Mercenary....you do that all the time.

You make a claim, wont defend it with facts or a real example and say prove me wrong.

Nope. You claim it would fairer and better. Provide an example that works.

No, you defend it. You are the one who made the claim. All I did was state what I thought would work. You stated that in your massive, but obviously weak experience, I mean since you really have no political connections, that, "In fact in the few highly industrialized countries where they were attempted, they failed miserably in meeting revenue projections.", and.... wait for it..... "I havent seen any flat or "fair" tax proposal where the numbers work or that is not highly regressive.".... so step up to the plate and back your assertions up with citations and facts. Thanks. I will wait for you.

You really are a trip! Always putting the burden on others who challenge your claims.

The only area of agreement between us is that a flat tax is simpler than the current system. Not better, not fairer, but only less complex.

I cant prove that it wont work. I can only say that I have not seen a proposal that would work and would not be regressive and cost middle class taxpayers more as well as eliminate current tax incentives that benefit middle class taxpayers - home ownership, retirement savings. etc.

If you know of one that works and doesnt have the downsides that I noted, we can discuss it.

Ok, got it. You can't dispute my statements. You have no citations. You can't prove it won't work. All I did was ask you to back up your statements. You can't discuss it because you still have not backed up your previous statements.

Good night.... loser.

Its been fun and more laughs. :)

I'll wait til the next time you say a flat tax would be better and ask you to demonstrate with a real example of how that would be the case.

I wont expect an answer, but will assume you will turn it back on me and demand that I prove it wont work.

Nice trick!

SO you can't prove your statements. Ok. I get it. Carry on.... You made the assertions. I quoted them. You can't back them up. Well done. Excuse me while I take something for the Cellar's Reflux.... :vomit: careful it is really HCL acid.

Still waiting..... :vomit:

When they (Mercenary) default to their defensive "I dont have to prove I am right or provide a cite, you have to prove I am wrong" mode, ignoring is ultimately where it ends. :D

I got it. You still can't back up your statements. Please cite.

What countries? Where? When? What failure?


Thanks.

Who is they? The Illuminati? The Republickins? The Zombies? The Boggie Men under your bed? I knowwwww! Fox News!!!!!

...

Does it take into account the elimination of the current loop holes?

Interesting report about the transparent Obama Administration....

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/...entry_id=87978

But yet I did. (Hint: there's a scroll bar on the code box. Try using it next time before making unfounded accusations.) Yes, really. Although "rescinded" was the wrong word to use. I should have said "restricted".

"President Barack Obama will announce today that he’s imposing a cap of $500,000 on the compensation of top executives at companies that receive significant federal assistance in the future, responding to a public outcry over Wall Street excess.

Any additional compensation will be in restricted stock that won’t vest until taxpayers have been paid back. . ."

Why do you refuse to acknowledge that this investment in our economy was critical to avoid a complete collapse into a full on Depression?

Were you this angry when Ronald Reagan bailed out the failed Savings and Loans in the '80s that ultimately cost the taxpayers over $124 BILLION that was never repaid by the banks (or weren't you alive to remember that bloody fiasco?) I see that as you find yourself losing ground in a debate, you resort to anger and personal attacks. Trust me, you'll never get anywhere with me with that tack. I find it comical that you are so demanding for cites, when you ignore requests for you to provide cites for your own claims. Let me remind you: Yet, still no cite. Why is that? You fail to understand how debate works. You make a claim, it is incumbent upon you to back it up. Your debate partner is not responsible for refuting your claims.

But I'll tell you what; I'll humor you just this once on behalf of friend Fair&Balanced.

IMF and Romania tackle flat tax failure

"Yet more evidence that flat taxes do not deliver. The government of Romania, which adopted the idea of flat taxes in 2005, has called in the International Monetary Fund to provide a €20 billion rescue package to stem a massive deficit in its public finances. The government is now in discussion with IMF officials and others to consider radical tax reform. Amongst the measures under discussion is abandoning flat tax and restoring progressive taxes on personal income and corporate profits."

The Flat Tax Is Flat-Lining

"Posted Tuesday, March 31, 2009 - 4:09pm

Over the last decade, Eastern European countries became darlings of the far right by instituting free-market economic policies designed to break convincingly from their Communist past. The so-called Baltic Tigers—Latvia, Lithuania, and Estonia—garnered worldwide plaudits for a number of free-market reforms, led by the imposition of a flat-rate income tax, especially from the American right. "The flat tax is making a comeback," trumpeted the conservative National Review. The three nations are "leading a global tax reform revolution," said the right-leaning Heritage Foundation.

The idea behind a flat tax is deliciously simple: Charge one uniform rate of income tax for all payers, regardless of their relative wealth. That, say its advocates, will end tax cheating and bring in higher revenues than the usual graduated tax system used in the United States and most other countries. Before the Eastern European "revolution," the loudest proponent of the flat tax was Steve Forbes, a former Republican presidential candidate and the editor-in-chief of Forbes. Of course, thus far American policymakers have not shown much more appetite for the flat tax than American voters did for Steve Forbes' candidacy, which is why the right was so excited that the idea took hold abroad.

Too bad for them that it hasn't worked out. Latvia, which has a flat tax of 25 percent, and Lithuania and Estonia, which have 21 percent tax rates, are all in deep economic trouble. . ."

So, there are your cites. I trust this meets satisfactorily with your demands.

I think I'm in love. :lol: