Wanna save the budget AND cut taxes for most Georgians? Just do this: (rating, working)

[toll_booth]

You know, the naysayers have yet to come up with a counterproposal. If there is one, I still await it.

Oh, and way to completely distort my position. There's nothing like some good, ol' fashioned bearing of false witness against thy neighbor.

[BobKovacs]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

You know, the naysayers have yet to come up with a counterproposal. If there is one, I still await it.

Oh, and way to completely distort my position. There's nothing like some good, ol' fashioned bearing of false witness against thy neighbor.

My counter-proposal is simple- either:

1) raise taxes to cover the shortfall
2) reduce the budget/services to meet the current tax revenue
or
3) some combination of 1 and 2 above

Why are you so adamant that we need to reduce taxes? I'm quite happy with the level of taxes I pay. Try living up in NJ or some of the other states with insane taxes for a while, and you'll be thrilled to pay the taxes here in GA.

And where did your position get distorted? Your position was simply to cut taxes for those below an income level that you feel is "rich", and raise taxes for those above that same level. How about if we move the lower/raise cutoff to a point $5k below your income level- would you still think your proposal was reasonable if you were on the other side of the cutoff?

[neil0311]

What Bob said.

[LoeCraw]

I don't necessary subscribe to this notion, but it could be argued that most modern day infrastructure (airports and roads for example), are funded, or at least subsidized by the government, and that's why richer people should pay more in taxes. Some people from low income brackets may never use a plane, or even use roads for that matter, but the average person who makes over 250K a year, probably takes at least a few plane trips a year. Granted, lower income people don't pay a lot in taxes, but they still help fund things they will hardly get to use.

With that said, the biggest way to reduce spending is to cut our losses, and stop this nation building project in Iraq. I thinking about all the money, lives, time, and effort spent on revamping a country that doesn't like us; it's very frustrating to say the least. I have to respectfully disagree with anybody who thinks that Iraq will dramatically transform into this western world like nation.

Another thing would be to collect taxes on all the illegal aliens that are here. I think about it every time I see all the new construction in the area.

Plus, when is GA going to step into the 21st century and legalize/regulate/tax prostitution and marijuana. I see a large untapped source of income right here. Just imagine a tax like what's on alcohol and cigarettes, but on pot and prostitution. The tax/regulation on prostitution could see fit that whores do not have STDs and are clean, thus avoiding the spreading of disease. The tax/regulation of pot, could produce legitimate farming jobs. Really, the benefits are almost endless.

[rcsteiner]

Originally Posted by toll_booth

Wow. I honestly had no clue just how unpopular a tax cut for the lower and middle classes is.

As much as I would like one, I have to agree that it doesn't seem fair to cut anyone's taxes when *more* funding is needed.

Of course, in a perfect world, my own taxes would be zero. Or maybe a very large negative number.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by LoeCraw

I don't necessary subscribe to this notion, but it could be argued that most modern day infrastructure (airports and roads for example), are funded, or at least subsidized by the government, and that's why richer people should pay more in taxes. Some people from low income brackets may never use a plane, or even use roads for that matter, but the average person who makes over 250K a year, probably takes at least a few plane trips a year. Granted, lower income people don't pay a lot in taxes, but they still help fund things they will hardly get to use.

You're kidding, right? So poor people never use airplanes? That means they should pay no taxes?

Originally Posted by LoeCraw

Another thing would be to collect taxes on all the illegal aliens that are here. I think about it every time I see all the new construction in the area.

We can agree here, although better would be to not allow them in and not to use our resources (education, public safety, etc) for people who have no legal right to be living here.

Originally Posted by LoeCraw

Plus, when is GA going to step into the 21st century and legalize/regulate/tax prostitution and marijuana. I see a large untapped source of income right here. Just imagine a tax like what's on alcohol and cigarettes, but on pot and prostitution. The tax/regulation on prostitution could see fit that whores do not have STDs and are clean, thus avoiding the spreading of disease. The tax/regulation of pot, could produce legitimate farming jobs. Really, the benefits are almost endless.

I could go along with that. Not sure I'd legalize pot, but I could be persuaded if there was a clear way to keep it out of the hands of kids.

[LoeCraw]

Originally Posted by neil0311

You're kidding, right? So poor people never use airplanes? That means they should pay no taxes?

No, not necessarily. Lower income people should pay taxes, just not at the rate of higher income people. And yes, some people never fly on planes, and I think part of the reason is that they just don't have the money. Just like I'm sure that some people won't have broadband internet either because they can't afford it, but their some of their tax dollars go toward subsidizing the construction of the infrastructure. We all pay for things that we don't use. With that said, I'll agree to disagree, because I think it's probably an ideological difference.

However, let me say that while I think higher earners should pay more, I don't think they should be abused in regards to taxation. I think that overly high taxation on people who do well hurt our economy.

Originally Posted by neil0311

We can agree here, although better would be to not allow them in and not to use our resources (education, public safety, etc) for people who have no legal right to be living here.

Of course! I wish somebody in government would get serious about this issue. I know a lot of people, both Democrats and Republicans, that want the border patrol to be beefed up, and illegal immigrants to be tracked down and deported. It's funny, because it seems to be an issue that many Americans agree on, but the politicians do nothing about it.

Originally Posted by neil0311

I could go along with that. Not sure I'd legalize pot, but I could be persuaded if there was a clear way to keep it out of the hands of kids.

I understand your concern. I would like to see pot regulated the same way as alcohol (age limits, sellers must have a license, etc.) but there would be no guarantee that it wouldn't fall into kids hands. If anyone was caught selling to minors, or even children, then I'm all in favor for strong punishment.

BTW, I'm not a pot user(nor alcohol nor tobacco), and I don't advocate its usage to anybody, but it's going to be done anyway, so the government might as well capitalize on it.

[Iconographer]

Does anyone stop to consider who these high-income earners are? They're not all the fat-cat trust fund babies that the demagogues make them out to be; most, in fact, are like my DH...small business owners that work in a very competitive environment internationally and who are keenly aware that the livelihoods of many people depend on their continued financial success. Continuing to increase their tax burden raises the inevitablity that expenses will have to be cut to accommodate it...and some of those 'expenses' include the cost of employing these individuals that would benefit so greatly from this 'panacea' of tax restructure. Simple economics, really.

[mccarley]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

Simple economics, really.

They don't understand economics, just free rides.

[neil0311]

Originally Posted by LovinDecatur

Does anyone stop to consider who these high-income earners are? They're not all the fat-cat trust fund babies that the demagogues make them out to be; most, in fact, are like my DH...small business owners that work in a very competitive environment internationally and who are keenly aware that the livelihoods of many people depend on their continued financial success. Continuing to increase their tax burden raises the inevitablity that expenses will have to be cut to accommodate it...and some of those 'expenses' include the cost of employing these individuals that would benefit so greatly from this 'panacea' of tax restructure. Simple economics, really.

Very good point.