Glenn Beck is missing!

[BloodEclipse]

Return to the Article

April 10, 2010
Glenn Beck is missing!

Neil Braithwaite

Bill O'Reilly had this guy on the other night that looked exactly like Glenn Beck, but when he started talking, I knew immediately he was an imposter.

This Glenn Beck imposter proceeded to tell O'Reilley that he wants a 2% Value Added Tax on everything - personal and corporate - because he's, "willing to pay down the debt."

Now I have been watching and listening to Glenn Beck for a couple of years and one thing I know - that wasn't Glenn beck.

The "real" Glenn Beck would be the first to tell you that the government is addicted to taxes, and that it would be rather stupid to agree to give the addict another way to get their fix.

The imposter did go on to say there needed to be a ten-year limit and tight spending regulations, but seriously, the real Glenn Beck wouldn't be so naive as to think that once a VAT was implemented, the government wouldn't eventually make it permanent?

The real Glenn Beck also knows from experience that all addicts are liars, and will say and do just about anything to get their next fix.

Based on what this imposter said, I can imagine the real Glenn Beck conjuring up one of his crazy voices and saying, "Hey Mr. Addict, how about America gives you ten years of your favorite drug if you promise to just... (Fill in the blank). Now that's classic Beck!

Alert America! Anyone finding the real Glenn Beck please call FOX News immediately.

Yes Red, I need some of that for my head!

 

[trnsplntfrmohio]

VAT is a great idea, as long as the get rid of national income tax. I still think it's time to give up my social security # so I can stop paying medicare, social security and federal income tax while still paying state and city taxes

 

[BloodEclipse]

VAT is a great idea, as long as the get rid of national income tax. I still think it's time to give up my social security # so I can stop paying medicare, social security and federal income tax while still paying state and city taxes

VAT is a horrible idea. It makes the costs of some products outrageous.
Now a National sales tax is something I could get behind with the removal of the Federal income tax.
With a flat rate sales tax everyone contributes based on their spending habits. It is by design fair because the rate is the same for everyone.
Plus think of all the IRS agents we could put out of work. Making Govt smaller is a huge plus. No more thugs penalizing you into bankruptcy or worse.

 

[Bruenor]

I think Beck's point is that we have to do something about the debt. It can't go on as it is. If I'm in debt up to my eyeballs, I'd be cutting spending left and right, and then also be getting any extra job I could find. The "job" portion in this case would be a VAT, but if used it would have to be with drastic cuts in funding.

Once we have a VAT, we would never get rid of it. But we do have to do something.

 

[shibumiseeker]

VAT is a horrible idea. It makes the costs of some products outrageous.
Now a National sales tax is something I could get behind with the removal of the Federal income tax.
With a flat rate sales tax everyone contributes based on their spending habits. It is by design fair because the rate is the same for everyone.
Plus think of all the IRS agents we could put out of work. Making Govt smaller is a huge plus. No more thugs penalizing you into bankruptcy or worse.

Flat sales taxes are regressive as they tax the average person far more in proportion to their income. Exclude necessities like food and they become a little better. Increase the tax rate as the cost of the item goes up and it becomes a little more fair.

In some ways VAT on SOME items is more fair, and in some ways it's less. A VAT on food (and I am NOT a proponent of taxing staple food!) would work in the national interest regarding public health since each step in the processing and packaging would add cost, so less processed foods would be cheaper rather than the way it is currently.

Taxes aren't the problem. The size and complexity of the government is the problem. With the current size and complexity of the government changing the way taxing is done is just a huge game of whack-a-mole because if you push down in one area then it pushes up again in another area. If the governmental system were one tenth of the size it is and twice as efficient, then the taxes we pay wouldn't be an issue. The biggest struggles I see currently between republicrats is not so much in any real change in the income of the federal government, it's in who is paying for that income.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Flat sales taxes are regressive as they tax the average person far more in proportion to their income. Exclude necessities like food and they become a little better. Increase the tax rate as the cost of the item goes up and it becomes a little more fair.

People with more income spend more and generate more taxes.
The system we have now is beyond broken with about half of Americans paying nothing or getting money back they didn't put in. I agree with a food exemption.
The only fair tax is one that is the same for everybody. Taxing higher cost goods more, makes them harder for lower income people to purchase.

 

[Truckerman79]

People with more income spend more and generate more taxes.
The system we have now is beyond broken with about half of Americans paying nothing or getting money back they didn't put in. I agree with a food exemption.
The only fair tax is one that is the same for everybody. Taxing higher cost goods more, makes them harder for lower income people to purchase.

I agree, the Fair Tax gives everyone skin in the game. The way Boortz and Linder designed it gives you a refund on the taxes you pay on food up to a certain level. I think in the interest of paying down debt it may be appropriate to tax income on the wealthiest Americans in the range of 5-10% which is a lot less than what they pay now.

 

[Bruenor]

Flat sales taxes are regressive as they tax the average person far more in proportion to their income. Exclude necessities like food and they become a little better. Increase the tax rate as the cost of the item goes up and it becomes a little more fair.

