posted on August 13, 2004 01:05:30 PM new
Just one more way to tax the hard working people.
CARSON - John Kerry said Thursday that President Bush's musing about a national sales tax is an insult to financially struggling voters and would amount to ``one of the largest tax increases on the middle class in American history.''
The Democratic presidential nominee, during a speech at California State University-Dominguez Hills, tried to reverse partisan stereotypes by portraying the Republican president as the tax raiser and himself as a tax cutter.
Kerry said if Bush wants to create a national sales tax without increasing the deficit, people will end up paying at least 26 percent more for purchases on top of state and local sales taxes.
``We know exactly who that's going to hurt,'' Kerry said. ``That's going to hurt small business. It's going to hurt jobs. It's going to hit the pocketbooks of those who need and deserve tax relief most in America.''
Bush, who also campaigned in Southern California on Thursday, has suggested that overhauling the tax code would be a second-term priority if he is re-elected. While campaigning in Florida on Tuesday, he said replacing the income tax with a federal sales tax is ``an interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously.''
Kerry seized on Bush's comments even as White House officials downplayed the idea and denied that any such plan is under consideration.
Kerry said Bush had failed to offer a plan for improving the economy in his second term. He said the president's tax cuts have resulted in a tax increase on the middle class because their state and local taxes have been increased to compensate for loss of revenue from the federal government. He said a national sales tax would only further burden the middle class.
``I call it one of the largest tax increases on the middle class in American history,'' Kerry said. ``And this is coming from an administration that has offered almost no new ideas for our economy, and the few ideas that they have offered have only hurt middle-class families. This new idea is no different.''
Kerry repeatedly invoked the memory of better economic times under another Democratic president, Bill Clinton. He said Clinton's advisers were helping craft his economic plan and that he will be ``a champion for the middle class'' by cutting their taxes while lowering the deficit.
Kerry said he would offer tax breaks to help pay for health care premiums, child care and college tuition, paid for by repealing Bush's tax cuts for people earning more than $200,000 a year.
Bush campaign official Steve Schmidt said Kerry cannot pay for his tax plan.
``John Kerry's numbers don't add up,'' Schmidt said. ``He has spent his tax hike more times than anyone can keep track of.''
In Dayton, Ohio, Vice President Dick Cheney questioned Kerry's call for a ``more sensitive'' war on terror, saying it would not impress the Sept. 11 terrorists or the Islamist militants who have beheaded U.S. citizens -- criticism Kerry dismissed as negative politics.
``America has been in too many wars for any of our wishes, but not a one of them was won by being sensitive,'' Cheney told supporters in this swing state that offers 20 electoral votes and typically goes with the presidential winner. ``Those who threaten us and kill innocents around the world do not need to be treated more sensitively. They need to be destroyed.''
The Kerry campaign said Kerry's use of the word ``sensitive'' referred to outreach to allies -- a word Bush used in March 2001. And it responded to the criticism by pointing out that while Kerry was a decorated Vietnam War veteran, Bush served stateside with the Texas Air National Guard and Cheney received five deferments.
Speaking later Thursday to thousands of supporters at a rally in Medford, Ore., Kerry said: ``I defended our country as a young man when others chose not to, and I will defend it as president of the United States. I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary with the right, legitimate intelligence with swiftness and certainty
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
posted on August 13, 2004 02:47:47 PM new
Wow logansdad you take Kerry's word for everything. You know maybe he is just wrong on this, but it is not going to happen so you can rest.
If there was a national sales tax the rich would pay more as they buy more. That's a given. I would pay much less because I don't need all the luxuries that the rich have.
posted on August 13, 2004 03:36:21 PM new
I'd like to see a quote from President Bush himself...the whole question and answer when he was asked about this.
I believe this is just another desperate attempt by kerry to made it look TOTALLY different than what the story truly is.
I'd read that at one of his 'question and answer' campaign stops...someone asked the President how he'd feel about this. And that ONE part was all he'd said. "an interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously.´´
And from that short answer just look what kerry's turned it into....lying liberal. Now kerry's trying to make it appear this is something he's going to do....and the people should be outraged.
They're going to be outraged alright...IF kerry gets elected and we get our taxes raised to pay for the $735 BILLION worth of new programs he's promising everyone.
IF he makes this statement again...he should be asked just how much he plans to raise our taxes to pay for his programs. And ask why President Bush is working to get his tax CUTS made permanent IF he were really going to do what kerry's suggesting.
