We Are Not Broke - Documentary

[CaliNoleFan6]

Just watched it on Netflix. For those who have seen it, what are your thoughts? I did a little research on religion since its tax free and was amazed that last year, it make some $56 Billion. That's $19.6 Billion (based on standard 35%) that the Govt. missed out on. Add in big oil and big business that don't pay due to tax havens and its no wonder there's a "deficit"

Makes you think about things a little different.

 

[Garnet66]

Didn't see it, but I will say that in my community we would not have a hospital without the Baptists, a food bank without the Catholic and Presbyterian churches, meals on wheels for seniors without local churches, and on and on. How much is that worth?

 

[RangerNole]

The government not getting enough money is way down the list of why we have budget and financial issues in this country. You could take everyone's wealth and money give it to the government and they would still spend more than they took in. If you want to find solutions for fixing the country's financial issues start with the spending and work from there. Elected officials derive all their power from telling the masses "I will spend X" for you if elected; take that power away and maybe then the government would stop wasting tons of money. We also need to decide what we want our government to be; currently the government is into so many things that it was never intended to be in. Another easy solution is to stop the way we budget for each year. No government program is ever "cut" just the increase in spending is cut; so if you were promised a 10% budget increase and when the budget is finalized you only get 6%, the government and media think that something has been cut.
By the way if you want to start looking at organizations that don't pay taxes, I would look at things like the NFL, MLB, NBA and all the so called private organizations which are tax exempt well before I looked at churches. At least most churches do a fair amount of good in the community.

 

[cmanole]

Feel the Bern!

 

[LesClaypool]

Didn't see it, but I will say that in my community we would not have a hospital without the Baptists, a food bank without the Catholic and Presbyterian churches, meals on wheels for seniors without local churches, and on and on. How much is that worth?

What you've described are separate non-profit entities - each of them. There's no need to have a church to fund those operations and those operations are not funded by churches! You think the Baptist Church funds the Baptist hospital? Meals on Wheels it's own non-profit. C'mon.

 

[JohnnieHolmesNole]

Government clowns are scheming now to tax your IRAs and 401ks. It will happen eventually because those of us with retirement plans are already in the minority. And if you object you will be labeled intolerant, a bigot, a hater, whatever.

 

[Garnet66]

What you've described are separate non-profit entities - each of them. There's no need to have a church to fund those operations and those operations are not funded by churches! You think the Baptist Church funds the Baptist hospital? Meals on Wheels it's own non-profit. C'mon.

Well, I'll give you that the Baptist Church doesn't fund the expenses of the hospital, but I think you don't give churches credit for a lot of things they do. The Catholic and Presbyterian churches in my community provide the buildings for housing the food banks, not to mention coordinating volunteers to collect and distribute food. The Meals on Wheels program does receive some government funding for meals, but local churches in my community serve as the distribution centers, as well as provide volunteers to deliver meals. I vote in a church building, and my church also serves as a voting location as well as providing a community food pantry entirely supported by my church through its membership. I think without church buildings, a lot of services would be lacking or a lot more expensive.

 

[coolguy100]

Just watched it on Netflix. For those who have seen it, what are your thoughts? I did a little research on religion since its tax free and was amazed that last year, it make some $56 Billion. That's $19.6 Billion (based on standard 35%) that the Govt. missed out on. Add in big oil and big business that don't pay due to tax havens and its no wonder there's a "deficit"

Makes you think about things a little different.

huh...what about separation of church....that lil non-constitutional idea that the supreme court keeps trotting out so that atheists can stop a prayer that a sheriff says during a tragedy keeps the irs out of the churches business.

btw...I don't know of a real church, that ministers, that makes huge amount of profit, they spend it on ministries...You know Joel Osteen is not a real pastor and that isn't a real church...he is some kind of psycho-babel nut job who parsecs the scripture into some kind of feel good, blab-it-grab-it crap.

 

[CaliNoleFan6]

I apologize for not clarifying earlier. I am in no way attacking religion, it was just one area that came to mind when looking at entities that don't pay taxes. It was just an example.

The point of the whole documentary is that big business gets to keep their profits, while American citizens have to pay taxes. While its true that government is going to spend, the point is that the law is directed towards taxing those things that provide a service (businesses) and not working wages (unless this law has changed recently). Granted I am not an attorney and admittedly don't know enough to call myself an expert, it just seems like everything is backwards. To say "Its not fair" is so pedestrian, but its basically true. If the government wants to spend like crazy, that's fine, but they need to tax big business to help fund it. Making the American citizens fund overspending, while big business gets a pass is just BS. They use the loopholes and then bargain their massive profits back into circulation paying a "negotiated" 5%, instead of 35% and then cut jobs to recoup the 5%. As another posted stated, IRA's and so on are going to be taxed eventually as well... so where does it end?

