Line item veto without a constitutional amendment would be a HUGE violation of the separation of powers.Coyote wrote:Line item veto is the only way it will happen, but the Congress won't allow it. And the good thing about a flat tax is that it closes all the loopholes that the current graduated tax system allows. I'd sytill say that people below a certain income range would live tax-free.
How Would You Eliminate Pork Barrel Spending?
Moderators: Alyrium Denryle, Edi, K. A. Pital
BoTM / JL / MM / HAB / VRWC / Horseman
I'm studying for the CPA exam. Have a nice summer, and if you're down just sit back and realize that Joe is off somewhere, doing much worse than you are.
Hence my constitutional amendment comment above...Durran Korr wrote:Line item veto without a constitutional amendment would be a HUGE violation of the separation of powers.Coyote wrote:Line item veto is the only way it will happen, but the Congress won't allow it. And the good thing about a flat tax is that it closes all the loopholes that the current graduated tax system allows. I'd sytill say that people below a certain income range would live tax-free.
"preemptive killing of cops might not be such a bad idea from a personal saftey[sic] standpoint..." --Keevan Colton
"There's a word for bias you can't see: Yours." -- William Saletan
"There's a word for bias you can't see: Yours." -- William Saletan
-
RedImperator
- Roosevelt Republican
- Posts: 16465
- Joined: 2002-07-11 07:59pm
- Location: Delaware
- Contact:
Congress did allow it. The problem is, the Supreme Court struck it down. In order for a line-item veto to be legal, two-thirds of both houses and three quarters of the states must approve of a new Amendment to the Constitution. That's much, much harder than just passing a law.Coyote wrote:Line item veto is the only way it will happen, but the Congress won't allow it.
X-Ray Blues
Bah, already you are making loopholes. Everyone pays, say 10% (just cause its easy), if you make 100,000 a year you pay 10 grand. If you make 20,000 you pay 2 grand.jegs2 wrote:I couldn't agree more. A flat tax is as fair as it gets -- fully self-adjusting: The more you make, the more you pay. Other loopholes I'd eliminate are various types of income not being counted as income. So far as I'm concerned, if you've more in the bank today than yesterday, it counts as income regardless of how you got it or from whom. And yes, if you make below a certain level, you'd not pay taxes, nor would you get "free" money from the federal government.Coyote wrote:Line item veto is the only way it will happen, but the Congress won't allow it. And the good thing about a flat tax is that it closes all the loopholes that the current graduated tax system allows. I'd sytill say that people below a certain income range would live tax-free.
Any way, I still like the national sales tax on non edible items my self. If you don't want to pay taxes, you don't have to.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red