Another typical dem spin....they're so good at doing all they can to divide people....make them fearful...so they'll vote for them. What a sorry politican kerry is.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"One thing is for sure: the extremists have faith in our weakness. And the weaker we are, the more they will come after us." --Tony Blair
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"The War on Terror will not be won until America is united. And as long as Democrats target the Bush administration -- not the terrorists -- as the enemy, we are in trouble." --Oliver North
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Those are only two reasons why we need to:
posted on August 13, 2004 05:15:18 PM new
Libra: If there was a national sales tax the rich would pay more as they buy more. That's a given. I would pay much less because I don't need all the luxuries that the rich have.
You may think that would be true:
If that sounds like your idea of a dream world, keep dreaming -- it probably won't happen any time soon, analysts said Wednesday.
Bush, answering questions at a campaign stop in Florida on Tuesday, said the idea of replacing the income tax with a national sales tax had some merit.
"You know, I'm not exactly sure how big the national sales tax is going to have to be, but it's the kind of interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously," Bush said, according to a Reuters report.
With that, he echoed recent calls by conservative lawmakers, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert of Illinois, to abolish the Internal Revenue Service and replace the national income tax with a flat tax, a tax on retail sales or a tax on all sales, called a value-added tax (VAT).
Rep. John Linder, R-Ga., has introduced a bill -- with 54 House co-sponsors -- to replace the income tax with a 23 percent sales tax on all purchases. The goal would be to take a flame-thrower to the Byzantine tax code and encourage investment, job growth and wealth accumulation by making investment and savings totally tax-free.
The issue has special salience in an election year, in which Bush is looking for a big idea -- the vision thing, if you will -- that will please his conservative base and help carry him to re-election.
Still, while few would disagree that a world without an IRS would be a wonderful world indeed, the issue is a little more complicated than that. It's a lot more complicated, in fact, which is why Bush will probably not try to make this a campaign issue this year.
"There was a lot of speculation around [Washington] a week ago that something big could come, that the White House needed to trot out something bold ahead of the convention," said Greg Valliere, political economist at Schwab Washington Research Group. "I've talked to several people who've come away from this thinking it's unlikely."
"The feeling is that Bush might call for a study, a commission, a blue ribbon panel on tax change, but that, if you start talking about radical tax reform, it becomes a big, fat target for criticism."
Conservative economist Bruce Bartlett, an adviser to President Reagan and author of the 1981 book Reaganomics: Supply-Side Economics in Action, illustrated this quite bluntly in a recent column for the conservative Web site National Review Online.
"With all due respect to Speaker Hastert, trying to eliminate the IRS by adopting a national retail sales tax is a very dumb idea," Bartlett wrote.
One of the biggest roadblocks to such a proposal is that it could entail doing away with tax deductions precious to many Americans, including the home mortgage deduction.
After all, buying a house is, technically, consumption. Same thing with buying diapers and food for the kids -- say goodbye to the child tax credit. If you get sick, you'll be paying that 23 percent tax on your doctor and prescription bills, too.
You could make such purchases tax-exempt, but that would push the tax rate on other goods even higher. In fact, that 23 percent rate is probably not what the rate would actually be, anyway. Bartlett said in the real world, it would be closer to 30 percent.
Economist Robert McIntyre, director of Citizens for Tax Justice, a liberal think tank, said other estimates of the tax rate necessary to run the government have been even higher than that.
"Imagine a 40-to-50 percent sales tax -- that would cheer everybody up," McIntyre said.
What's more, a simple sales tax would punish people at the lower end of the income scale, who tend to consume almost all of their income in order to stay afloat. That means they'd be taxed at the 30-percent rate on their full income, while the wealthy would be taxed only on whatever part of their income they spend.
If somebody making $500,000 spends $250,000, for example, they'd be taxed 30 percent of what they spend, or $75,000, which amounts to just 15 percent of their total income. That's called a "regressive" tax -- the higher your income, the less tax you pay -- and it is not a politically popular idea.
What's more, McIntyre and some other economists believe, it will hurt the economy. If people are taxed heavily on their consumption, they'll be inclined to consume less, according to this theory, which will force businesses to produce less.
"If people don't buy stuff, why would anybody invest in machinery to make stuff?" McIntyre said.
Supporters: sales tax would boost economy, cut prices
Supporters of a national sales tax, however, say such concerns are misguided. For one thing, they argue that encouraging investment and spending will improve the economy, making everybody -- rich and poor -- better off.
They also suggest that eliminating corporate taxes will cut the base costs for most goods and services. In other words, consumers won't be paying $130 for a $100 DVD player. Instead, the price of the DVD player could be cut to, say, $80. The 30 percent tax on that would take the final price to just $104 -- a negligible price increase, which could be followed later by price declines.
