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.
That's what Obama does... use unrealistic examples and then....
Say he wants to tax those who make 250k+.... while using someone making 20M as an example of why we need to tax those making 250k+... its just silly....
That's what Obama does... use unrealistic examples and then....
Say he wants to tax those who make 250k+.... while using someone making 20M as an example of why we need to tax those making 250k+... its just silly....
Personally, I would like to see a system where either Direct Revenue is made for specific programs (like SS tax goes to SS and is completely untouched by any other program)... other programs would need to be a Zero Deficit program (It is initially funded by the government but the program itself is responsible for generating its own revenue to support itself)... other things I like to cut off entirely like International Aid program as it isn't the job of the Federal government, it is the choice of the American people... in all that would mean taxes would go down because the government isn't spending irresponsibly... So if you were on Welfare and collected X amount, then your wage would be garnished in the future should you find a job to pay back what was "loaned" to you at 0% interest rate.... Also, please note that during the Clinton Administration, welfare was cut from lifetime to 5 years maximum... so far, no increase in crime...
Any specific suggestions as to how the military, benefits given to veterans, or medicare might be funded directly?
Also, does it say somewhere in your constitution that overseas aid should not be the business of federal spending, or are you taking issue with the decision of elected administrations to make it so?
Any specific suggestions as to how the military, benefits given to veterans, or medicare might be funded directly?
Also, does it say somewhere in your constitution that overseas aid should not be the business of federal spending, or are you taking issue with the decision of elected administrations to make it so?
Specific suggestions? Why bother, it would be a pointless exercise... Medicare already has Medicare taxes, so I don't really know what you are getting at... as for the military and the benefits it receives, do a separate taxation for National Defense... for benefits given to veterans, take it from the veterans income... that's how they do it for non-veterans...
I take issue with someone making a decision on someone else's money to "give" in the name of charity... that's like me saying "Hey Benjamin, give me a $100 so I can give it to a charity I like."... I don't think you would appreciate that and what makes it worse is that I don't give you an option of giving me that $100...
Eliminate social welfare spending programs, privatize them, and let those who believe in supporting the dependent class put their money where their mouths are and donate to pay for their support.
Well, in this concept that you made 20K and 4K a year came out in taxes (through payroll deductions) and this was a "burden" then you need to change your situation. Why not, I don't know, work harder to earn a better rate? The more you'll make, the more that will come out. When does that "burden" go away? Double your pay to 40K a year and you paid 8K in taxes. Is that better or still just as bad? Who shouldn't pay taxes and why? If they don't, why should the be entitled to things taxes pay for (besides handout programs, but schools, roads, firemen, police, etc). We ALL have to pay taxes and we shouldn't rely on the wealthy to take care of us. How is that even remotely fair? This is coming from someone no where NEAR wealthy --heck, I'm no where near "Well off" lol
But I'm making the best out of what we're earning on our current and messed up tax system.
Just checking, presumably this means that someone earning 250,000 dollars, and so paying 10 times as much as someone earning 25,000 dollars, should also be entitled to 10 times as many services? Like 10 times as many cops showing up when the dial 911? Right?
Or, do we have instead to imagine that what people pay in tax is based on what they can realistically afford?
That's what Obama does... use unrealistic examples and then....
Say he wants to tax those who make 250k+.... while using someone making 20M as an example of why we need to tax those making 250k+... its just silly....
So, how much more should the wealthy pay more in taxes? In percentages.
Just checking, presumably this means that someone earning 250,000 dollars, and so paying 10 times as much as someone earning 25,000 dollars, should also be entitled to 10 times as many services? Like 10 times as many cops showing up when the dial 911? Right?
Or, do we have instead to imagine that what people pay in tax is based on what they can realistically afford?
No, because it's not about the amount you make, it's the percentage we should all pay.. If we all paid the same percentage, we'd all equally contribute.
So, how much more should the wealthy pay more in taxes? In percentages.
I don't work for the government and the government doesn't pay me to crunch their numbers and I don't have access to government budgets and I don't make decisions on what programs go and stay... so how am I suppose to answer your question?
If we all paid the same percentage, we'd all equally contribute.
Why are we all not contributing on an equitable basis? A flat tax makes perfect sense. Earn little; pay little. Earn A LOT; pay A LOT.
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.