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.
There's no positive. Despite having record taxes coming in, the outgoing money is still through the roof, and NOT going to deal with the deficit.
That's the problem with big government. It becomes addicted to spending, and has the luxury of just getting more and more from the taxpayers.
On the same token, taxpayers become addicted to the things they get from the government as well. Touching entitlements is akin to slitting your own throat in politics.
In 100 years America has gone from a land with no income tax to one where taxes are where more of our income goes than goes for life's necessities. Our forefathers had (good enough roads), schools, hospitals, sewers, indoor plumbing. Most of them anyway. Or their equivalents at least. What do all these taxes buy that we didn't have before? 2 gallon toilets, chlorinated water?
We have a fabulous interstate highway system and military establishment to beat the band. Anything else? Average schools and hospitals I guess.
Washington D.C. has become the richest town in the country while before it was mostly pasture, so they made out. Plus we have all this debt, 99.9% of which we didn't have before we had taxes.
I am ALWAYS for lower Federal taxes. But another way of putting this, is that the costs of our necessities of life are now much cheaper.
Whenever I see articles like that I wonder...if we pay so much in taxes, why don't we have cool stuff like universal health care or tuition-free college? Other countries have that stuff & pay high taxes as a result, but the article says we pay high taxes?
Either we're not paying that much tax or the U.S. government is much more inept & inefficient than those of the rest of the developed world.
Why? First, because our income taxes are actually lower than in most of the developed world. And second, because we have a huge stratum of persons whose jobs and livelihood depend on the complexity and inefficiency of "the system". And I don't mean public-sector employees; I mean persons involved in record-keeping and compliance and administration and so forth.
Health care is expensive because it supports so many jobs. Before we grouse and vex over how much of our GDP we spend on health-care, relative to how little actual health benefit we derive, we should consider: what percentage of American jobs are related to health-care? If we had a more efficient system – with lower prices for consumers (that is, the patients), how many people would lose their jobs, or sustain a pay-cut?
Either we're not paying that much tax or the U.S. government is much more inept & inefficient than those of the rest of the developed world.
Yes.
And this is actually my objection to keep paying more and more taxes. Our government is so bloated and inefficient and staff heavy while wasting money all the time or just outright losing money here and there.
But their reward for not being able to efficiently run things is more of our money. It makes no sense. They have enough money to run things properly if they use discipline and stop all the corruption.
On the same token, taxpayers become addicted to the things they get from the government as well. Touching entitlements is akin to slitting your own throat in politics.
Like what. Because from where I'm sitting, the folks paying the taxes aren't the ones getting the entitlements.
Why? First, because our income taxes are actually lower than in most of the developed world. And second, because we have a huge stratum of persons whose jobs and livelihood depend on the complexity and inefficiency of "the system". And I don't mean public-sector employees; I mean persons involved in record-keeping and compliance and administration and so forth.
Health care is expensive because it supports so many jobs. Before we grouse and vex over how much of our GDP we spend on health-care, relative to how little actual health benefit we derive, we should consider: what percentage of American jobs are related to health-care? If we had a more efficient system – with lower prices for consumers (that is, the patients), how many people would lose their jobs, or sustain a pay-cut?
Who cares? I look a it the other way. How many people have been paid to do a worthless and unnecessary job all these years, and are better for it? And how much more money would be pumped in to the economy if we could keep more of our own money instead of paying it in taxes?
It's not he purpose of the federal government to create jobs.
Comparing tax burden from country to country is quite often an apples, oranges, and other round things situation. VAT is used in many places and it is a tax on consumption. Property taxes vary greatly. Fuel, sales taxes and burden on local business often cannot be factored in.
Tax burden varies greatly by location and lifestyle so the best you can look at on a broad scale must be broken down by economic level and still will be inaccurate in many ways.
Exactly!
Americans complaining about taxes often have no idea how good we have it here.
We pay no VAT rates and have some of the lowest oil/gas taxes in the free world. Also persons can control how much they pay in local/state taxes by simply packing up and moving. OTOH in many other places such as Europe basically everything comes out of a central government so it doesn't really matter where you move.
In countries like Sweden the common joke is you surrender almost all your earnings to the state (via taxation), however in return you get a vast network of literally cradle to grave social benefits that often are very generous by US standards.
Large potions of the USA population pay nil to none federal income taxes and very low payroll (FICA) rates. What amounts some do pay are offset by the earned income, child and other tax credits so they actually end up getting money *back* from the IRS. State by state that is another matter...
And this is actually my objection to keep paying more and more taxes. Our government is so bloated and inefficient and staff heavy while wasting money all the time or just outright losing money here and there.
But their reward for not being able to efficiently run things is more of our money. It makes no sense. They have enough money to run things properly if they use discipline and stop all the corruption.
Here is the thing; everyone complains about a bloated and inefficient federal government. But when it comes time to make cuts they want the "other person's" bloat and whatever cut, but not what benefits themselves.
Military spending is spread around the nation for just that reason; closing bases, ending weapons and other programs could bring hurt from Maine to California, so in the end no one in Congress wants to have that fight.
Three biggest areas of the federal budget that need to be addressed are military spending, Social Security, Medicare and Medicaid. You can wring a good amount of savings from each by cutting waste, abuse and whatever, but at what cost and to who? There are still communities that haven't recovered from the last round of base closings, and some never did or will.
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.
