Taxes: Cost of Liberty

[Natalie C. Barney]

I have been thinking alot about taxes and am appalled citizens want tax cuts when taxes are the cost of liberty. Look at it this way taxes pay for the legal system required to maintain property rights from maintaining estate records to enforcing the law enforcement against attacks on property. Taxes pay for fair and just regualation of trades, standards of building and other regulated goods that maintain health and safety. Taxes pay for the military the basis of our protection from an external invader. And taxes pay for social services we tend to now expect of our governement. In my view the government should decide how much it actually needs to operate and expect the citizens and businesses to pay the entire cost each year this includes aspects like paying off government debts and the like.

Just this of governments that are the least funded by the people they also have the least rights. Saudi Arabia they don't pay taxes and the people have no right to petition the government. Other despotic governments are just poor with a certain small percentge controling most of the wealth very unevenly. In fact those they don't pay taxes fairly have no right to then complain that the government is not doing enough.

And my view applies to local and state levels not just the Federal level.

[Jefepato]

Presumably, some people are concerned that the government is not making effective use of their money.

I love America and I wouldn't want to live anywhere else, but there are literally trillions of dollars that the government refuses to account for, which is problematic when you consider that the Department of Defense paid $640 for a toilet seat.

The government is supposed to be accountable to the people, after all.  If they aren't going to spend the money effectively they ought to give it back.

[Ariabella]

Plus instead of letting special interest groups and lobbyists control the lawmakers, here's a novel concept. Listen to the people they represent. After all, it's what the Constituition was founded on...no taxation without representation. I have no objection to reasonable taxes, but make me feel represented.

And use the government funds to care for the people of your own country as well. Let us have a say on expenditures.

[Natalie C. Barney]

You do have a say you can vote and join lobbying interests. Its not my fault people in this country won't vote out idiots in office if one year half the ncumbant people up for election lost most of their seats maybe the two political parties would get in their heads they are not safe.

Here is how taxes are supposed to have been collected. The Federal government decides we need ,lets say for fun $1 trillion. Ok they decide by population the state of California owes their share at $100 billion the state gets the money from their people and sends it. Taxation is supposed to be at the local level the Federal Government was to deal with the states for their taxes. Originally the Federal Government could not tax private citizens and businesses State could except in Washington D.C. and territories.

But in a Republic system we vote for representatives in government and they make the decisions so our best weapon is supposed to be the vote.

[GothicFires]

The problem is that not everyone who runs shares all the opinions of the person they are trying to represent. Personally my vote for the last presidential race would have been NONE OF THE ABOVE if it could have been. You may have the choice of ‘lesser evils’ but you are never going to find someone who truly has the same beliefs and values as you. Trust me I have never heard a politician touting ‘Pagan Values’.

I love America. Proud to have been born and live here. But there is no way of voting people in or out of office that is not trying to change America into what is important to them rather than the millions they are there to represent.

[Ariabella]

Added to the fact that they may say a lot of things one agrees with, but once in office, the lobbyists and special interests all get their claws in and control them.

[Jefepato]

This is a certainty:

Nobody should be allowed into a position of political power that shows the slightest inclination of wanting it.

[Vekseid]

I have been thinking alot about taxes and am appalled citizens want tax cuts when taxes are the cost of liberty. Look at it this way taxes pay for the legal system required to maintain property rights from maintaining estate records to enforcing the law enforcement against attacks on property. Taxes pay for fair and just regualation of trades, standards of building and other regulated goods that maintain health and safety. Taxes pay for the military the basis of our protection from an external invader. And taxes pay for social services we tend to now expect of our governement. In my view the government should decide how much it actually needs to operate and expect the citizens and businesses to pay the entire cost each year this includes aspects like paying off government debts and the like.

It wasn't always this way, and, did we really need to give eight billion dollars to oil companies last year?

[Zakharra]

 

In my view the government should decide how much it actually needs to operate and expect the citizens and businesses to pay the entire cost each year this includes aspects like paying off government debts and the like.

That is a scary thought. The government taxes people too much already, if we let it take what it thought it needed, the taxes would be very high. That is taxation with no representation since there is no control over who says what level of taxes can be levied. You can bet they would rarely if ever go down. Government can always find a way to spend  money and need more of it.

[Ariabella]

And let's not forget that the debt would be much lower, if not eliminated, if they didn't pay $10,000 for a hammer or the aforementioned $640 for a toilet seat.

[Vekseid]

And let's not forget that the debt would be much lower, if not eliminated, if they didn't pay $10,000 for a hammer or the aforementioned $640 for a toilet seat.

Those are a bit misleading.  Those costs come from a general parts rollup, which was $500 for a hammer IIRC...  and $500 for an atramodern radar that cost some $50,000 to make.

Most government waste comes from little pet congressional porkbarrel projects - a bridge to nowhere in Alaska, for example.

[Zakharra]

 The debt is simple enough to get rid of. Stop spending so bloody much. Keep taxes low and let the economy grow, which increases revenues and grow out of the debt. Congressional pork is a big part of governmental waste and corruption in the ways the money is handed out. Contractors padding the bills and such.

[Natalie C. Barney]

That is a scary thought. The government taxes people too much already, if we let it take what it thought it needed, the taxes would be very high. That is taxation with no representation since there is no control over who says what level of taxes can be levied. You can bet they would rarely if ever go down. Government can always find a way to spend  money and need more of it.

But the operation of government is expensive as I pointed out. Take the new Raptor fighter its over $200 million a pop but is the most advanced fighter in the world and vital to give our nation a tactical superiority if needed. Add to that the justice and penal system the 8th amendment requires a certain treatment of inmates that is hardly cheap. A court system to maintain legal records including estate law. Regulation of medicine and other trades again not inexpensive. Road construction is very expensive. Social welfare and medical programs for the elderly and needy are pricey. Must I go on?