Fair would be treating all people equal. A flat tax, the same percentage for all people, is fair. In that scenario, I pay the same thing as my neighbor for the same services. We pay the same amount of taxes for the fire department, and if our houses are on fire we get the same results. If I pay more in taxes, the fire department doesn't show up faster to my house, yet I'm paying more for the service.

A graduated tax scale is discriminatory. It treats people unequally. What is fair about that?

 

[shibumiseeker]

People with more income spend more and generate more taxes.
The system we have now is beyond broken with about half of Americans paying nothing or getting money back they didn't put in. I agree with a food exemption.
The only fair tax is one that is the same for everybody. Taxing higher cost goods more, makes them harder for lower income people to purchase.

It breaks down because people with more wealth don't buy more stuff in proportion to their wealth. The consumption model only works up to a point, generally speaking from lower income up to high median income. Above that and consumption mostly levels off. Excess wealth then gets invested to make more wealth.

This is the major problem with trying to apply a simple solution to a complex problem, it breaks down beyond a first glance.

 

[T-rav]

A fair tax is a bad bad bad idea!!! Let me explain, who determines what is fair? We will end up back to class warfare and whats fair for one will not be fair for the other. The government will say well if you make this much 70% is fair if you make below this much 2% is fair.

A flat tax is fair for everyone lets say 7%. If ya make 25,000 a year you pay 7% of that make 250,000 7% of that. This would be the easiest way to shrink government their spending and all the other crap they do. PLUS how simple would that make the tax system. At the end of the year you pay your share cut the check and done! If we all had to cut a check April 15th I think we as a country would finally actually find the common ground to hold the crooks feet to the fire.

Of course we would have to repeal or amend the 16th to keep this set in stone.

Oh and the most important if you don't have skin in the game you get nothing.

 

[SavageEagle]

It breaks down because people with more wealth don't buy more stuff in proportion to their wealth. The consumption model only works up to a point, generally speaking from lower income up to high median income. Above that and consumption mostly levels off. Excess wealth then gets invested to make more wealth.

This is the major problem with trying to apply a simple solution to a complex problem, it breaks down beyond a first glance.

Yeah, but when the rich buy a 100K dollar car every year, that's 1000x's more than the average person spends in a year. I could get behind a scheme like this. Although, I don't see them eliminating the income tax and cutting spending.

 

[Truckerman79]

A fair tax is a bad bad bad idea!!! Let me explain, who determines what is fair? We will end up back to class warfare and whats fair for one will not be fair for the other. The government will say well if you make this much 70% is fair if you make below this much 2% is fair.

A flat tax is fair for everyone lets say 7%. If ya make 25,000 a year you pay 7% of that make 250,000 7% of that. This would be the easiest way to shrink government their spending and all the other crap they do. PLUS how simple would that make the tax system. At the end of the year you pay your share cut the check and done! If we all had to cut a check April 15th I think we as a country would finally actually find the common ground to hold the crooks feet to the fire.

Of course we would have to repeal or amend the 16th to keep this set in stone.

Oh and the most important if you don't have skin in the game you get nothing.

Wow, your logic is totally back-assward. A flat tax is MUCH, MUCH less fair for people of lower incomes because even though they pay the same % rate, it will leave them in a position to where they may find it economically impossible to pay the tax! Many low income earners spend everything they make on bills and living expenses with nothing left over. Wealthy folks could stroke a check for their tax liability without even thinking about it, especially at a 7% rate. Talk about fanning the flames of class warfare, this would set it off like you wouldn't believe.

By getting rid of corporate and income taxes and setting a consumption tax at 23% we would see little to no change in prices because 23% of everything we buy is from companies passing tax costs to the consumer. Linder and Boortz explain this thoroughly in the Fair Tax book.

 

[Ogre]

Wow, your logic is totally back-assward. A flat tax is MUCH, MUCH less fair for people of lower incomes because even though they pay the same % rate, it will leave them in a position to where they may find it economically impossible to pay the tax! Many low income earners spend everything they make on bills and living expenses with nothing left over. Wealthy folks could stroke a check for their tax liability without even thinking about it, especially at a 7% rate. Talk about fanning the flames of class warfare, this would set it off like you wouldn't believe.

By getting rid of corporate and income taxes and setting a consumption tax at 23% we would see little to no change in prices because 23% of everything we buy is from companies passing tax costs to the consumer. Linder and Boortz explain this thoroughly in the Fair Tax book.

I disagree, I think the only fair solution is a Flat Tax. as far as personal income taxes go.

 

[BloodEclipse]

Above that and consumption mostly levels off. Excess wealth then gets invested to make more wealth.

You say that like it is a bad thing? That is what causes capitalism to work so well. People invest their money in companies that provide jobs and create products that consumers want. Without the wealthy this country would be crap.
That money still gets taxed when people buy the products.
Eliminate corporate taxes and capital gains taxes and we would have a historic economic rebound.

