Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Imagine if the 47% who pay no Federal income tax had to pay a minimum tax of $500. Let's say that 20,000,000 tax returns now pay $500 instead of $0, which brings in $10,000,000,000 annually. Then this $10 billion is allocated 100% to U.S. infrastructure needs (roads, bridges, trains).
I see 3 good things here:
1 - Lower-income people, and some millionaires who pay no Federal income tax, now pay $500 and have some skin in the game. Most of the 47% are neither lazy nor unproductive but instead benefit from a multitude of tax credits which often provide them with refunds, sometimes significant.
2 - The new revenue is utilized in this country, not other countries, for sorely-needed infrastructure improvements. This is beneficial because our government seems to always want to cut funding for U.S. infrastructure while spending money elsewhere. The money could be awarded to crumbling bridges in need of repair, over-burdened highways needing expansion, and the establishment or restoration of rail services to congested areas not currently serviced adequately by public transportation.
3 - The money spent in #2 above stimulates the economy, perhaps far more than providing people with a $500 tax cut that they use to buy a flat-screen TV engineered and manufactured in another country.
I know, I'm a naive idealist, and our government would squander the money on bloated, inefficient, unworthy, pork barrel projects, but at least in theory it's a good idea.
The federal tax on motor fuels already funds 3 times as much as your proposal to infrastructure improvements, over $30 billion, and has been for years.
How are you picking the 20 million people out of the 47%? Do you want those on welfare to pay? Where would they get it? Do you want my son who is in college to pay?
Great idea, go after those who are hanging on by a thread for $500 a year while those who make millions get charged the same $500 tax rate. That makes perfect sense, in the GOP's parallel dimension anyway...
I know a women who is disabled and is raising a 10-year old daughter on a monthly SSI payment of $660. I'm sure she'll be proud to cough up about a month's income every year, to help get the Romney's off the hook and to beautify the overpasses on the beltway. Trust me, she has some skin in the game, and bones and blood.
The problem isn't the 47% that don't pay federal income tax because most of those people do work and pay payroll taxes through out the year and basically fund the Government on a daily basis. Those 47% also pay property taxes, sales taxes and other taxes.
Those who are self employed and/or are business owners get to pay Federal Income taxes every Quarter unlike the average employee who gets their taxes withheld every paycheck. In addition self employed/business owners have the advantage of getting extensions for paying their income taxes.
The tax code does favor the wealthy.
The federal tax on motor fuels already funds 3 times as much as your proposal to infrastructure improvements, over $30 billion, and has been for years.
How are you picking the 20 million people out of the 47%? Do you want those on welfare to pay? Where would they get it? Do you want my son who is in college to pay?
20 million was a complete estimate on my part of the people who represent the 47% that still have the wherewithal to pay. Old ladies who only receive SS are out. College kids are out. Low income families, especially those with young children, are out. The 20 million an estimate of those who have an ability to pay $500 but don't pay Federal income tax because of the generous credits and deductions that are available to them. Or because they have $100k per year of tax-exempt interest income that isn't taxable for Federal purposes.
As for the Federal tax on fuels, you are correct, but clearly it's not enough.
I know, I'm a naive idealist, and our government would squander the money on bloated, inefficient, unworthy, pork barrel projects, but at least in theory it's a good idea.
Taxes will be raised eventually for the poor and the wealthy. There is no way around it.
Forget about building roads we cannot even afford our current obligations.
Isn't there a politics section this should be moved to?
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