"We will have more investment and business growth, which leads to lower prices, because more people will be coming to the marketplace with similar products," said Stephen Slivinski, director of fiscal studies at the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank.
What's more, they believe that people will be encouraged to work harder and earn more if they know Uncle Sam won't be taking some of their extra money.
Liberal economists respond that the world isn't that simple -- do a Google search for "backward-bending labor supply curve" one day, if you have absolutely nothing better to do -- but the idea could have some political resonance.
Slivinski also said the regressiveness of a sales tax could be eased by, for example, helping lower-income workers open up tax-free retirement accounts.
Rep. Linder's proposal would also give every family a partial tax refund at the start of each month, based on the poverty line. Others have proposed similar refunds of basic living expenses -- which would, however, potentially drive up taxes on other items.
Still, Slivinski agreed that scrapping the income tax and replacing it with a national sales tax was probably a tall order, politically.
But he suggested Republicans could find a way to back into a consumption tax in a more nuanced, politically palatable way -- for example, by allowing unlimited contributions to 401(k)s. This would help cut taxes on investment and saving, leaving only disposable income to be taxed.
In fact, the "ownership society" theme Bush has been trumpeting on the campaign trail recently could, in the long run, have a similar effect as a national sales tax. That theme encompasses several policies, including Social Security privatization and health savings accounts, which would ostensibly cut the cost of investment and saving, just as a national sales tax would.
"Going in the direction of an ownership society gets you to the consumption tax in a different way," Slivinski said
posted on August 13, 2004 05:19:53 PM new
logansdad
This could be a good thing. Let Bush develope the idea and use it as part of his campaign. That out to get him booted fairly quickly!!!!!!!!! State tax here in Ohio was raised to 8% this year. That's enough!
Cheryl
. . .if you still try to defend the infamies and horrors perpetrated by that Antichrist- I really believe he is Antichrist- I will have nothing more to do with you and you are no longer my friend.. . - War and Peace, Tolstoy
posted on August 13, 2004 05:30:22 PM newit's the kind of interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously," Bush said, according to a Reuters report.
So now just mentioning, in an answer to a question, is reason for kerry to act like it's under serious consideration....when the 'panel' hasn't even been established.
------------
And on the sales taxes on homes....hey...you guys want to have National Health care for ALL just like Canada....why not pay taxes to purchase a home...like they do in Canada too. Probably to help pay for their expensive, EQUAL, health coverage. lol
posted on August 13, 2004 05:35:02 PM new
Also....since kerry's stated he's NOT going to tell the public just how he does plan to pay for all his programs until AFTER the election....
...maybe you'll all be in for a big surprise when he flip-flops on this idea and decides it might just work out well. Sure wouldn't surprise me....he continually goes around saying "When elected I plan to do...XXXX" Which usually is what President Bush is already doing at that time.
posted on August 13, 2004 07:14:04 PM new"Wow logansdad you take Kerry's word for everything. You know maybe he is just wrong on this, but it is not going to happen so you can rest."
How do you know it will not happen? Do you take everything Bush says as the truth?? Oh wait, of course you do. Just like Linda does.
In case you forgot, it was Bush Sr. who said "NO NEW Taxes" while campaigning. Then BAM what did he do? He raised taxes.
So you can see why I don't take Bush's word as the gospel.
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
[ edited by logansdad on Aug 13, 2004 07:18 PM ]
posted on August 13, 2004 07:34:55 PM new
Logansdad-Here's your answer to the national sales tax.
Bush courts voters in key state of Oregon
By PETE YOST
Associated Press
PORTLAND, Ore. - Campaigning in a state he lost by less than 7,000 votes four years ago, President Bush weighed in with election-year support for Oregon on Friday, saying his administration will fight for federal money that would give a boost to the state's economy.
After repeated requests, Bush says the White House is backing $15 million in proposed congressional appropriations to deepen a 100-mile channel from Portland to the Pacific Ocean.
Oregon's jobless rate is at 6.8 percent, substantially above the 5.5 percent rate nationally, while its economy is among the fastest growing in the country, adding 6,900 jobs in June. Bush's Democratic rival John Kerry, who was campaigning in the same city, focused on taxes and energy.
The Bush administration is "committed to keeping America's great ports open for business," Bush told hundreds of supporters on the banks of the Columbia River.
Since Bush took office, the White House budget office has opposed new projects by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers not required by environmental laws.
Deepening the channel would cut costs for shippers and expand export opportunities for farmers and manufacturers. Portland is the largest wheat export port in the United States and the largest volume auto handling port on the West Coast.
The president's comments came as he distanced himself from another economy-related issue, a suggestion that he wants to replace the federal income tax with a national sales tax.
