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.
We can cut all the spending and waste we want, but if the state doesn't have enough money coming in, I don't see how we can really cut down the debt.
I think of it this way: a household can look at what they are spending on the necessary items and then the "frivolous" items. The people in the household can cut back on going out to eat, buying Starbucks, using less energy, etc. That money they don't use can go to the necessary items, such as rent/mortgage, bills, etc. At the same time, the people in the household aren't making as much money, for whatever reason. So even though they cut down on spending money, they aren't making as much to pay for the neccessary items anymore. So they go further in debt, simply to pay for the things they NEED. Until they start making more money, they can never really start cutting down on their debt and begin saving.
I know that is a rough analogy, but I think that is how our government is acting. We can cut all the waste (and there is A LOT), but I think we will get to the point where we have cut all we can, but we will still have a deficit. NO ONE wants to pay higher taxes, but sometimes it is a necessary evil. I often think of what Oliver Wendell Holmes said: "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society."
We can cut all the spending and waste we want, but if the state doesn't have enough money coming in, I don't see how we can really cut down the debt.
I think of it this way: a household can look at what they are spending on the necessary items and then the "frivolous" items. The people in the household can cut back on going out to eat, buying Starbucks, using less energy, etc. That money they don't use can go to the necessary items, such as rent/mortgage, bills, etc. At the same time, the people in the household aren't making as much money, for whatever reason. So even though they cut down on spending money, they aren't making as much to pay for the neccessary items anymore. So they go further in debt, simply to pay for the things they NEED. Until they start making more money, they can never really start cutting down on their debt and begin saving.
I know that is a rough analogy, but I think that is how our government is acting. We can cut all the waste (and there is A LOT), but I think we will get to the point where we have cut all we can, but we will still have a deficit. NO ONE wants to pay higher taxes, but sometimes it is a necessary evil. I often think of what Oliver Wendell Holmes said: "Taxes are what we pay for civilized society."
Of course...that's common sense. I just think most people, rich and poor included, would be happier if the gov't would first work on cutting the Starbucks before lowering our allowance.
I was not intending for this thread to get into a political debate - my main point was simply that it was amazing, and this is the first time I remember seeing such an instance, that the gov't actually lowered taxes.
While I do have political views, I disagree that it's simply "the Republicans" or "the Democrats" fault. It's everyone's fault, including those of us who elected them. You can't make a blanket statement and point fingers at a single party. They are all to blame.
Of course...that's common sense. I just think most people, rich and poor included, would be happier if the gov't would first work on cutting the Starbucks before lowering our allowance.
I was not intending for this thread to get into a political debate - my main point was simply that it was amazing, and this is the first time I remember seeing such an instance, that the gov't actually lowered taxes.
While I do have political views, I disagree that it's simply "the Republicans" or "the Democrats" fault. It's everyone's fault, including those of us who elected them. You can't make a blanket statement and point fingers at a single party. They are all to blame.
This.
The way I look at it is cut all the spending first and then come see me if you need more money. Giving the money to them first just enables them to spend more and cut less.
Of course...that's common sense. I just think most people, rich and poor included, would be happier if the gov't would first work on cutting the Starbucks before lowering our allowance.
I was not intending for this thread to get into a political debate - my main point was simply that it was amazing, and this is the first time I remember seeing such an instance, that the gov't actually lowered taxes.
While I do have political views, I disagree that it's simply "the Republicans" or "the Democrats" fault. It's everyone's fault, including those of us who elected them. You can't make a blanket statement and point fingers at a single party. They are all to blame.
Maybe you're just too young :-)
Marginal tax rates at the Federal level are lower than they were 20 years ago. I also remember capital gains being treated in the same marginal rates. Interesting graph :
Marginal tax rates at the Federal level are lower than they were 20 years ago. I also remember capital gains being treated in the same marginal rates. Interesting graph :
I am a conservative, but not in lock-step with the typical conservatives. I have no objection to maintaining high taxes for those earning over half a million or so a year. However, the liberals tax the hell out of everyone, including the middle class and those struggling to remain middle class - all so that they can give these hard-earned taxes to those on the dole, including illegal aliens and the like.
So I don't know how to classify myself - I am not in favor of tax breaks for the filthy rich, but I am against increasing taxes on the middle and working struggling classes, and I am for cutting all the welfare crap to illegals and anchor babies and all the other stupid liberal agenda waste - so here I am, not in step with the Hannityesque conservatives, definitely anti-liberal - is there anyone in NC or elsewhere that is representing me in NC or the nation?
The problem with our economy is the middle class is actually taking the money they earn and handing it to China. None of that money comes back to the US. When the middle class is taxed, and the money given to the poor, that money comes right back to the economy in the form of food, services, etc.
Now, do I want to pay more taxes? No. But I actually think this country would be in worse shape if the middle class were allowed to keep more of their money. We'd just have a size larger LCD TV (from Asia), another new cell phone (from Taiwan), and a large SUV burning more gas (bought from the middle east). And the kids would have an Xbox (China) and PS3 (China) and probably a hole bunch of toys they don't ever play with (also from China).
Actually, I would rather the federal taxes go down, and state taxes go up. I have no problem paying state taxes, as I see more of that money coming back to me in the form of roads, protection (police & fire), libraries, etc. However, I have lived in 2 states (NH & FL) which had no income tax, and that was nice. I have to wonder why it can't be repeated here as well. Also NH has no (0%) sales tax. It's actually a really great state, just too cold and lots of snow.
I am a conservative, but not in lock-step with the typical conservatives. I have no objection to maintaining high taxes for those earning over half a million or so a year. However, the liberals tax the hell out of everyone, including the middle class and those struggling to remain middle class - all so that they can give these hard-earned taxes to those on the dole, including illegal aliens and the like.
So I don't know how to classify myself - I am not in favor of tax breaks for the filthy rich, but I am against increasing taxes on the middle and working struggling classes, and I am for cutting all the welfare crap to illegals and anchor babies and all the other stupid liberal agenda waste - so here I am, not in step with the Hannityesque conservatives, definitely anti-liberal - is there anyone in NC or elsewhere that is representing me in NC or the nation?
Little off topic, but we are talking taxes.
My problem is somehow they feel millionaires and billionaires = $200k.
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.