 

[RangerNole]

I apologize for not clarifying earlier. I am in no way attacking religion, it was just one area that came to mind when looking at entities that don't pay taxes. It was just an example.

The point of the whole documentary is that big business gets to keep their profits, while American citizens have to pay taxes. While its true that government is going to spend, the point is that the law is directed towards taxing those things that provide a service (businesses) and not working wages (unless this law has changed recently). Granted I am not an attorney and admittedly don't know enough to call myself an expert, it just seems like everything is backwards. To say "Its not fair" is so pedestrian, but its basically true. If the government wants to spend like crazy, that's fine, but they need to tax big business to help fund it. Making the American citizens fund overspending, while big business gets a pass is just BS. They use the loopholes and then bargain their massive profits back into circulation paying a "negotiated" 5%, instead of 35% and then cut jobs to recoup the 5%. As another posted stated, IRA's and so on are going to be taxed eventually as well... so where does it end?

I don't disagree with you and that is why I am for some sort of flat, sales, VAT whatever tax instead of the income tax and IRS. We all hear about some new tax break or increase and what you never see is the behind closed doors deals made by those that have a seat at he table. Again it goes back to the politicians and how they get/keep their power. If you took the IRS and congress out of the equation with just some sort of standard tax things would be much better. I also think that everyone should pay some sort of tax; if you have no skin in the game then you are not going to care. If there was some sort of flat, VTA etc we could also use it to pay for things that no one expected or budgeted for. Lets say another Kartina comes along or another war you could raise the % to pay for that issue; this would also get more people in the national debate about whether or not we want to do something. This is especially true with war since less than 1% o the US actually serves in uniform and if you bumped that up to say 5% for anyone that is truly effected by sending Soldiers off to war you have a real small % of people effected; however if you said we are going to war and your tax will go up X then more people would pay attention. Of course as with everything in DC getting the tax rate back down is nearly impossible. Once the govt. starts a program or adds something it rarely ever goes away.

 

[coolguy100]

I apologize for not clarifying earlier. I am in no way attacking religion, it was just one area that came to mind when looking at entities that don't pay taxes. It was just an example.

The point of the whole documentary is that big business gets to keep their profits, while American citizens have to pay taxes. While its true that government is going to spend, the point is that the law is directed towards taxing those things that provide a service (businesses) and not working wages (unless this law has changed recently). Granted I am not an attorney and admittedly don't know enough to call myself an expert, it just seems like everything is backwards. To say "Its not fair" is so pedestrian, but its basically true. If the government wants to spend like crazy, that's fine, but they need to tax big business to help fund it. Making the American citizens fund overspending, while big business gets a pass is just BS. They use the loopholes and then bargain their massive profits back into circulation paying a "negotiated" 5%, instead of 35% and then cut jobs to recoup the 5%. As another posted stated, IRA's and so on are going to be taxed eventually as well... so where does it end?

I now understand what you are saying. The tax system is not fair, it favors the rich, and it needs to stop. Hedge fund managers have a tax rate that is extremely low I believe it to be 15% on their earnings and no medicare or social security taxes because they have gotten a special law passed, of course they are giving millions to the candidates.
Trump actually brought that up and said it was wrong for them to have that tax rate while a dude who is a police officer pays a much higher tax rate and social security and medicare. I am not saying trump is the answer but it is that type of thinking.
The flat sales tax is not the answer either. You have saved money and put in your home and perhaps have a nice nest egg, and you have paid taxes on every dollar that you have saved. Made it a priority in your life and deferred gratification on those dollars only to have to pay taxes on them again....it is the biggest tax scam in history and people are falling for it.

Oh and most small businesses are s-corp and

 

[seminole97]

You know Joel Osteen is not a real pastor and that isn't a real church...he is some kind of psycho-babel nut job who parsecs the scripture into some kind of feel good, blab-it-grab-it crap.

Yeah, but have you heard how fast he can make the Kessel run?

 

[coolguy100]

Yeah, but have you heard how fast he can make the Kessel run?

I had to google that....
All I can say you must either have an IQ of 185 or so to think that one up....

 

[seminole97]

The flat sales tax is not the answer either. You have saved money and put in your home and perhaps have a nice nest egg, and you have paid taxes on every dollar that you have saved. Made it a priority in your life and deferred gratification on those dollars only to have to pay taxes on them again....it is the biggest tax scam in history and people are falling for it.

A Roth IRA is made with income after it has been taxed, but I would guess the preponderance of IRA contributions (and thereby actual retirement savings) are made pre-income tax.

I think that a sales tax is ultimately more beneficial for society. When you run the numbers on how 'costly' income and dividend taxes are on even an average person's ability to generate a snowball of wealth, it's staggering. The decades of 'lost' earnings on income that is taxed away adds up to a lot more than the actual cost of the taxes themselves.

