Jim Carson

mitch wrote on (September 18, 2003 11:49 AM)

Well as a Californian who is taxed on everything (even the air indirectly - we have to have our cars "smog checked" for about $50 each a year) I was pretty disgusted when I heard about this one. My thoughts.

1. You already pay a tax on the coffee - it's called a sales tax

2. For the people who "just throw the change into the tip jar", they would be throwing a dime less into the jar each time, meaning this tax would just be transferring money from the Barristas pockets to social programs, and why should coffee workers bear the cost of these programs?

3. For people who don't do that, a lot of them would change from lattes to non-taxed regular coffee just out of principle, bringing the revenue and profit of the coffee place down.

4. I believe that people are the best allocators of their own money. If someone believes that childcare is important, let them donate 10 cents a day of their OWN money to this cause. Let other people decide what to do with their 10 cents (by the way, did anyone calculate how much was spent on this election from both sides plus how much it cost to vote on this thing? That would be an interesting number to ponder).

5. We can ALL afford "just 10 cents more" for EVERYTHING we buy - our coffee, our clothes, our food. Then just a dime more is not a big deal. And then another dime can't hurt anyone. And another. And another. Then another.

History tells us that taxes have a way of going up once they start, that temporary taxes never are (like Jim's example of the Spanish War tax), and taxes that are "only on the rich" ALWAYS trickle down to everyone (the Constitutional Ammendment to enact the income tax was gleafully passed by state legislatures who were promised that it would only affect the rich. The Alternative Minimum Tax - AMT - enacted in anger over rich people who avoid taxes will ensnare a MAJORITY of taxpayers before the end of the decade. The list goes on).

The best way to stop it is to stop the tax before it starts and force the government to actually cut spending, or move money from other programs to ones that have a higher priority.

Debbie wrote on (September 18, 2003 12:12 PM)

My hubby had what I thought was a great idea (or he read it and passed it on to me). It was this: Cut out income tax, state taxes and federal taxes entirely. Just put a bigger sales tax on everything.

This would force people who make money illegally or get paid under the table to pay their fair share of taxes. It would also eliminate tax breaks for the wealthy. You buy a big assed yacht, you pay taxes on a big assed yacht.

This is a much better idea than say a flat tax where the poor would pay as much as the very rich. Necessities would have to be taxed reasonably, but luxuries would be much more expensive.

Sorry to ramble... :)

Debbie wrote on (September 18, 2003 12:44 PM)

I thought I was done. I'm not. I don't mind paying taxes for my kid's education, grandma's medicare, fixing potholes, whatever. Apparently, our kids get to pay for the Iraq war with their taxes, or that's what I've read. The next generation inherits that 87 billion dollar debt. But, that's another topic altogether.

Anyway, I don't like the idea of a tax that singles out a particular group. So, I wouldn't like the coffee tax even if I didn't drink coffee, which I do. I can't stop writing - I'm too hopped up on caffiene.

mitch wrote on (September 18, 2003 5:42 PM)

> Cut out income tax, state taxes and federal
> taxes entirely. Just put a bigger sales tax on
> everything

Yeah, one of the problems with our tax system is that politicians have made it into more than collecting $ in order to run the government. It has been turned into a social tool to create certain incentives (deduction on home mortgage interest since home ownership is "good"), favored technologies (tax deduction for "renewable" energy sources), punishments (double taxation on dividends, recently mollfied somewhat by recent law) and protected classes (people with minor dependents get a deduction, but not people with, say, pets). You may agree with all of these, but not everyone does. So taxing is not about government revenue, it is about, well, politics.

This particular idea is one of those that sounds good on paper but won't ever happen. The 50 states aren't going to give up their sources of revenue (income, sales, property, etc.). If only the federal government overturned income taxes and inacted a sales tax or VAT, it would go something like this:

2010 Congress abolishes income tax, enacts U.S. Sales Tax (USST)

2015 Congress increases USST, reintroduces income tax for "richest" Americans in order to cover balooning social security requirements for an aging population (that's what our children have to worry about - trillions for social security, not a 100 billion for country building, which is only ten years worth of in "aid" that we send to Israel each year - $10 billion a year. Don't forget the $2B a year to Egypt, and so on. If we actually stabalize the region, maybe we won't need to send these tens of billions of dollars over there each year?)

