401–410 of 438 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am not agreeing with it just stating the fact.
You are not stating "the fact" you are stating patent nonsense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are not stating "the fact" you are stating patent nonsense.
Maybe so, but you've crossed into attacking and name-calling, which is a violation of the site guidelines no matter how right you are. Moreover it's unsubstantive to just declare "nonsense" without explaining anything to the reader. Please don't post like this to HN. https://news.ycombinator.com/newsguidelines.html
Calling a declaration patent nonsense is not "name-calling". Stuff which is "attacking and name-calling" however include:
* insinuating that the IRS rejects pre-filling declaration because they "would make less money" despite them having supported that effort
* declaring that tax declaration is "like a poker game" and that it's "just a fact" is
* insulting other commenters, as ransom1538 has done and I have not
> Moreover it's unsubstantive to just declare "nonsense" without explaining anything to the reader.
Why would I need to substantiate a disagreement with an unsubstantiated assertion?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Ferrari, Porsche, et al would beg to differ. Most high end Mercedes, Audi or BMW cars are limited to 155 mph but you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in ride quality between the top 50 mph of the range and the bottom 50. If your car gets shaky and unstable when you hit 90 mph then I'm sorry but you just don't have a very good vehicle.
you can't assume that most of the general population has these cars, though. a 2013 camry going 90 MPH is not something i want to be in, nor do i trust anyone going that fast to be in control of their vehicle and making high speed decisions
Car chassis are very performant nowadays.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This is certainly true. In particular, Americans for Tax Reform (the group founded by Grover Norquist) lobbies against any attempt at making paying taxes easier for this reason. Their argument is that people should be constantly aware of how much they are paying in taxes, and making it too easy would hinder this. These groups, combined with tax preparation companies, prevent any meaningful attempt to make paying taxe…
I agree to a point. It's common for Europeans to forget about VAT since it's included in the final price consumers see, for example. You often see income tax comparisons between the US and European countries, when in reality if you actually spend your money you are paying a 20+% tax. With our tax system, you can see clear as day how much money you are losing out on for social security, medicare, and standard income t…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think Ferrari, Porsche, et al would beg to differ. Most high end Mercedes, Audi or BMW cars are limited to 155 mph but you'd be hard pressed to tell the difference in ride quality between the top 50 mph of the range and the bottom 50. If your car gets shaky and unstable when you hit 90 mph then I'm sorry but you just don't have a very good vehicle.
The car is not all that's at play here. Road surface quality is a huge factor. I've pushed a rental Merc past 180 km/h (110 mph) on a reasonably well-paved outback road, and it was downright unpleasant to drive at that speed from the vibration. On a smoother highway I would guess it'd still become unpleasant past 200 km/h (125 mph). Personally, I also found driving at those speeds too mentally taxing. The lack of tim…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
"No, because the idea behind a flat tax is to eliminate most or all of those deductions," Removing deductions has nothing to do with the tax curve. You could do that with the current curve and tweak it accordingly.
In fact, removing itemized deductions alone would do this, because the standard deduction is mathematically equivalent to a 0% bracket. Alternately, you could even have a progressive, flat tax with a standard deduction of $150,000 and like a 40% rate. I’m surprised the Democrats haven’t proposed that just as a publicity stunt.
So high earners get a larger tax reduction from deductions than low earners. There's not really a way to do that with a 0% bracket (and in fact we have both a 0% bracket and deductions).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There are also 1.2 million tax preparers in the US. I'm not going to vote for somebody who has the wrong opinion on, e.g., abortion just because they're going to make my taxes easier but if the change to taxes was going to eliminate my job I'd feel differently. Also, the complex nature of the US tax code means that the people who've put effort into gaming the system and the dishonest also stand to lose if move to a m…
You can't have a right or wrong opinion, its just an opinion.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The IRS have all the data Not..entirely true. My 2016 taxes were professionally done, but we somehow forgot to include one of the something-something-1099 forms from a brokerage firm. The brokerage reported some RSU stock-sells to the IRS but didn't report the cost-basis, and so the IRS assumed the cost-basis was $0 and thus taxed the full sale as income (effectively double-taxing all the RSUs). They just sent a ta…
Oh man, was this Schwab that did that to you? This happened to me and I just paid... but I did not check the cost basis. (I should know, too, because Schwab did this on another year and I caught it.)
I stopped filing my taxes starting in 2011 for 2010. I had always hated the process, but in 2010 I had switched jobs several times, and had misplaced one of the stubs mailed by an employer. I have almost always worked as an employee, not a contractor or business, so I did not owe money--they probably owed me. I decided that rather than get the couple hundred bucks I would receive as my return, I will forgo the stupid…
> I guess you could call it civil disobedience Willful failure to file is a felony [1]. [1] https://www.irs.gov/irm/part25/irm_25-001-007
/ˈsivil ˈˌdisəˈbēdēəns/
noun
the refusal to comply with certain laws or to pay taxes and fines, as a peaceful form of political protest.
I stopped filing my taxes starting in 2011 for 2010. I had always hated the process, but in 2010 I had switched jobs several times, and had misplaced one of the stubs mailed by an employer. I have almost always worked as an employee, not a contractor or business, so I did not owe money--they probably owed me. I decided that rather than get the couple hundred bucks I would receive as my return, I will forgo the stupid…
> I decided that rather than get the couple hundred bucks I would receive as my return, I will forgo the stupid process altogether. You would rather willfully evade taxes (not file) to protest the system? The hundreds of dollars in your favor doesn't cut it for you?