And you do have representation you elect people to legislature and in local elections you have a much stronger voice and they are to act in your interests. Is it a erfect system- no. But in Spain we had a fine example the governenment would not get out of Iraq so the people voted in heavily a party that would get their soldiers out. As far as I'm concerned citizens have foru moral obligations to government- 1. Be informed of the political and social issues (civics). 2. Get involved in the process including voting for people they think will do the best job regardless of party. (ooc: You know you can vote for parties other than the big two the Libertarians, Green Party and others.) 3. Pay taxes. 4. Be a productive citizen.

As for our government it may be a rather chaotic instrument but if you actually look at what they do by and large it works more often than doesn't. Case in point no one has successfully made a war on our soil in almost 200 years due to our strong military. Case in point most people are not starving to death. Case in point we have generally a stable society in most regions. Case in point aid to disaster victims is still generally better than even 30 years ago. Case in point childhood vaccines have saved many thousands of children.

[Zakharra]

 They do do some good things. Mostly, but over all I simply do not trust the government to spend money wisely. Nor do I think it should be able to say what taxes it thinks it needs. Because once it sets that standard, you have to pay the tax. Or you are breaking the law. You don't get a say in not paying it.

With the current system of lobbiests and influence peddling, that power is not one I'm willing to see the gorvernment have. Would you be willign to let the government say it needs half of your taxes to operate? What about 60%? Or 70%? How would you say no? you couldn't and be heard.

[Natalie C. Barney]

My point is that the fact there are so many interests it naturally gravitates to the center more or less. Now I'm a Republican in the true conservative way I feel taxes fund government. My question is what services would give up the Federal Government does you would do without? A weak military. Or maybe no social welfare money for the needy. Or maybe half the road project spending? Or no mony at all for needy students?

Where do you draw the line?

And no government spends money wisely in a law based Republic. Rome had corruption. Most other democratic republics have corruption to some degree. Face it its worst in totalitarian regimes by far look at the old Soviet Union. We are the largest free Republic in the world and that makes the problem more for us. But it seems to me when your Senators bring in money for local projects people generally don't complain its when it goes somewhere else its a problem. Some seem stupid. For example in my State we put billions into highways where I backed a high speed rail- I lost that's the democratic process. It was a ballot item so all voters could make their choice on this issue.

My final point is still people have the vote if they refuse to vote the people out that are not using their power to the will of their citizens its not anybody elses fault but the people. The vote is the first weapon of the citizen and one that is supposed to be used wisely if the two parties don't suit you people can back other ones we have others join and support one of those. Its not a wasted vote you make your voice heard according to your political beliefs the one right you have under the Constitution none can take away.

[Celestial Goblin]

I like the idea behind taxation, but i'd have to be blind not to see how goverments, for example the USA one but not only, are spending the money on things they should not.
If only politicians would be at least moderately honest with 're-distributing the wealth' and such, i'm sure there would me much more support for taxation amongst the voters.
And yeah, vote. If you can't vote for somebody that deserves it, at least vote against the guy you agree with less.

[Ariabella]

The problem is a. you need to draw a line on the maximum percentage they can take. I wouldn't want them to have the control to take so much that you wouldn't be left with enough to live on, especially if you work a low paying job.

b. I have nothing against the social programs except they don't truly target those in need.  Our welfare system, at least here in Maryland,  supports women who do not want to work, and do nothing but pop out baby afer baby. Yet if you work and have a low paying job, especially those just over the supposed poverty level, but they can't afford housing because the government doesn't place any rent control to keep housing affordable. Utilitiy companies are allowed to jack up your bill 50% to 72% in one jump (and this is true, just happened here. Our bill went from $263 month which was already high to $378.

c. Disability is nearly impossible to get unless you can afford a lawyer or if you're a drug addict. The drug addicts can receive it with no problem.

d. Do we really need a space program?

e. What about social programs for the people in the country who need assistance but make more than the poverty level yet can't afford proper housing because rent is $1000+ for an economy with no rooms? And $1000 may be all they clear per month because minimum wage is a joke and Social Services say "Well you earn too much" Excuse me?

f. Wasteless studies that mean nothing to the general population. We've all seen the headlines "Studies prove... and it's something stupid. Most of those are government funded.

g. wasteful spending...but stuff at Walmart instead of contractors that charge ridiculous prices (yes, I'm going back to the hammer, even $500 is too much.

[Natalie C. Barney]

The problem is a. you need to draw a line on the maximum percentage they can take. I wouldn't want them to have the control to take so much that you wouldn't be left with enough to live on, especially if you work a low paying job.

b. I have nothing against the social programs except they don't truly target those in need.  Our welfare system, at least here in Maryland,  supports women who do not want to work, and do nothing but pop out baby afer baby. Yet if you work and have a low paying job, especially those just over the supposed poverty level, but they can't afford housing because the government doesn't place any rent control to keep housing affordable. Utilitiy companies are allowed to jack up your bill 50% to 72% in one jump (and this is true, just happened here. Our bill went from $263 month which was already high to $378.

c. Disability is nearly impossible to get unless you can afford a lawyer or if you're a drug addict. The drug addicts can receive it with no problem.

d. Do we really need a space program?

e. What about social programs for the people in the country who need assistance but make more than the poverty level yet can't afford proper housing because rent is $1000+ for an economy with no rooms? And $1000 may be all they clear per month because minimum wage is a joke and Social Services say "Well you earn too much" Excuse me?

f. Wasteless studies that mean nothing to the general population. We've all seen the headlines "Studies prove... and it's something stupid. Most of those are government funded.

g. wasteful spending...but stuff at Walmart instead of contractors that charge ridiculous prices (yes, I'm going back to the hammer, even $500 is too much.

I'm a conservative at least in the true sense as in practical and caring governing but an expectation that people can do much for themselves. But that does not mean saying NO to outrageous increases in rent and other essentials either. Take Social Security Disability they do give it out too easily to people that can work. I know a blind person should get it but someone with "depression"- please there has to be a reigning in of abuse here. I happen to think the Space Program should be internationally funded and a UN program where we pay a fiar percentage of the costs along with China and Russia and the EU and others. But it does advance science and technology plus I feel is a area we must explore but the space probes we send out are more cost effective than manned space flight. And buying from Walmart there we have a big agreement I can get spending alot for an advanced fighter with all the extra costs involved and the new Joint Services fighter is at least a flexible one we are also selling to England and other friendly nations. But for hammers why not.

One think I'm pushing locally is to contract with Walmart for Hurricane relief they have a huge distrubution network and can supply essentials fast to the local people, so why not spend the emergency funds with them to supply fast food and water? Tents. Generators. Medicines. Seems more practical that what they did in the Northern Gulf Coast after Katrina.

[Ariabella]

. I know a blind person should get it but someone with "depression"- please there has to be a reigning in of abuse here.

I agree on the depression, but I have known several people with serious physical problems (heart problems, things like that) that have had to fight for months on end to get it. Cancer, heart problems, bone problems, if it's physical  then they should get it with no problem. After all, it comes from social security which they paid into.

As for Hurricane Katrina, there were a lot of things that could have been and should have been done differently. I hope Wal-Mart comes through, they're one of the most likely to do it and let's face it, even a lot of the grocery stores and all did things a lot quicker and smoother during that.

[Celestial Goblin]

Huh, i have a disability for depression. I had to end my education on elementary schoold because of that depression and now would probably have a rather depressing choice of jobs with no high school papers. Not that the welfare money would allow me to survive alone anyway, as with no job history the sum assigned is very low. Believe me, a real depression is a serious problem, even though it's a thing many people can try faking.

[Elvi]

Yes me also Celestial, it is a very big part of my illness, (chronic fatigue syndrome), which actually causes the worse disabling influences far more than the constant pain I suffer.

I am sorry, but anyone who believes that "Depression" is nothing and people should pull themselves together and just get on with it, have never ever experienced the total and utter feelings of uselessness and dessolation that all those with depression get so often, mostly caused by people thinking 'there is nothing wrong' with them.

[Ariabella]

Speaking only for myself, I was speaking of the people who claim depression and actually slip their doctor something to state they can't work so they can claim disability. There are a lot of dishonest doctors in the US who are willing to do those sorts of things.

By no means did I mean that all depression should be eliminated from getting disability as I do know how my own body feels when I'm depressed, so if it is severe I am certain it can make it impossible to work.

What SSI (our disability plan in America) needs to do is actually screen better and not exclude those with the severe ailments. There are plenty of people here on it who's disability is alcoholism and drug addictions. While I realize these are diseases, the people I speak of are not even willing to attempt treatment for it.

[Celestial Goblin]

I know what you mean, depression disability has a bad name because it's the best choice to fake. And doctors are dishonest here too, actually they're only little better than politicans themselves. And i've read about a whole informal 'price index' for people who want whatever false diagnosis given.
And psychologists are not the most corrupt of the specialities either.

[Natalie C. Barney]

I'm not heartless I have bi-polar disorder, cerebral palsy and a good work record I could easily get SSI but I prefer to work and take care of myself. But I understand some people have uncorrectable mental conditions and I'm not talking about them. The only public benefit I take is reduced fare for mass transit to get around a fair benefit for me to ask and I take care of myself otherwise. I just think a good number of people abuse the system and more accountability is called for.

Another are i have a huge problem with is the VA system. They give drug benefits to people who were no in the active service career wise or during conflict, my father was a cold war veteran draftee and was shocked he could get benefits. He was never near a war or conflict and left after his four years. Why should he get them over legitimate wounded veterans or career soldiers that were injured in active service? Seems so wrong.

[Zakharra]

 I'm for social programs that go to those truely in need. Not the sponges that live off of it. It needs to be tightened up alot more.

The space program is good, but that could be better run too. Alot of what the government does is needed and good, but alot isn't. how money is alllotted and parceled out for pork projects and special friends.

My final point is still people have the vote if they refuse to vote the people out that are not using their power to the will of their citizens its not anybody elses fault but the people. The vote is the first weapon of the citizen and one that is supposed to be used wisely if the two parties don't suit you people can back other ones we have others join and support one of those. Its not a wasted vote you make your voice heard according to your political beliefs the one right you have under the Constitution none can take away.

Until they take that away.

[Lilian]

The problem is a. you need to draw a line on the maximum percentage they can take. I wouldn't want them to have the control to take so much that you wouldn't be left with enough to live on, especially if you work a low paying job.

b. I have nothing against the social programs except they don't truly target those in need.  Our welfare system, at least here in Maryland,  supports women who do not want to work, and do nothing but pop out baby afer baby. Yet if you work and have a low paying job, especially those just over the supposed poverty level, but they can't afford housing because the government doesn't place any rent control to keep housing affordable. Utilitiy companies are allowed to jack up your bill 50% to 72% in one jump (and this is true, just happened here. Our bill went from $263 month which was already high to $378.

c. Disability is nearly impossible to get unless you can afford a lawyer or if you're a drug addict. The drug addicts can receive it with no problem.

d. Do we really need a space program?