Bush created a stir earlier this week when, in response to question from a supporter at a campaign forum in the Florida Panhandle, he said such a tax is "an interesting idea that we ought to explore seriously."
Thursday night on CNN's "Larry King Live," Bush said, "People shouldn't worry about me raising taxes."
Kerry suggested such a plan would impose a new burden on working families.
Bush said Thursday night that his point was that "we ought to explore ways to simplify the tax code."
"I said it was an interesting idea," Bush said on CNN's "Larry King Live." "This is politics. People put words in your mouth. People shouldn't worry about me raising taxes. I'm the guy that cut taxes."
Bush has suggested an overhaul of the tax code would be a priority if he is re-elected.
Earlier Thursday, Kerry said a national sales tax would be an insult to financially struggling voters and would amount to "one of the largest tax increases on the middle class in American history."
In the interview, Bush tried to portray Kerry as one who will raise taxes. Kerry wants to eliminate Bush's tax cuts for people making more than $200,000 a year, and use the money to pay for health care, education and other needs.
"The tax code is way too complicated, but let me just make this clear so everybody understands," Bush said in the interview. "I'm the guy that believes in reducing taxes and keeping them low. It's the other fellow that says he's going to raise taxes and I think it'll be a mistake to raise taxes now."
Bush sat for the interview during a five-day campaign swing that included a stop in Los Angeles. He was embraced by two of the state's Republican icons, Nancy Reagan and Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, hoping their glow would rub off on him in a state that remains hostile territory to him.
Article from the Twin Cities Pioneer Press dated today.
posted on August 13, 2004 07:45:02 PM new
From the same article.
In the interview, Bush tried to portray Kerry as one who will raise taxes. Kerry wants to eliminate Bush's tax cuts for people making more than $200,000 a year, and use the money to pay for health care, education and other needs.
Okay now Kerry wants to play Robin Hood. So people who go out and work, make a good living, then take it away from them and give it to the lower and middle class for their health care. Doesn't seem right to me. Does this statement include Kerry or does he have enough tax shelters that he doesn't pay taxes. It would be interesting to see his tax report.
posted on August 13, 2004 08:07:44 PM new
"I said it was an interesting idea," Bush said on CNN's "Larry King Live." "This is politics. People put words in your mouth. People shouldn't worry about me raising taxes. I'm the guy that cut taxes."
Bush has suggested an overhaul of the tax code would be a priority if he is re-elected.
That is what he says now. It may be a different story if he is re-elected. What exactly does an overhaul entail??
At least Kerry is being honest when he said he was going to raise taxes for the wealthy.
Let's have a BBQ, Texas style, ROAST BUSH
------------------------------
YOU CAN'T HAVE BULLSH** WITH OUT BUSH.
------------------------------
We the people, in order to form a more perfect Union....
.....one Nation indivisible, With Liberty and Justice for ALL.
posted on August 13, 2004 08:40:43 PM new
Hey I would love a flat tax as long as its set up to tax people like Linda_K and other heartless greedy people about 50% of their income without any deductions. Then we can tax honest hard working Americans about 10%.
VOTE FOR JOHN KERRY HE IS OUT TO MAKE THE GREEDY RICH PAY THEIR FAIR SHARE OF TAXES. JOHN KERRY WANTS TO RELIEVE THE MIDDLE AND WORKING CLASS OF A HEAVY TAX BURDEN.
posted on August 13, 2004 09:04:11 PM new
Correct me if I am wrong here.. but wouldn't this be just another form of tax evasion for the wealthy business owners? The tax would be on retail goods right? Business buy wholesale right? So again the rich would avoid paying sales tax..right??
posted on August 14, 2004 05:35:13 AM newThen we can tax honest hard working Americans about 10%.
That certainly would be good idea for everyone...especially the ones who pay the most taxes... but then most people who say this type of diatribe don't really care to try to work hard and make something of themselves... they want a handout from the governement and punish those who actually do work hard...
posted on August 14, 2004 08:43:38 AM new
Number one: An undue burden would be placed on the seller to collect the tax which realistically would be approx 22%. The paperwork for the seller would be lengthy and because of the large amounts collected frequent.
Number Two: The tax would offer an incentive to hoard money, if you don't spend it you are not taxed. This of course would not apply to those on a tight budget who spend 100% of their income on necessities. It would create a windfall for the wealthy (sort of like the tax cuts given them by Bush)
It would create a stagnant economy don't spend it don't get taxed
States such as Oregon where there is no sales tax enjoy many shoppers from neighboring states such as Washington & California. This would only encourage shopping in Canada & Mexico.
