The Instigator
Svenyboy
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
donald.keller
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

Exponential tax will end all of financial crisis

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 4 votes the winner is...
donald.keller
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/17/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,082 times Debate No: 70206
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

Svenyboy

Pro

As many may acknowledge many people are against exponential tax since they think it is higly unfair and is not highly fair as of the static taxation system where everyone is equal.
Equal or not, but exponential tax works which will allow massive growth in economy for great good, for future.
donald.keller

Con

Rebuttal: Pro's Case.

I will summarize my rebuttal like this:

"Equal or not, but exponential tax works (Examples? How does it work?) which will allow massive growth in economy (How does it? Explain...) for great good, for future. (I are English too.)" Sorry about the last part.

Argument II: Flat Taxes:

It's believed by many that a Flat Tax can't work financially, but this isn't true. Current Income Tax revenue is $1.4 trillion (1). In the US, personal income exceeds over $13,400,000,000,000 ($13 trillion)(2). With that in mind, a 15% flat tax rate would create $2.01 trillion in tax revenue, $650 bn more than the current tax brings in.

Now there is this belief that a Flat Tax can't have Tax Cuts. This isn't true. Giving cuts as an incentive or aid is entirely acceptable in a Flat Tax system. Using a 15% tax rate, you could cut as much as 6.9% off everyone's tax rate. You could also cut $6300 off the taxes of everyone earning $50,000 or less a year (71% of the population)(3). People with $50,000 taxes would pay $7500 a year in a 15% tax rate, meaning they would pay near to nothing. The thing is, not all of those 71% of earning $50,000. Most earn (and therefore pay) far less, meaning you could cut the taxes of everyone earning less than $50,000 down to zero and still have billions left over. This doesn't imply we should, but based off those numbers, we know that tax cuts are easily affordable. Based on currents estimates, 47% of the US isn't even paying income tax. You could recreate that (hopefully not have to) and still be far over. It's highly probable that you could even retain tax revenue after financing the needed tax cuts.

Again, reminding the audience that a Flat Tax can have tax cuts for people who need them.

The Tax Code costs Tax Payers $500 billion to comply to the 4 million word Tax Code. The sheer complexity of Taxes in the US is expensive to maintain. A simplier tax system, such as a Flat Tax system, could essentially save Americans billions of dollars.

[1] http://www.taxpolicycenter.org...
[2] https://bber.unm.edu...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...

Argument II: Progressive Tax.

Pro says that a Progressive Tax would work and end Financial Crisis? The US has a Progressive Tax Rate, and financial crisis's still very much exist. Pro's Resolution is negated.

Conclusion:
A Flat Tax rate can accomplish the revenue needs of the Government plus some. Financial Crisis's exist despite the Exponential Tax Rate that the US has.

Exponential Tax Rates will not end all Financial Crisis's.
Debate Round No. 1
Svenyboy

Pro

Svenyboy forfeited this round.
donald.keller

Con

Vote Dony
Debate Round No. 2
Svenyboy

Pro

Svenyboy forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by donald.keller 1 year ago
donald.keller
So... like... any opinions on what I wrote? <_<
Posted by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
I'm guessing he is referring to a tax rate with a larger number of brackets slowly rising toward 100%.
Posted by donald.keller 2 years ago
donald.keller
I assume it implies a tax that starts progressively.
Posted by ResponsiblyIrresponsible 2 years ago
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Yeah, I agree with Khaos. Define it, and I'll consider taking this.
Posted by Khaos_Mage 2 years ago
Khaos_Mage
You should define exponential tax.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
Svenyboydonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Con. Pro forfeited two rounds in this debate, which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. S&G - Tie. Both had adequate spelling and grammar. Arguments - Con. Pro failed to provide a single rebuttal to any and all contentions presented by Con. Since Pro clearly failed to maintain the BOP, and left Con standing unchallenged, Con wins arguments. Sources - Con. Pro did not utilize sources within this debate whereas Con utilized several to strengthen his points. This is a clear win for Con.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 1 year ago
Ragnar
Svenyboydonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: No contest and forfeit.
Vote Placed by Zarroette 1 year ago
Zarroette
Svenyboydonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ff. I thought "Dony" was "Donnie", Donnie :/
Vote Placed by 16kadams 1 year ago
16kadams
Svenyboydonald.kellerTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF