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.
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...
Oh, you're talking about that element of your argument. If you want to put name-tags on taxes, go right ahead - you still have taxes to pay. I thought you were going to explain how to make these programs self-funding.
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.
Upon what basis do you decide what the percentage should be? What would be the reasoning?
If it's about equality of contribution, shouldn't everyone pay an fixed absolute amount?
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.
That's what I've said, but apparently it's not good enough. Because to someone making $20,000 a year, 4K a year in taxes is too much... and those who are making like 2,000,000 a year.. $400,000 in taxes is not enough!
I really don't understand. Should someone making 2 million a year honestly pay like 1,000,000 or more in taxes?
Well, surely you either have to say it's fair we all pay the same...
...in which case, you need a fixed sum, of, say, $5000 each...
...or say, figure out what people can actually afford...
...in which case, clearly, someone on a subsistence income, who needs 95% of their income just to survive, will not be able to afford the same, even as a proportion, as someone for whom 95% of their income is available for discretionary spending...
Oh, you're talking about that element of your argument. If you want to put name-tags on taxes, go right ahead - you still have taxes to pay. I thought you were going to explain how to make these programs self-funding.
Obviously for SOME programs it should be self-funding for programs where self-funding isn't possible, obviously it would be taxed so that citizens would know exactly where the problem is instead of some nebulous thing... if the military needs more money, the government can elect at that time to start cutting military projects or increase taxes... What people don't realize is that the military is one of the most wasteful programs in our government... that would force government departments to evaluate where the money goes more efficiently instead of waste... because their increase in spending is now readily transparent...
Well, surely you either have to say it's fair we all pay the same...
...in which case, you need a fixed sum, of, say, $5000 each...
...or say, figure out what people can actually afford...
...in which case, clearly, someone on a subsistence income, who needs 95% of their income just to survive, will not be able to afford the same, even as a proportion, as someone for whom 95% of their income is available for discretionary spending...
...right?...
OR I can do this really cool thing:
Get job -> Work -> Paycheck after taxes.
..and then I could.. learn to live within my means! GASP!
No wait. I shouldn't. I should make $13k a year and demand others to pay more so I can have kobe beef burgers 4x a week.
The real answer, though, is that governments simply cant raise enough money to get anything done using a flat tax system. Flat tax means either only taxing the rich at a rate the poor too could bear, and so collecting only a pitiful amount, or taxing even the poor at a rate that only the rich could afford, and so making much of the population destitute. Lose lose.
Obviously for SOME programs it should be self-funding for programs where self-funding isn't possible, obviously it would be taxed so that citizens would know exactly where the problem is instead of some nebulous thing... if the military needs more money, the government can elect at that time to start cutting military projects or increase taxes... What people don't realize is that the military is one of the most wasteful programs in our government... that would force government departments to evaluate where the money goes more efficiently instead of waste... because their increase in spending is now readily transparent...
I suppose you could maybe have a system whereby governments are obliged to publish a detailed breakdown of their expenditure?
OR I can do this really cool thing:
Get job -> Work -> Paycheck after taxes.
..and then I could.. learn to live within my means! GASP!
No wait. I shouldn't. I should make $13k a year and demand others to pay more so I can have kobe beef burgers 4x a week.
Right, so you don't have an argument, no problem.
eta: FWIW, if you can get by under your flat-tax system, why not have my - undoubtedly fairer - poll tax system, whereby everyone pays not just the same rate, but the same, fixed, amount?
Oh, yeah, I can just see the masses taking the time to evaluate a detailed federal budget report. We couldn't even get our Congressmen to read the healthcare proposal.
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.