Fair Tax System

Hillary Clinton is a democrat. She want to make it so that immigrants can continue staying here, according to this quote "I 'll end family detention, close private immigrant detention centers.” by closing the centers that accuse them of being here illegally. "As president, I 'll stand up for Planned Parenthood and women’s access to critical health services, including safe, legal abortion." according to this quote she is pro-abortion. The same source says, "I 'll take on the gun lobby and fight for commonsense reforms." this is stating that she doesn’t want to make guns illegal she just wants to make them harder to get so that they can’t fall into the wrong hands. Based on these issues

Immigration: Jill Stein, in contrast with Donald Trump, believes that immigrants are not to blame for economic troubles and “stealing jobs” instead it’s that “our jobs went overseas due to NAFTA and other free trade agreements.” In order to end the waves of immigrants coming in, Stein says we need to fix the economic problems that are sparked by the current American trade policies. Stein cites immigrants as the “backbone of our economy,” citing that “In Alabama, their tomato industry collapsed to the tune of billions of dollars when they passed very harsh anti-immigrant laws and the immigrants left town” and advocates for a welcoming path to legal residency. Stein wants to end deportations that separate families, and calls for an end to the war on immigrants, stating that the Green New Deal would do so. Stein does not believe in a pathway to citizenship for immigrants with criminal backgrounds.

The use of flat (proportional) tax rate seems like a fairer option in my opinion. The reason why I think this is because we talked in class that the more money you make the higher your tax bracket is requiring the rich to pay more and the poor to pay less in comparison. This is causing companies to go overseas rather than staying in America which in effect could cause less jobs in America in general. Secondly, I feel that it would make a simple system and allow everyone to know exactly how much their going to pay for taxes.

Income inequality is fair and trying to close the income gap is making the economy worse

Hence, she takes a more moderate approach than others, but still a much more progressive stance than others. As it concerns the economy, Hillary is looking to give working families a raise by increasing minimum wage and also by giving tax relief to help them manage increasing costs (“Raise American Incomes” 1). She wants to create well paying jobs and stimulate an increase in pay rates by investing in infrastructure, clean energy and scientific and medical research to strengthen growth of the economy (“Raise American Incomes” 1). Perhaps most importantly, she wants to close corporate loop holes and make the wealthy pay their fair share (“Raise American Incomes”

There are many exemplary applicants this year and it would be beneficial to research each and every one of them. Jill Stein is a very strong leader and an even more worthy candidate to fill the role of the president of the United States. Some of her key issues are ways to improve the environment, healthcare, education, violence, discrimination, and more. Stein is a strong, smart, and determined candidate who can put these issues and policies into effect if she’s voted into the oval office. Those who have done their research on the candidates will have a chance to vote for Jill Stein in the 2016 United States Presidential election.

Hillary exposure towards the campaign is helping the economy and the public, middle class. She quotes “My dad played football at Penn State,” as she is speaking out to her voters. During the debate she quotes I want us to invest in you. I want us to invest in your future. That means jobs in infrastructure, in advanced manufacturing, innovation and technology, clean, renewable energy, and small business, because most of the new jobs will come from small business.

Her economic policies and proposals are especially geared towards increasing minimum wages, taxing speculative behavior, and supporting trade policies and programs that benefit domestic workers. Her policies will ensure that the recent economic growth enabled by the Obama’s Democratic policies are sustainable and create a competitive advantage for the United States. Her policy positions and experience makes her the best presidential candidate for the 2016 presidential

There is an ominous shadow hanging over the American people threatening to consume our freedoms, wealth, and the very sanity that holds our nation together. America is a nation born from revolution against unjust taxation from a government that does not hear the voice of those who pay the taxes. Today this nation is threatened by the same oppression that incited a revolution and gave birth to one of the greatest democracies in history of the world. The accumulated debt of America and its people is without rival in the modern world, and threatens to tear this nation apart. The only way to deal with the rising debt of a nation is to tax its people, like the Federal Income Tax. Many question the Federal income tax, asking if this is a

With the next presidential election just around the bend, there have been many heated policy debates on both sides of the caucuses. One of the more intriguing of these has to be the debate on the structure of the current tax system. Many GOP hopefuls are putting forth plans to impose a Flat Tax System. The scope of this paper is not to analyze, per se, the reasons behind their putting forth such ideas. Instead, this paper will attempt to analyze the ethical considerations and ramifications of a flat tax system as opposed to our current progressive system. In order to accomplish this goal the following study will: present a thorough analysis of the background surrounding this issue; the stakeholders and their involvement in the issue as well as the issues effects on each; two ethical theories and test and how they apply; and finally a Biblical interpretation on the ethical issues that will be brought to light and a suggestion to believers on what side they should take given the analysis presented.

In the article, “The US Tax System: Who Really Pays” by Stephen Moore, he justifies his belief that there is little to no correlation between economic mobility and equality. Moore delivers his reasoning by contradicting relatively popular statements where some are virtually untrue and others are merely common opposing viewpoints. However, in the end Moore concludes his argument with the belief that raising the taxes on the wealthy would not help the poor’s income mobility, which I support one hundred percent.

The issue of federal income tax policy has been one of hot debate and controversy for many years. Discussions and arguments on the issue have been presented on the floors of Congress, in the United States Supreme Court, used by politicians as political platforms, broadcasted in televised debates, and discussed around the dinner table of American families of various socioeconomic backgrounds for years. The Federal Government of the United States of America, like any governing body whether it be at a national, state, or local level, works (for lack of a better word) to generate revenue to make possible the funding of many public programs and services and repayment of national debt. Of course, the easiest

My community decided that the best tax system would be to use the 2-point flat tax across our community. We decided as a group that it would be fair, because each member would be taxed the same regardless of their role. The treasurer, and myself being mayor could also map out how many points we would have for the rest of the semester. This would not have been the same if we had decided a percentage based tax or one that first needed to know the quiz score. I believe that our preparation for potential threats to our community prepared us for when they did occur.

Hillary has many plans to make the United States better. Clinton and her colleagues forged a plan that reflected her campaign themes while preserving the basic framework of the individual and corporate tax laws. In her plan, she inputted the “Buffett rule” which is the argument that the wealthiest Americans should have to pay at minimum a higher effective tax rate than other people. Clinton wanted to show to Sanders and her other observers in the liberal side that even though her reputation for peacefulness with Wall Street and other franchises, she isn’t hesitant to hit big banks and other wealthy investors with higher taxes and fees. She underwrote most of the cost of her social and economic agenda by raising taxes on the wealthiest Americans, without driving up the debt too much or shaking the economy. Her long term programs include new infrastructure

As her belief on education would help more students get their dream job. As it is a common saying “The more you know, the more you earn”, is going to apply more in Chelsea. The household income would increase as more people are getting higher education. There is a little bug more than 50% that have at least graduated high school from ages twenty-five and higher. The percentage would rise with Hillary’s plan. Since the yearly household income is about $49,000, and for a year at a private college/university may ask for that much money for a year. College expenses are rising yearly but those who want to go to college also need to manage their money for needs such as food and rent. With Hillary’s plan, Chelsea ei be a better city with more educated