2020 Congresses expands income tax to all Americans while "only" holding steady USST

So you would end up with the current income tax situation, but now an added federal sales tax.

If you don't believe me, just look at the short history of our country or the states, where there are lots of examples of "abolished" taxes and fees suddenly reappearing later down the road.

carson wrote on (September 19, 2003 4:53 AM)

> For people who don't do that, a lot of them would change from lattes to non-taxed regular
> coffee just out of principle

Last year Seattle passed a motor vehicle excise tax (by 868 votes) to fund the $1.7b Seattle Monorail Project. (Quick math: $1.7B/425,000 people = $4,000)

The tax, 1.4% of the depreciated value of motor vehicles, is added to vehicle registrations fees in the Seattle city limits. There is just one little problem: there's no state requirement that you register a vehicle to your home address. Thus as you might expect, the funding is down 1/3 because a lot of people are making the 10 mile trip to Bellevue (or wherever) to save the $500. (See http://65.73.232.197/project/faq/MVET.asp)

carson wrote on (September 19, 2003 10:30 AM)

> Cut out income tax, state taxes and federal taxes entirely. Just put a bigger sales tax on everything.

I really like this idea, but it has a some serious kinks.

First, the current level of taxation is complex and subtle. The equivalent straight tax would be rather shockingly high. I just did a back-of-the-envelope and found about 20% of my paycheck taken out for the big three taxes plus 9% for property tax. Nearly everything I buy is at 8.9% sales tax, and there are even hidden taxes inside. (For example, if I buy salmon, the state takes a .5% cut from the fishermen, who naturally pass this along.) Or when I drive to work, I pay vehicle registration fee plus a tax on the gasoline (with my post-tax income ;-o)

Ugh... I think it's safe to say this works out to at least 40%. This is a very sobering number when you look at it.

A second issue is there are a lot of hands in the pot, so to speak. Getting these folks to agree is one reason we haven't (yet) seen a sales tax on out-of-state purchases on the Internet. For example, just consider the state guidelines for sales & use tax in my quiet part of the world:

6.5% State of Washington
3.7% King County, which can include some combination of:

up to 1.0% -- Cities/Counties
0.1% -- County Criminal Justice
up to 0.9% -- Transit Districts
up to 1.0% -- High Capacity Transit
0.1% -- County Juvenile detention/jails (if below 1 million in population)
0.1% -- County Zoo/Aquarium/Parks (if between 500k to 1.5 million in population w/national park)
0.1% -- County Emergency Communications Systems/Facilities
0.017% -- Baseball stadium levy
0.016% -- Football stadium levy
up to 0.08% -- Rural Counties
0.2% -- Public Facilities Districts : County
0.2% -- Public Facilities Districts : City
up to 0.5% -- Regional Transportation Investment District
up to 0.5% -- Baseball stadium levy on food & drinks from restaurants

And we don't have a state income tax. (Yet.) I imagine other states are just as convoluted.

Thirdly, what would probably happen is as mitch suggested, theree would be an additional tax while the others were lowered but not eliminated entirely. Then, when things got tight, they'd be ratcheted up.

Ouch, my brain hurts.

tedder wrote on (September 19, 2003 1:16 PM)

Different types of taxes create different problems.

Going to a sales-tax-only model causes increased savings. Given the fact that most people can't handle their money, this is mostly a good thing. But it's bad for our economy- it relies on people spending money.

Going to an income-tax-only model causes people to evade paying taxes. This is especially true for corporations (who then register offshore) and service employees who expect tips (and then are responsible for reporting them).

My biggest beef with the espresso tax was the trite phrase "it's for the kids!". Please.

mitch wrote on (September 22, 2003 9:18 AM)

Jim, what's your record on comments to a post? Is this site getting popular, or did this post just hit a nerve (taxes!) while no one comments on your biking ones... :-(

carson wrote on (September 22, 2003 10:02 AM)

> what's your record on comments to a post?

I think the Fry's post had 11. THe original donotcall.gov post got the most different people post, though it's apparent from reading the comments that several were confused. Funny thing about the bicycling posts is most of the comments I get are through private email.

>Is this site getting popular

Hah! Well, it's technically true that my traffic did double in September. But I'll never be as amusing as Debbie.

Debbie wrote on (September 22, 2003 2:48 PM)

*Blush* Aw, shucks.