Progressive-Conservative Party Headquarters [NSG Senate]

[Geilinor]

I have a possible sales tax too, but I left it out to make it more agreeable to the leftist parties.
Sales Taxes:
Nonessential services: 7.25%
Gasoline: 2.50%
Food, water, utilities: 0.00%
Publications, admission tickets to cultural events: 3.50%

No compromise shall be made unless the other parties are willing to agree on a tax to the poor, even if it is just .5% it doesn't matter, they are liable to pay for the services they will require.

That's what the sales tax does. The poor do use some nonessential services. Let's say a poor person chooses to buy an inexpensive cell phone. They would pay 7.25% tax on that. I think the lowest income tax rate should still be 0.

[Subramani]

I have a tax proposal for your party, if you want to think on it.
0-15k: 0%
16k-50k: 10%
51k-100k: 20%
101k-500k: 30%
501k+: 35%
1 million+: 40%

If I make the 35% rate part of 30%, even the Libertarians have said they might support it to keep out Communist proposals.

I agree with this proposal.

[Subramani]

No compromise shall be made unless the other parties are willing to agree on a tax to the poor, even if it is just .5% it doesn't matter, they are liable to pay for the services they will require.

That's what the sales tax does. The poor do use some nonessential services. Let's say a poor person chooses to buy an inexpensive cell phone. They would pay 7.25% tax on that. I think the lowest income tax rate should still be 0.

Yes, we defiantly need sales tax considering the fact that the senate might legalize almost all drugs in the future and also might legalize Universal Health Care. Having high sales tax on drugs might help to pay for Universal Health Care for Drug users.

[Subramani]

No compromise shall be made unless the other parties are willing to agree on a tax to the poor, even if it is just .5% it doesn't matter, they are liable to pay for the services they will require.

That's what the sales tax does. The poor do use some nonessential services. Let's say a poor person chooses to buy an inexpensive cell phone. They would pay 7.25% tax on that. I think the lowest income tax rate should still be 0.

I completely agree that the lowest income tax should be 0%. A person who can only afford very basic things should not be burdened with taxes as well.

[Othelos]

That's what the sales tax does. The poor do use some nonessential services. Let's say a poor person chooses to buy an inexpensive cell phone. They would pay 7.25% tax on that. I think the lowest income tax rate should still be 0.

I completely agree that the lowest income tax should be 0%. A person who can only afford very basic things should not be burdened with taxes as well.

Agreed.

That's what the sales tax does. The poor do use some nonessential services. Let's say a poor person chooses to buy an inexpensive cell phone. They would pay 7.25% tax on that. I think the lowest income tax rate should still be 0.

Yes, we defiantly need sales tax considering the fact that the senate might legalize almost all drugs in the future and also might legalize Universal Health Care. Having high sales tax on drugs might help to pay for Universal Health Care for Drug users.

I dropped that proposal about legalizing everything. In fact, it helped me realize that I was in the wrong party.

But, I guess there's no stopping the current LFP members from proposing something similar.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

I completely agree that the lowest income tax should be 0%. A person who can only afford very basic things should not be burdened with taxes as well.

Agreed.

And what about transfer payments? The poorest of the poor of course who don't have any other source of income will be exempted, provided that they are receiving direct payments from he government, however those on a stable income will have to pay a minimal tax percentage, it is only fair, and incentivises competition, which lead to economic growth.

[Othelos]

Agreed.

And what about transfer payments? The poorest of the poor of course who don't have any other source of income will be exempted, provided that they are receiving direct payments from he government, however those on a stable income will have to pay a minimal tax percentage, it is only fair, and incentivises competition, which lead to economic growth.

Paying taxes does the opposite of incentivising competition and it also impedes economic growth.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

And what about transfer payments? The poorest of the poor of course who don't have any other source of income will be exempted, provided that they are receiving direct payments from he government, however those on a stable income will have to pay a minimal tax percentage, it is only fair, and incentivises competition, which lead to economic growth.

Paying taxes does the opposite of incentivising competition and it also impedes economic growth.

I agree with you Mr. Speaker, unless of course you don't count the jobs that are created by state infrastructure spending...

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

Mr. Wolfmanne, please tell where you are confused, because I want to make it perfectly clear, High taxes only work on special occasions, and prosperity is usually due to the spending that the Government does during infrastructure spending...

[Radiatia]

I'm definitely willing to go with the Liberal Democrat proposal. It seems reasonable to me.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

- Redacted I misread -

I'm sorry, what was redacted?

[Radiatia]

- Redacted I misread -

I'm sorry, what was redacted?

Don't worry, I wrote something and then realised I had missed the entire 5th page of the thread.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

I'm sorry, what was redacted?

Don't worry, I wrote something and then realised I had missed the entire 5th page of the thread.

Oh alright, I'm just trying to show the communists my point of view at the moment...

[Radiatia]

Don't worry, I wrote something and then realised I had missed the entire 5th page of the thread.

Oh alright, I'm just trying to show the communists my point of view at the moment...

To be honest, I don't think we're ever going to be able to negotiate or work with the commies. You're basically pissing into the wind with them and wasting your breath. I know this because when I was a young lad, I was a communist.

[The Republic of Pantalleria]

Oh alright, I'm just trying to show the communists my point of view at the moment...

To be honest, I don't think we're ever going to be able to negotiate or work with the commies. You're basically pissing into the wind with them and wasting your breath. I know this because when I was a young lad, I was a communist.

(Sigh) But there must be something we can say to show that what they believe in (though it sounds good) is unrealistic... If a woman could do this, why can't a young man?

[Vietnam]

Oh alright, I'm just trying to show the communists my point of view at the moment...