e. What about social programs for the people in the country who need assistance but make more than the poverty level yet can't afford proper housing because rent is $1000+ for an economy with no rooms? And $1000 may be all they clear per month because minimum wage is a joke and Social Services say "Well you earn too much" Excuse me?

f. Wasteless studies that mean nothing to the general population. We've all seen the headlines "Studies prove... and it's something stupid. Most of those are government funded.

g. wasteful spending...but stuff at Walmart instead of contractors that charge ridiculous prices (yes, I'm going back to the hammer, even $500 is too much.

a.  I agree and disagree. Taxes aren't a large issue, I believe it wouldn't be that bad if we were being paid an appropriate wage. Right now, a lot of jobs are suffering because certain people are coming into the country and working for much lower than we are. But the companies are encouraging that, so it's not the people's fault.  Taxes to the government is only a good thing.. when they're used right.  But between people not wanting to pay them, people fudging taxes, tax breaks for the rich and other such things, it's only us that's really paying for it..

b. A lot of social programs are bunk. American selfishness has seriously hurt them and the lack of government testicular fortitude and unbiased education has made a very good idea into a very bad implementation.

c.  Not really. My dad's on disability, my mom's on disability.. it just depends on what's wrong.

d.  We need a space program that fucking DOES SOMETHING!!! 

e.  The federal run social services and the state legislated housing laws tend to miss a point when it comes to people's lives. The federal institutions enforce the rules. Unfortunately, the rules do not cater much to people anymore. Because some states are too large or people turn a blind eye to profit-mongering at the expense of others, the people suffer.  Selfishness has really rotted things here.

f. School's a bunch of bullshit sometimes, but it's the kids who dont want to learn. They make us learn the wrong things at the wrong times sometimes, I feel, and really.. what schools do is breed the next class of citizen. They need to remember that. They need to encourage intelligence, good being, they need to make people realize that racism is utter bullshit and the only reason this country exists is because people from EVERY country decided to go, "You know what? Our two countries may have been at war for the last million years, but we're not there anymore. We're here. And now you're my neighbor, and not my enemy." People lose sight of what this country was FOUNDED on.  America is lacking community spirit.

g. I consider two hundred million dollars on some fucking jet WHEN WE'RE NOT EVEN IN A REAL WAR, excessive spending. If China invades, it's all over. Nobody else could do it. Nobody else comes close. Why the HELL Are we spending like we're in a goddamn war?!  People who support it are just ignorant fucks who think that America is this vulnrable baby to outer nations and everyone else in the enemy, all the while this country's honor is going right down the shitter, we're only looking out for ourselves and we're letting our freedoms slip away to a comfort in personal ignorance when the government has it 'all under control'.

[Mistiq]

I don't have much to say on taxes except...

There is something wrong with the fact that a majority of gas prices are taxes...

California welfare changed for the better and once you get on you'll only get money for the kid(s) you have when you got on, then they will just add food stamps.

And I agree with Lilian on the last point that was made. Also if other countries were ticked off enough, the US in my view would be the equivalent of jumped...

[Jefepato]

If China invades, it's all over.

I realize this is a tax debate, not a military debate, but China couldn't successfully invade the US.

The US probably couldn't invade them either (not to mention, it'd be an economic nightmare), but China simply doesn't have the means to mount an effective invasion against us.  All the manpower in the world wouldn't mean a thing if they couldn't get them onto American soil.

Now, if other countries joined with China to attack the US?  I couldn't say, but it still wouldn't be pretty for them.

[Mistiq]

That reminds, I never understood why there was a need for a space program? It seems to be a dangous waste of money the more I think about it.

[Zakharra]

That reminds, I never understood why there was a need for a space program? It seems to be a dangous waste of money the more I think about it.

Potential. Economic potential. There are resources in space that are waiting to be used. Minerals in the Moon, asteroids that can be mined. Colonies and bases on the Moon, Mars, in the Asteroid Belt, the moons of Jupiter, Saturn and Neptune, Mineral extraction on Venus and Mercury. Energy. The possibilities are endless if we can only establish a presense in space.

[Lilian]

Well said. ;)    The space program is dangerous. But so is any other profession! That's why it must be properly maintained and we shouldn't be launching so infrequently. There is a vast resource out there of inventive people out there. We have already built planes that can go into the stratosphere and cross the world on a single tank of feul without any problem.  I'm sure there's potential if we start remembering that AMERICA WAS GREAT FOR ITS INGENUITY!

[Elvi]

So, you are saying that the reason there is a space program is so that other planets can be ravaged like this one has been?
Damn and there I was thinking that it was to satisfy human's inquisitive nature and the need to understand what is beyond the present limits of our capabilities.

[Ariabella]

I fear they are right, Elvi, although once upon a time I thought like you did. To me, the space program was the prelude to the Starship Enterprise and Captain Kirk, exploring new worlds and learning new things.

Alas, our greed overirdes, and we inded would ravage the planets plus probably destroy all of the aliens when they protest.

[Lilian]

I feel there are numerous reasons, you both are right...

[Zakharra]

 It's the only way to og. Out into space and to spread humanity outward. Or stay here on Earth and eventually collapse into a decayed society that will rot and eventually die on this planet. To keep a industrial society going requires more resources in metals, fuel, energy, space to grow and a challange. The resources of the Earth are being used up. That's a fact and it would happen no matter what nation ruled.  I'm for colonizing the other planets/moons of the solar system and going to other systems.

On one side we would be taking our prejudices, lifestyle and cultures with us, but those ones that left would also change to adapt to the new enviroment and possibly be better than what they came from. Or they could be worse. No one knows what the future will be. We would ruin some worlds, and others would be cared for. Some would be beacons of light and prosperity, others pits of dispair and squallor. 
 
As for aliens, I have long wondered where are they? Our galaxy is full of habital worlds and it's about 15 billion years old, yet where are the other alien races? There should be star-faring civilizations all over.

[Ajoxer]

Well, humans are a destructive species- Life, by it's nature, is a destructive species. The only reason nothing in nature usually tends to wipe out it's competition is the fact that it can only change through evolution- It's like trying to make a job out of playing slots. Then you get species that are accidentally displaced from their ecosystem, and either die out, or end up prospering damagingly because they have no natural predators. Technology has let us change ourselves at our own choice, and in a timeframe an infinitesimal fraction shorter than that of Evolution. We've won the game of Life, and we accidentally screwed up the board.

I hope that we can learn our lesson, but the question is when will we come into conflict with an alien race, not will. As of yet, resources are still limited- Just because getting out into the galaxy would let us get at a whole lot of them doesn't mean it will stay that way forever.

I think that the sort of species that we would end up getting along with best would be silicon-based. They'd inhabit entirely different planets, want different materials... You find the best relationships between creatures that don't fight.

But then, hey, we can't know until we try.

But one way or another, it's either into the sky or under the seas- We can't last if we stagnate, and for the last 100 years, there's been no real new growth. I think that the space program, if we can start really doing something with the money poured into it, is going to be very, very important.

DAMN I tend to ramble...

And just as a note, the number of worlds habitable by life as we know it is actually fairly slim. Not to mention a species that actually manages to gain intelligence to the point where they can escape their planet without getting destroyed by any of a hundred massive extinction events...

[Zakharra]

 

But one way or another, it's either into the sky or under the seas- We can't last if we stagnate, and for the last 100 years, there's been no real new growth. I think that the space program, if we can start really doing something with the money poured into it, is going to be very, very important.

There has been alot of growth in the last 100 years. It's been industrial and economic. We can do far more today than we could a centry ago.  Jet planes, rockets, reusable shuttles(and more usable ones coming up). Computers and material sciences. 100 years ago there were no airplanes. No computers. Very primative rockets. Now we are at the point we can take the first steps into the vastness of space.

[Lilian]

And finally, sci fi geeks the world might have thier dreams come true - alien nookie! XD

[Zakharra]

And finally, sci fi geeks the world might have thier dreams come true - alien nookie! XD

Lol! Captain Kirks of the world unite! Heheehehehehehe.

[RogueJedi]

As far as taxes go...

I work for Republican Senator George Allen (Virginia).  I am a libertarian and a supporter of the Fair Tax system.  The biggest waste of tax money is the IRS and their lobbyists.  Get rid of them, get rid of income tax, and put in a 25% consumption tax nationwide, and it is fair.  That way, you are only taxed if you buy things, and the more expensive things are taxed more.

As for tax breaks for the rich, that is a misnomer.  They don't really get tax breaks.  It is just that the rich know every loophole in the IRS taxcode.  Get rid of the money grubbing IRS, and things would become alot smoother and more money will actually come in as taxes.

Here in Virginia, the former governor (who is seeking the Democrat nomination for President) said when he came into office: "I will NEVER raise taxes.  That is my solemn pledge to all Virginians."  Three years later, he pushes through a $1.4 billion dollar tax increase, saying it was necessary because the state had a huge deficit.  Two weeks after the tax raise was passed, the Commonwealth reported a budget SURPLUS of over $350 million.

Now, his former lt. governor who is the new governor, after also saying he would not raise taxes, is trying to push through an almost $1 billion tax increase again.  It is ridiculous, and I frankly would love to get rid of every congressman (state or federal) who vouches for increasing spending all the time.  Learn to work with a budget, like normal Americans have to do.

[Natalie C. Barney]

Why not use the original Constitutional Tax System decide on what the budget need of the Federal Government is and then tally that and tell the states to pay their share based on population? After all I believe the taxes should be levied at the most local level that makes sense at that generally is the State. And the States has the right to say NO the ultimate checks and balance on government spending at the Federal level.

[Zakharra]

 To get rid of the income tax would require a Constitutional amendment. Since it was a amendment that gave us the income tax system.

I'm not sure a 25% consumption tax would be fair either. That is a high tax. 25% of anything you buy? Harsh. I know that I would buy alot less and grow more food myself than to spend that much for things.  The IRS collects money, where most of the waste is, is Congress. All of the pork and special projects the Senators and Representatives pass in budget spending. Like what is coming up for the President to sign real soon. It's loaded down with riders and special projects for Congressional reps to take home to the folks.

I'm for a fairer tax that gets all income earners. A flat tax. Have no or very few exceptions.

If the States could say No to the federal government and hold taxes back then there would come a nasty fight very soon as some states would not hand over the taxes that the federal government does need to operate.

[Lilian]

Well, I still think taxes need to be changed depending on how things are going with America, but ..  indeed.. these useless projects need to stop. Until we can cut through some of the curroption, red tape and downright selfishness of people in office, I dont think we could do much to stop it anyways. I wouldnt mind giving power to other people in a government, I just need to trust that these people will be selfless to the cause of thier country, and that they are brilliant to the function in which they serve. This 'president picks his own cabinet' deal is a bit of bullshit if you ask me.


I think the people, combined with the senate, have a right to choose whoever the fuck they want, when the opporotunity comes up. The idea of a single man, possibly curropt, possibly a moron, choosing the future of this country just because he's there at the right time just chills me.

[Ajoxer]

Take a look at the Supreme Court in Canada... Prime Minister chooses who he wants, the people don't even have a right to know who's ON the Supreme court.

[RogueJedi]

Zakharra,

check out www.fairtax.org and they explain how the fair tax system works.

Honestly, it is already being used by two of the states with the largest intake: Texas and Florida.  Those two states don't have income tax if I am not mistaken, and just charge a flat tax on all products and services.  But, the national fairtax would rebate all spending up to the poverty level.  So I think it is a good deal.

[Zakharra]

 That site keeps wanting to give me pdf's.  :-\

[RogueJedi]

Let me see if I can get the info from them.  I'll post it if I can, or at least a link to a .doc file.

[Natalie C. Barney]

Zakharra,

check out www.fairtax.org and they explain how the fair tax system works.

Honestly, it is already being used by two of the states with the largest intake: Texas and Florida.  Those two states don't have income tax if I am not mistaken, and just charge a flat tax on all products and services.  But, the national fairtax would rebate all spending up to the poverty level.  So I think it is a good deal.

I live in Florida there are problems with the system we have constant vicious fighting over the budget and serious property tax issues one local county raised the impact fees on new construction from $700 to over $3700 and several groups are suing. And the tax is a slaes tax with numerous exemptions. But I agree on some sort of flat tax might work better at the Federal level. But why a rebate why not just lower the flat tax and keep it simple.

[Lilian]

I live in Las Vegas. They're like.. "Money problems? RFOL!"

"We make so much excess money, LET'S ACTUALLY GIVE FULL REFUNDS ON EVERYONE'S REGISTRATION FEES!"

[TheoTheBard]

I live in Las Vegas. They're like.. "Money problems? RFOL!"

"We make so much excess money, LET'S ACTUALLY GIVE FULL REFUNDS ON EVERYONE'S REGISTRATION FEES!"

What happens in Vegas, stays in Vegas.

The U.S. Treasury was hosed from the day Richard Nixon took us off the gold standard.  From there it was only a matter of time until Uncle Sam spent himself into penury.

Near as I can tell, the plan in Washington is to spend, spend, spend, have a huge debt--then go conquer everyone we owe it to.  What are they going to do, come and fight the 82nd Airborne to collect?  Kind of like Joe Pesci in Casino.

[robitusinz]

  Bleh...see, this is a fine example of the problem with the US.  Everybody has an opinion based on hearsay or, in some cases, pulled straight outta their ass.  It's almost impossible to wade through the vast mountains of shit to formulate any sort of reasonable compromise or resolution.  Here, we have it on a micro scale.  In reality, it occurs on a macro scale.  The media controls opinion, which then becomes the opinion of the people...and by people, I mean the average grunt.

  The thing is, everyone thinks their opinion is right, 100%, no flaws.  Nobody acknowledges their own selfishness, and nobody takes the time to look at things from someone else's point of view.  Every issue has at least 2 sides to it...just look at the mini-debate over disability benefits that sprang up in this thread.  Neither side is ever completely right nor completely wrong...they just happen to benefit different people.  Until people realize that they're simply citizens of the world, and that they're going to have to give up certain advantages in order to allow everyone those same opportunities, nothing's ever going to get better.  People are just too selfish, to quick to join in mob mentality, and too intolerant of each other to ever evolve as a society.

  And another thing...can we stop talking about $500 hammers?  That's fucking retarded, at best.  First of all, there are no factual figures that even mention a $500 hammer...we're just going by someone's make-beleive on that, and it makes for an unsound argument.  Secondly, if there were a $500 hammer, it wouldn't be because the gov't paid $500 for it...that's probably the total cost model of said hammer.  In essence, it's what the hammer "really" costs, when added in aggregate to the rest of the federal budget.  Nobody's ever paid $500 for a hammer.  But, when said hammer is used for the construction of some gov't building, its "cost" may be inflated due to many factors related to the project.

[National Acrobat]

I think that one thing that people really fail to grasp about taxes, is simply how much they affect almost every public service you want.

It really came to light here in Virginia a few years ago when the Governor at the time, Jim Gilmore, decided to elimate 70% of the personal property tax on vehicles (which included cars, trucks, boats, planes, etc.) simply because he and his party decided that people shouldn't pay taxes on them beyond the sales tax.

What they failed to take into account was the fact that the localities and counties derived nearly 50% of their local tax revenue from this source.

Well, now our property is being re-assessed every nine months, and there are cases of people having the values of their property rise over 100%.

Why?

To make up for the lost revenue in order to pay the police, fire, EMS, Schools, teachers, etc.

What's worse is that fewer people own property than own vehicles, so now those of us who do own property are being asked to shoulder an even larger burden.

I think if people in general would just take the time to understand how taxes and revenue work, and then understand how our government works, the debate might make more sense.

[Celestial Goblin]

I'm cynical, but did that governor of yours, did he own vehicles? Like, a few cars and a nice boat?
Just an innocent inquiry:)

[National Acrobat]

Of course he did.

Him and the state legislature that supported it felt, quite simply, that it wasn't fair to tax people based on the types of vehicles that they wished to purchase, and that they already were taxed at a rate relative to the purchase price when they paid the sales tax on the vehicle.

I think eliminating the vehicle tax is a good idea, but not until you've figured out where the lost revenue comes from.

Here in Virginia, in addition to the Vehicle tax (which was merely reduced to 30% of the value), we also pay sales tax on the vehicles when purchased and we pay 25$ a year to purchase the decal for the county or locality that you reside in, for the right to have the vehicle registered in the area you live.

So, I understand the reasoning. I just don't get the short-sightedness of wiping out a huge source of revenue without thinking about the consequences.

[Zakharra]

The thing is, everyone thinks their opinion is right, 100%, no flaws.  Nobody acknowledges their own selfishness, and nobody takes the time to look at things from someone else's point of view.  Every issue has at least 2 sides to it...just look at the mini-debate over disability benefits that sprang up in this thread.  Neither side is ever completely right nor completely wrong...they just happen to benefit different people. Until people realize that they're simply citizens of the world, and that they're going to have to give up certain advantages in order to allow everyone those same opportunities, nothing's ever going to get better.  People are just too selfish, to quick to join in mob mentality, and too intolerant of each other to ever evolve as a society.

I live in the world, I am NOT a citizen of the world, but I am a citizen of America. Why do I have to give some things up? Why can't the rulers of the other nations actually get off of their corrupt asses and actually do something good for their people instead of lining their own pockets and wasting the money of their nation?  Many people bash the USA (not neccessarily here in Elliquiy)), but they forget or purposefully ignore one fact, The USA is the most prosperous and powerful nation in the world. Economically, militarily and culturaly(this is debateable, but relatively true)). If it is so bad, why do so many people want to come here?

The US is #1. The lone superpowe. We use that power to try to do some good and all people can do is bitch about it. The US is thew world's policeman and we are policing the world of the evil that EVERYONE else is ignoring. Like Iraq, Iran and N. Korea. The US would still be ignoring those nations and passing worthless resolutions if the US had not acted. Unlike some nations and the UN, the US has testosterone. There comes a time when you have to stop talking and just fight.  If you talk for too long, you will lose the war.

This is not a slam to populations, but to some nations governments for being spinless and casterated.

[National Acrobat]

That reminds, I never understood why there was a need for a space program? It seems to be a dangous waste of money the more I think about it.

Resources, economic and technological development, scientific research, and eventually far in the future, discovery and exploration.

I'm for social programs that go to those truely in need. Not the sponges that live off of it. It needs to be tightened up alot more.

Amen to that. I can give first hand experience as to the utter failure of the Welfare Job Training Program. At the place I worked before my current job, we tried to hire a bunch of these folks, but they were so used to sponging off of the government and not working, that they never lasted more than the interview. A few of them actually would tell my boss what they would and would not do if they got hired.

Here in VA they have really tightened those restrictions. Basically if you are able to work, you lose your welfare.

So, you are saying that the reason there is a space program is so that other planets can be ravaged like this one has been?
Damn and there I was thinking that it was to satisfy human's inquisitive nature and the need to understand what is beyond the present limits of our capabilities.

It will be both in the long run, but the odds of us actually getting to a planet with a population anytime in the next several hundred years are nil. Another thing to consider will be that eventually, when the earth's population is too large to be supported by the planet, our future generations will have to look elsewhere...

[RogueJedi]

That is true Rat Salad.

But, back to taxes.  In Virginia, our esteemed former governor raised taxes a couple of years ago, the largest tax increase at one time in the history of the Commonwealth.  Now, people will argue about taxes anyways.  The problem I have with it is, Warner, the former governor, made the pledge on the campaign trail and after he took office, that he would "not raise taxes, period."  A couple years later, after reports that Virginia was facing a budget shortfall, he passed the $1.4 billion tax increase.

Two weeks later, the state government came out with figures that Virginia actually had a surplus, and not a deficit.  Politicians have a tendency to lie, regardless of their party or other associations.

[National Acrobat]

I don't dispute that at all.

In fact, the Conservatives in the State Legislature fought tooth and nail to not have the increase, and I supported that movement. I still do.

The surplus, however, can be a misnomer, as it's only a surplus on paper. Many factors can raise, lower or totally deplete the surplus, or put us in the red.

The issue I have with the car tax rollback, was that while the State may have had a surplus, my county didn't, and the roll back on car tax directly affected me, with my property tax being raised, and my property being reassed every 9 months now instead of every 12 months.

I am hoping that the current impasse over the 1 Billion Dollar transportation issue doesn't result in higher taxes. The State Senate and the Governor want to raise taxes again in order to cover it, while the House wants to slash spending in some areas and not tax us anymore.

A tough call, because then you get into the debate over where to cut.

The money has to come from somewhere, but I feel I am already paying enough here in Va, given that we also have a state Income Tax as well.

[Swedish Steel]

I personaly just love taxes. They have given us free healthcare, free schooling, a pension to live on while your old etc. I have no problems paying taxes, though I am as ancious as the next guy that the money isn't missused.

[Zakharra]

I personaly just love taxes. They have given us free healthcare, free schooling, a pension to live on while your old etc. I have no problems paying taxes, though I am as ancious as the next guy that the money isn't missused.

tThat's all nice and dandy. IF they are used well. Which they aren't. The government always finds a way to spend. If there is a surplus, they spend it. If there is a defocot, they spend that too. The government can  never do with more and actually live within a budget. For most politicians, it is tax raises that are needed to cover any shortfal. And in the next year's budget they always need more money.

Here in Iadho, in the cocunty I live in, once you buy a place, the value is assessed and taxes levied. Then  they stay pretty much the same until it is sold. The taxes/value can go up or down by only 3% for taxing purposes, so property owners are very concious of levies and things.  We recently defeated a new recreational taxing district that the county  wanted to set up to build a new rec center. The supporters of the center said that everyone would be able to use it, but it was going to be built with only the money that the land owners were forced to cough up. We did not agree with that and it went down to a 80% Nay! vote.

[Ariabella]

Ah but here in the US we don't get free medical care. Something like that would make it much more bareable. Now, back in Maryland, you have sales tax, property tax, luxury tax, income tax plus the county you live in adds what they call a piggy back tax to your state tax at tax time, which usually runs about 50%.