I don't want a VAT because I don't want the cost of taxation further hidden from the public.
If I was king for a day and couldn't eliminate the income tax I'd like to at least have a constitutional amendment eliminating income tax withholding and requiring federal taxes to be paid in full the first Monday in November.

 

[FreeFlyNole]

This article is pertinent to this conversation. I read through these posts and I'm pretty much with Ranger here.

I'm a pretty basic thinker, and I think as far as income tax goes, it should be a flat tax, that is the only truly "fair" thing to do. I'm appalled that 50% of workers pay no income tax (unless you consider social security and medicare taxes). Everyone has to have skin in the game.

Balancing the Budget (Article)

 

[kc78]

People see these handfull of large church's that are simply abusing the system for profit and then make an assumption that we should change how all church's are handled. By far, the majority of church's are not huge profit centers. Our church could be if we chose, but we don't. We pay one pastor an ok salary, and have a few part timers that get a bit of a salary. We purposely choose not to build, rent, or own our own building as we think the money could better go back to the community. Instead we simply rent out space on Sunday mornings for a few hours. I don't remember the specific percentages, but a very high percentage of our budget goes to giving back to the community. We partner with a large number of civic organizations in the area to provide both funding, donations, and volunteer hours for assistance. If you change the way we're taxed, then suddenly much of the ability to do that goes away.

 

[coolguy100]

A Roth IRA is made with income after it has been taxed, but I would guess the preponderance of IRA contributions (and thereby actual retirement savings) are made pre-income tax.

I think that a sales tax is ultimately more beneficial for society. When you run the numbers on how 'costly' income and dividend taxes are on even an average person's ability to generate a snowball of wealth, it's staggering. The decades of 'lost' earnings on income that is taxed away adds up to a lot more than the actual cost of the taxes themselves.

I don't want a VAT because I don't want the cost of taxation further hidden from the public.
If I was king for a day and couldn't eliminate the income tax I'd like to at least have a constitutional amendment eliminating income tax withholding and requiring federal taxes to be paid in full the first Monday in November.

What about the money that you invested in your home or a retirement home...how about money you set aside for your childs education, their living expenses. How about the money that you have put aside for a rainy day...all those funds would be subject to a double tax if the a national sales tax was implemented.

It seems that it would be double taxation. It makes great sound bites but it sucks. What needs to happen is that we need to make corporations accountable for their profits, no loopholes and that would make small businesses more competitive and they are the ones who can REALLY expand the tax base

 

[Formerly Rockymtnole]

Government clowns are scheming now to tax your IRAs and 401ks. It will happen eventually because those of us with retirement plans are already in the minority. And if you object you will be labeled intolerant, a bigot, a hater, whatever.

Why do you have a problem with paying your fair share?

Kidding. But get ready.

 

[ATLNole1]

Some of the plans that feature a national sales tax would replace the income tax so there would not be double taxation. In essence, you would choose how much tax you pay based how much you consume. Seems to make sense but I can't see this ever being implemented.

In terms of corporate tax, it is easy to say make corporations accountable for their profits but not so easy to do that without harming the country. If you take away some of the "loopholes" multinational corporations will invert and locate their headquarters to another tax jurisdiction with a lower tax burden. After inversion, only profits attributable the US would be taxable plus you would lose high paying positions that typically locate in the HQ country such as management, R&D, etc. There is no easy solution but the US needs to become more competitive with the corporate tax rate. Several major countries like the UK and Canada are reducing rates while the US does nothing. A lower corporate tax rate would also benefit small business who cannot take advantage of the profit shifting strategies that multinationals use.

 

[seminole97]

What about the money that you invested in your home or a retirement home...how about money you set aside for your childs education, their living expenses. How about the money that you have put aside for a rainy day...all those funds would be subject to a double tax if the a national sales tax was implemented.

I don't think there is any getting around the fact that taxes suck, but I'm telling you that if you build a spreadsheet to look at the true costs in unrealized earnings of taxes on income you'd realize that consumption taxes are the least bad option. Most people aren't capable of doing that, and you get demagoguery instead.

It seems that it would be double taxation. It makes great sound bites but it sucks.

What makes a great soundbite is a promise that taxes are intended for someone else, not you.

What needs to happen is that we need to make corporations accountable for their profits,

See, you just did it...

 

[LT4PLY]

Some of the plans that feature a national sales tax would replace the income tax so there would not be double taxation. In essence, you would choose how much tax you pay based how much you consume. Seems to make sense but I can't see this ever being implemented.

In terms of corporate tax, it is easy to say make corporations accountable for their profits but not so easy to do that without harming the country. If you take away some of the "loopholes" multinational corporations will invert and locate their headquarters to another tax jurisdiction with a lower tax burden. After inversion, only profits attributable the US would be taxable plus you would lose high paying positions that typically locate in the HQ country such as management, R&D, etc. There is no easy solution but the US needs to become more competitive with the corporate tax rate. Several major countries like the UK and Canada are reducing rates while the US does nothing. A lower corporate tax rate would also benefit small business who cannot take advantage of the profit shifting strategies that multinationals use.

I agree with the national sales tax and abolishing the income tax. However it would blow our economy up because it would reward saving over spending. Spending is a good thing because it creates jobs.

As an example... There was a luxury tax implemented in 1991 on a few things, but let's just take boats for our example. If you bought a new boat that cost more than $100,000 then you would have to pay 10% luxury tax on the cost over 100k. Sounds pretty reasonable! Well what happened is people changed their behavior. Guys that would have upgraded their half million dollar yacht for a new, bigger, yacht decided to keep the one they had. People that were in the market suddenly got out of the market because of that 10 percent premium. Used boats were more appealing because the tax didn't apply. In the end the tax raised 16 million in taxes. Not bad! The only issue is the boating industry disappeared so the 7600 jobs that were lost cost us 24 million in unemployment expenses.

As it is now... the guy that buys the yacht is likely to call it a second home, or used as part of his business so he can write off part of it there. It makes it far more appealing to spend that money because he can have fun at a bargain. Same goes for FSU booster money. If we go to a flat tax there is WAY less incentive to give dough to the boosters. I just looked at champions club seats for this very reason. It's tax write off so it doesn't really cost me 5 grand a year so it's appealing. Imagine all the charity, etc. that would get killed overnight if our tax structure promotes saving Vs. spending like it does now. There are many, many, parts of the tax code that promotes this spending behavior. If we really wanted to stimulate the economy we would put in place a tax break for excessive spending on american goods. It would never pass because it would sound terrible but the reality is would be the best thing we could do for ourselves as a whole.

 

[coolguy100]

Some of the plans that feature a national sales tax would replace the income tax so there would not be double taxation. In essence, you would choose how much tax you pay based how much you consume. Seems to make sense but I can't see this ever being implemented.

But you have to pay taxes on money that you have already paid taxes on. also all spreadsheets do not help if you are 85 and are spending your savings on necessities at the last years of life...or just fun on the last years of life. You wont het to have it "catch up" also there would be a huge chance for a black market.

In terms of corporate tax, it is easy to say make corporations accountable for their profits but not so easy to do that without harming the country. If you take away some of the "loopholes" multinational corporations will invert and locate their headquarters to another tax jurisdiction with a lower tax burden. After inversion, only profits attributable the US would be taxable plus you would lose high paying positions that typically locate in the HQ country such as management, R&D, etc. There is no easy solution but the US needs to become more competitive with the corporate tax rate. Several major countries like the UK and Canada are reducing rates while the US does nothing. A lower corporate tax rate would also benefit small business who cannot take advantage of the profit shifting strategies that multinationals use.

Then it is really easy if they move to a different country...they would not be able to move the profits abroad unless they paid the taxes. Remember a corporation is only a piece of paper in some state capital, mostly Dover, or Carson City, and they have really no rights, at least no right found in the Constitution, only the We the People have right in the Constitution.
But I am rather conservative on the Constitution.

 

[seminole97]

I agree with the national sales tax and abolishing the income tax. However it would blow our economy up because it would reward saving over spending. Spending is a good thing because it creates jobs.

Unquestionably there would be a recession as the market would shift to reflect new priorities under different incentives. But I think you'd better position society going forward.
Savings are a better thing because they allow for the accumulation of wealth and the creation of capital goods that increase our productivity, which is what actually drives increases in standards of living.

Krugman unintentionally points out the absurdity of the 'spending uber alles' approach when he suggests the government concoct an alien menace as justification for a massive government spending binge to reduce unemployment. It doesn't take into account that all the spending on Space Invaders defense is really just capital being wasted (irrespective of the price tag the Pentagon puts on its newest toys), and that on net we would be poorer as result of diverting scarce resources into this kind of unneeded and unwanted frivolity.
It's literally an updated version of Keynes madness about burying bottles of newly printed dollars and letting people 'work' to dig them up and then go spend them to 'stimulate' the economy.
It's not making anything people want, so it's not making us better off. It's really just disbursing new claims on the goods and services that already exist, without actually creating a new good or service that people want in trade.

As an example... There was a luxury tax implemented in 1991 on a few things, but let's just take boats for our example.

And what of the unseen?
How many businesses saw a commensurate uptick in sales when the guy who was going to buy a new boat decided against it in light of the new taxes, and instead bought something else?
Not that Bob the Boatbuilder gives a fig when he gets his pink slip, but there is more to the story when the economy is distorted by the government like this.