Young Turks: Sales Tax Vs Income Tax - Ploy To Help The Rich

[CherylK]

Run time: 03:50 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Fwvj1fRlg00   Posted on YouTube: April 08, 2011 By YouTube Member: TheYoungTurks Views on YouTube: 184   Posted on DU: April 10, 2011 By DU Member: CherylK Views on DU: 2152

 
Georgia Governor Nathan Deal has a plan to cut income taxes but increase sales taxes. Cenk breaks down the impact.

[Siouxmealso]

1. They'll generate more tax revenue this way

Reducing the income tax will help working people more than rich people because most rich people don't work for a living. They pay capital gains taxes, not income taxes. So the reduction in income taxes helps working people.

And regarding the sales tax, rich people spend more than we do, especially in a recession. And the rich have expensive tastes so they buy expensive cars and expensive jewelry and home furnishings, etc.

Working people aren't buying much of anything during these tough times so most of the sales tax revenue will be coming from ruch people.

So if you really want to tax the rich, this is the way to do it.

[Angry Dragon]

2. Not sure which way I should read your post

[SunSeeker]

3. Did you even listen to what Cenk said?!

A larger percentage of poor and middle class people's income goes to buying goods, so a larger portion of their income will go to taxes under the repugs' sales tax hike. Sales taxes are very regressive taxes. Yeah, you'll generate more tax revenue that way--from the poor and middle class. The best way to tax the rich is income, capital gains and estate taxes. Troll much, Sioux?

[Siouxmealso]

4. You're wrong

Rich people consume more than poor people.

During a recession, the poor and middleclass spend their money on food, clothing and shelter. Those things aren't taxable. The rich continue to buy throughout the recession because they're not affected by it. The still buy jewelry, expensive cars, home furnishings, etc. things that ARE taxable.

If you want to tax the rich, tax their consumption. Don't let your hatred of the rich blind you to what makes sense.

[ihavenobias]

5. Let's inject some facts here

Enjoy:

http://thinkprogress.org/2011/04/03/tax-cutting-nathan-deal/

[SunSeeker]

7. That's Cenk's graph again, which proves my point... n/t

[HankyDubs]

6. heh this must be republicans

trying to figure out how to tax the rich and relieve the burden on the poor!!! They are always trying to find new ways to do that!!!

Right Siouxmealso?

[Chisox08]

9. Yeah they consume more but as a percentage of their income

poor people spend a larger percentage of their income. Raising the sales tax hurts poor and middle income families more because a larger percentage of their money is now going to pay sales tax instead of buying food.

[olegramps]

12. Go back to Freeperville. You are full of it.

[sarchasm]

13. Bizzarro World

In what alternate universe do you live where food, clothing and shelter are not taxed? The rich buy things in other states and countries where they pay no sales tax. They avoid taxes and affect legislation by paying your salary to spread this type of propaganda.

[gejohnston]

17. Food is not taxed in Florida.

[Donnachaidh]

19. *hatred of the rich* -- Fox News much?

seriously, you need to find freeperville. Or go back to it.

[suzanner]

11. Can't agree there, Sioux, but Cenk is right as usual.

Your assumptions are flawed. When the majority of the population is the working and non-working poor, the next largest sector is the so-called middle class, and the rich are one in .5 million who buy things largely not made in America or so esoteric to their class as to support only a handful of workers, I don't see how you fix such a skewed distribution by giving the over-valued unscrupulous few even more money. And that's just one argument.
On Cenk's last statement to tell everybody: if I've learned anything in the past 10 years, it is that you cannot tell a Republican anything. They think they know it all because their misconceptions are reinforced by MSM daily. Even Independents don't get it as they are suspicious of both parties and don't pursue real information either. It's a mess, and my sincerest thanks to Cenk, DU, and others who are out there chipping away at getting the truth out.

[ChadwickHenryWard]

14. That's backwards.

In a progressive system, rich people pay more of their money than poor people, with the poorest paying no income tax at all. Because of this, any decrease in income taxes helps the wealthy disproportionately. However, everybody pays the same sales tax, regardless of their income (this is considered a "regressive" tax.) Further, poor people, who spend a larger portion of their income, pay much more of their income to sales tax. Thus increasing sales tax hurts poor people.

[PA Democrat]

15. You are misinformed.

What characteristics do states with particularly regressive tax systems have in common?

Looking at the ten most regressive tax states, several important factors stand out:

Six of the ten states do not levy a broad-based personal income tax.
The remaining four states do levy income taxes, but have structured them in a way that
makes them much less progressive than in other states. Two of the four states have flat-rate
income taxes, which tax the income of the wealthiest family at the same marginal rate as the
poorest wage-earner, and two have graduated tax rates that are among the lowest in the
nation.

Four of the ten most regressive tax systems — those of Washington, South Dakota, Tennessee,
and Nevada — rely very heavily on regressive sales and excise taxes. These states derive
between half and two-thirds of their tax revenue from these taxes, compared to the national
average of 35 percent.

http://www.itepnet.org/whopays3.pdf

Sales taxes are REGRESSIVE due to the fact that wealthy people by definition earn more than they spend.

[PA Democrat]

16. Here is a graph to illustrate why you are wrong.

The state of Washington has no personal income tax and relies solely on sales, excise and property taxes to fund its government. Please note that the result is a tax burden on the poorest 20% of more than 17% of their total income compared to a tax burden on the richest 1% of UNDER 3% of their total income.



http://www.openleft.com/diary/21331/ending-regressive-state-taxes

Edited to add link

[Donnachaidh]

18. wow -- all those republican talking points -- where to start?

"Working people aren't buying much of anything during these tough times so most of the sales tax revenue will be coming from ruch people."

So, working people don't spend MORE of their actual salaries on food and gas, which, you should note -- they NEED to buy. They don't have the option of *not buying much* on those items.

Rich people have more options -- they spend LESS on subsistence articles -- LESS of their total income.

So who is essentially getting *f*cked* with this sales tax increase? Do I need to do the math to explain it?

Personally, I'm stunned rigid that this sort of *logic* is being posted here. :wow:

[ejbr]

8. k & r n/t

[JDPriestly]

10. Income taxes increase the burden on people who work in the US.

A sales tax places some of the burden on the purchase of goods imported from low wage countries. That's why I support a sales tax.

I also support estate taxes and raising income taxes on the rich.

Above all, income taxes should be increased on certain capital gains.