 50% in their heavily Gerrymandered districts. Incumbents get reelected at a 98% clip overall, the exception being freshman critters who get chewed up and spit out by the system. 

[Rasmus Jorgensen + 1,169]

17 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

The president, contrary to your contention elsewhere has no power over the purse by our laws, he can only spend what was budgeted last year. Therefore government shutdowns begin and end with Congress. 

I am sure that you have a better handle on American legislative protocal than I do. However, to claim that Trump could not have handled budget negotiations is taking it a bit far I think. 

[Ward Smith + 6,615]

6 hours ago, Rasmus Jorgensen said:

I am sure that you have a better handle on American legislative protocal than I do. However, to claim that Trump could not have handled budget negotiations is taking it a bit far I think. 

Trump doesn't negotiate to negotiate. He has an objective in mind. Every President since Eisenhower has "negotiated" with North Korea. They'll happily keep negotiating for the next hundred years. "Negotiation" means nothing. People are binary, they think negotiations are yes/no. They're wrong, there's a third choice, doing nothing. Doing nothing is something American politicians excell at. 

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

On 8/7/2019 at 10:04 AM, BenFranklin'sSpectacles said:

TIL I'm a moron for becoming an engineer.  Should have studied accounting. 

It's those damn engineer's again!😂

[Douglas Buckland + 6,308]

12 hours ago, Ward Smith said:

Trump doesn't negotiate to negotiate. He has an objective in mind. Every President since Eisenhower has "negotiated" with North Korea. They'll happily keep negotiating for the next hundred years. "Negotiation" means nothing. People are binary, they think negotiations are yes/no. They're wrong, there's a third choice, doing nothing. Doing nothing is something American politicians excell at. 

I think that should read,"...all politicians...".