To be honest, I don't think we're ever going to be able to negotiate or work with the commies. You're basically pissing into the wind with them and wasting your breath. I know this because when I was a young lad, I was a communist.

Ad hominem + assumption that every communist = younger version of yourself you don't like :v

[Radiatia]

To be honest, I don't think we're ever going to be able to negotiate or work with the commies. You're basically pissing into the wind with them and wasting your breath. I know this because when I was a young lad, I was a communist.

Ad hominem + assumption that every communist = younger version of yourself you don't like :v

Learn to read:

This thread is for party members, and prospective party members only.

Also, learn what an ad hominem is before trying to use fancy terms like that. It was not ad hominem at all. I was merely telling him to stop wasting his time on you.

And yes I do think you and your views are extremely juvenile. Your reaction pretty much confirms that.

[Imperiatom]

I have a tax proposal for your party, if you want to think on it.
0-15k: 0%
16k-50k: 10%
51k-100k: 20%
101k-500k: 30%
501k+: 35%
1 million+: 40%

If I make the 35% rate part of 30%, even the Libertarians have said they might support it to keep out Communist proposals.

I think this would be a wise proposal for our party to except. It only just breaks our tax policy and even where it does it only does over 1 million and even then only by 5%.

I would support this and i urge all of our party and especially the senators to support and push for a bill similar to this.


Edit: Those that find the 0% level unacceptable, we can always push for high sales taxes on items most used by the poor later. I direct this specifically at The Republic of Pantalleria. To reject an offer like this when one considers the alternative would be folly.

[Imperiatom]

Oh alright, I'm just trying to show the communists my point of view at the moment...

To be honest, I don't think we're ever going to be able to negotiate or work with the commies. You're basically pissing into the wind with them and wasting your breath. I know this because when I was a young lad, I was a communist.

I find this to be the case a lot. Most people start off as idealist socialists of some denomination, and then reality hits them. They grow up into adult hood and they enter the real world and move towards conservatism. I would find pissing into the wind preferable to reasoning with a communist, at least the urine is sterile.

[Radiatia]

To be honest, I don't think we're ever going to be able to negotiate or work with the commies. You're basically pissing into the wind with them and wasting your breath. I know this because when I was a young lad, I was a communist.

I find this to be the case a lot. Most people start off as idealist socialists of some denomination, and then reality hits them. They grow up into adult hood and they enter the real world and move towards conservatism. I would find pissing into the wind preferable to reasoning with a communist, at least the urine is sterile.

And yeah agree your post about the tax thing. I don't think there's anything wrong with tax exemptions for the working poor - especially if it incentives them to work, as opposed to simply living off welfare.

[Imperiatom]

I find this to be the case a lot. Most people start off as idealist socialists of some denomination, and then reality hits them. They grow up into adult hood and they enter the real world and move towards conservatism. I would find pissing into the wind preferable to reasoning with a communist, at least the urine is sterile.

And yeah agree your post about the tax thing. I don't think there's anything wrong with tax exemptions for the working poor - especially if it incentives them to work, as opposed to simply living off welfare.

Yeah incentive is a good thing in this case. Working and paying no tax is better than not working and claiming benefits.

Having read the Classical monarchists page. They are conservative so we may have a good chance at winning them over towards our side. Also in case anybody forgot monarchists won't support much on the left and especially not communists since they support the abolition of monarchs.

[New Sapienta]

Hey, after this tax bill, which I support, I was thinking of writing a defense bill establishing the armed forces.

[Imperiatom]

Hey, after this tax bill, which I support, I was thinking of writing a defense bill establishing the armed forces.

Yeah sounds like a plan. Be sure to write in a rule that bars soldiers from public office, distance the state from the military as in the UK.

My idea that you might consider to reduce lobbying power of the armaments industry is to consider making it one of the few State owned areas of production. This means that whilst the private sector can come up with the designs, the state just pays intellectual property rights and builds the equipment itself. This gives military/industrial lobbyists less power as they can't build for export (we the state can export if we chose at full benefit to the nation but private company's can't) and thus use it to put pressure on the law makers.

[New Sapienta]

Hey, after this tax bill, which I support, I was thinking of writing a defense bill establishing the armed forces.

Yeah sounds like a plan. Be sure to write in a rule that bars soldiers from public office, distance the state from the military as in the UK.

My idea that you might consider to reduce lobbying power of the armaments industry is to consider making it one of the few State owned areas of production. This means that whilst the private sector comes up with the designs, the state just pays intellectual property rights and builds the equipment itself. This gives military/industrial lobbyists less power as they can't build for export (we the state can export if we chose at full benefit to the nation but private company's can't) and thus use it to put pressure on the law makers.

I disagree with barring them from political service, but the rest I can agree with. We'll see what the rest of the PC thinks as well.

[Imperiatom]

Yeah sounds like a plan. Be sure to write in a rule that bars soldiers from public office, distance the state from the military as in the UK.

My idea that you might consider to reduce lobbying power of the armaments industry is to consider making it one of the few State owned areas of production. This means that whilst the private sector comes up with the designs, the state just pays intellectual property rights and builds the equipment itself. This gives military/industrial lobbyists less power as they can't build for export (we the state can export if we chose at full benefit to the nation but private company's can't) and thus use it to put pressure on the law makers.

I disagree with barring them from political service, but the rest I can agree with. We'll see what the rest of the PC thinks as well.

Why do you disagree about my first point?

I feel that if one looks back through history, a politicized army has never worked out well. Think Rome, right wing military juntas, fascism, Pre WW1 Germany, Napoleonic era even communism to a degree and many others.