 

[SemperFiUSMC]

Who cares if a tax is regressive or not. I am so bloody sick and tired of people using the f-word (fair) as a descriptor when it comes to being an American or living in America. There is nothing fair about living in the best country in the world. It sux to be everyone else.

Our founders guaranteed freedom, not fairness. They guaranteed opportunity, not success. The only way to guarantee fairnesss is for EVERYONE to pay their share.

We drove through Skid Row in LA yesterday. It was heart-wrenching seeing all the people with nothing better to do than lay on the street and wait for someone to come by and feed them. They have accepted their positions as animals in the zoo. My 17 yo daughter asked how people could live like that. My response was that society not only enables but encourages it. We provide food and a street to sleep on so that we don't have to witness first-hand the horror and indignation of thousands of people living in a hopeless situation. The best way to stop the cycle? Stop feeding them. Institutionalize the ones that can't be self sufficient. Help, yet demand the rest get back on their feet.

The uber rich will always be uber rich. There will always be poverty, and people that are content to live in it. The real group that is suffering is the middle class that wants more from life, yet is unable to attain it because of the oppressiveness of those seeking fairness.

Until we shift the adjective from fair to equal we will continue to have these meaningless little discussions.

Flat sales taxes are regressive as they tax the average person far more in proportion to their income. Exclude necessities like food and they become a little better. Increase the tax rate as the cost of the item goes up and it becomes a little more fair.

In some ways VAT on SOME items is more fair, and in some ways it's less. A VAT on food (and I am NOT a proponent of taxing staple food!) would work in the national interest regarding public health since each step in the processing and packaging would add cost, so less processed foods would be cheaper rather than the way it is currently.

Taxes aren't the problem. The size and complexity of the government is the problem. With the current size and complexity of the government changing the way taxing is done is just a huge game of whack-a-mole because if you push down in one area then it pushes up again in another area. If the governmental system were one tenth of the size it is and twice as efficient, then the taxes we pay wouldn't be an issue. The biggest struggles I see currently between republicrats is not so much in any real change in the income of the federal government, it's in who is paying for that income.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Who cares if a tax is regressive or not. I am so bloody sick and tired of people using the f-word (fair) as a descriptor when it comes to being an American or living in America. There is nothing fair about living in the best country in the world. It sux to be everyone else.

Our founders guaranteed freedom, not fairness. They guaranteed opportunity, not success....

^^This. Rep added, and as I said in the comment there: Liberty. It's a beautiful thing.

Blessings,
Bill

 

[hoosiertriangle]

Your base assumption seems to be that fair means the "rich" pay more just because they're rich.

I don't have a good solution other than flat tax on income or consumption or split between the two. What is unfair is continuing to tax the "rich" at higher levels and not taxing the "poor" at all so that portions of the "rich" get redistributed back to those who didn't chip in all. Robin Hood is best left a fictional story and not an economical scheme to enact fairness. Most people who think the rich should pay more because they can have a fair measure of jealousy that they'd be better off converting to work ethic, patience, and perserverence.

It breaks down because people with more wealth don't buy more stuff in proportion to their wealth. The consumption model only works up to a point, generally speaking from lower income up to high median income. Above that and consumption mostly levels off. Excess wealth then gets invested to make more wealth.

This is the major problem with trying to apply a simple solution to a complex problem, it breaks down beyond a first glance.

 

[Expat]

Back to the original idea. I wouldn't have a problem with them adding a VAT of 2% if they cut the size of government in about half, eliminating several departments, trim the salaries and pensions of the remaining personnel, bring the troops all home from everywhere and use all the savings and VAT proceeds to pay off the debt. Then once that is accomplished eliminate the tax and reduce the others to what is being spent and not allow it to ever grow again except at the rate of inflation.

 

[jbombelli]

There is nothing more permanent than a temporary government program.

--Milton Friedman

 

[shibumiseeker]

Your base assumption seems to be that fair means the "rich" pay more just because they're rich.
.

Nice conjecture, but basically wrong. My basic argument was and is that creating a simplistic system like sales tax and applying it to a complex system like a nationwide socioeconomic system that is so bloated that the poor and middle class would pay far out of proportion to their incomes and basic means is essentially robbing the poorer to provide for the rich. You simple CAN'T apply a simplistic solution to a complex system. It doesn't work. It's not about what's fair or unfair, it DOESN'T WORK. Taxation HAS to be a complex formula.

Point in fact, if you keep the government the same size it is currently, if a flat sales tax nationwide were to be implemented, most you middle class folks out there in INGOland would be paying roughly double what you currently do in taxes. Hey, works for me, I live a pretty frugal lifestyle, mine would go down a fair amount.

Like any complex system, what works best is a mixture. In programming we might call it an algorithm. The problem with our current system is that it's too prone to manipulation. A flat sales tax would be equally prone to manipulation.

The fairest solution is for the government to be much much smaller and much more efficient, then you don't have to squeeze as much taxes from the proletariat and the rich can keep on avoiding paying taxes like they always will.