[Swedish Steel]

Yes, free health care is a beautiful thing. You should seriously consider trying to get your politicians to spend some of your money there, I'm sure they can find the funds somewhere. Isn't that defence (or should that be offence?) industry of yours sort of a financial black hole?  ;)

[Zakharra]

Yes, free health care is a beautiful thing. You should seriously consider trying to get your politicians to spend some of your money there, I'm sure they can find the funds somewhere. Isn't that defence (or should that be offence?) industry of yours sort of a financial black hole?  ;)

No. The Department of Defense is not a financial black hole. It allows the US to exist free and to help other nations stay/be free. WWII and the Cold War are the best examples. The US military has allowed Europe to maintain it's militaries at a lower size than they otherwise would have had to do. The benefits of the military are not as visible as infastructure building is, but it's been an immense impact world wide.

I am not for free health care unless it can  be proven to work for a nation as large as the US is. National healthcare is more easily done for a smallker nation than a larger one.

I'm sure they can find the funds somewhere.

National healthcare also would require higher taxes and a new beaurocracy.

[RogueJedi]

National Healthcare would not work in this country!

Already, we are experiencing more illegal immigrants crossing our borders every week.  If we had National Healthcare, I can guarantee you that the politicians would give them access to it as well.  Americans don't like to be taxed, it's in our very nature (see 1770 and on).

And I agree with the State House Rat Salad.  We do not need more taxes raised.  If the governor and the State Senate cannot keep to budget, then find others that can.  For example, money is just being thrown at Education, and we are not seeing a lot of results because of that.  For instance, I live in one of the counties surrounding the City of Richmond.  Richmond throws no less than 5 times the amount of money into education and such.  Yet, they have the worst academics in the area.  I know of at least four counties and two other cities in the immediate area that are vastly superior, and spend quite a bit less (even with more students).  Chesterfield, Hanover, Henrico, Powhatan, City of Colonial Heights, and the City of Hopewell all outstrip the City of Richmond.

Money is not the answer to all problems.  And I wish the politician would understand that.

[National Acrobat]

I know very well the City of Richmond and it's Education Department. I lived in the city for 5 years, and when my wife and I got married, promptly moved to a suburban county adjacent to it, because we knew that our children would be better off. My kids are getting an excellent public education in the county we reside in, because our county knows how to manage their resources.

My Sister-in-Law lives in the City of Richmond, but sends my niece to private school because the public schools are abyssmal.

Their needs to be cuts in certain programs and better management of funds. VDOT is a perfect example of that.

[Ariabella]

Not only that, but raising the pay of a poor teacher is not going to improve their teaching skills, so the argument of more money for better teachers bears no weight to me. We saw the same thing in Maryland. The academics have removed anything that stimulates the child into wanting to learn or keeping them interested in learning. And the answer to better grades is not to have them use a calculator or computer. A frend of mine went to the school for help with her son's handwriting skills and their reply was for him to type all of his work on the computer. They're certainly not learning mathematics by using a calculator.

[RogueJedi]

Yeah, well I graduated from Chesterfield County schools (though I was only at my high school for just over a year).  Alot of areas of the state need to have the fat trimmed.

And I agree with you Cindy, but the teacher's unions hold enough power that they don't care if a teacher is inept, that teacher must be paid "a better salary".  It is one of the few professions where you can be horrible and still get rewarded.  I have no problem with awarding teachers who are truly above satisfactory.  But, that won't change until the unions change their policies.  And I am not against teachers themselves, just the system that allows mediocrity.

[Jefepato]

In countries with national healthcare, wealthy people who get sick tend to hop on a plane to the United States.

I believe that is all that needs to be said.

[Swedish Steel]

Yeah, great argument against free healthcare that. I think I'll petition for an emediate dismantling of our system cause it clearly doesn't work.

[National Acrobat]

My step-father is Canadien, and doesn't use his free healthcare at all. Of course, he's a resident of the US, but never would consider going home for the health benefits. In his words 'It scares me'.

'nuff said I think. His parents always come to the US for their more urgent health needs also.

It takes too long to get appointments for many things, and according to him, the equipment is the best.

[RogueJedi]

Understand, I am not critisizing you Swedish... it just won't work in this country.

For my own sake, I also don't want it to work, but that is me.  Besides, then you run into other problems, so I am content to stay as I am regarding healthcare.

[National Acrobat]

Yeah, it's been brought up many times in this country, and really starts very bitter at times debates.

[Zakharra]

Yeah, it's been brought up many times in this country, and really starts very bitter at times debates.

*cough* HillaryCare!*cough*

[Swedish Steel]

I must say I'm suprised you feel that way. Over here we are pretty gratefull we have free healthcare, and look at your system with horror. Sure, ours is far from perfect, but it's better than the alternative. I feel we won't be able to change eachothers minds regarding this, but that's cool, not every argument has to have a winner.

[Zakharra]

 We know that beaurocracies do not work the larger they get. For national healthcare to work in the US, the beaurocracy would have to be huge and massively funded.  Oregon tried to do that and the voters said 'No' when they had the chance to vote on it.  Massachutsets has a new healthcare system. Time will see if it works. Part of it requires by law.. that everyone either has to but health care/insurance, or pays higher taxes to cover any possibly use that the individual might have of the system. It forgets that some poeple can pay for it themselves and others do not want healthcare at this time.

We also tend to think that it's the individual's job to see that they are cared for. Not the State's. I do not want the US to become the nannystate that Europe seems to be. With entitlements from cradle to grave. People need to have pride in themselves and their nation, not to be coddled by that state. For if the state takes care of everything, then you have no freedom if it does something you don't like. Aristocracies went out of favor in the US in the 1700's.

[Max]

I personaly just love taxes. They have given us free healthcare, free schooling, a pension to live on while your old etc. I have no problems paying taxes, though I am as ancious as the next guy that the money isn't missused.

Uhm, seems to me that if you are paying taxes to get that "free" health care, "free" schooling, etc, it isn't free.  Just curious, what is the tax rate there?

[Swedish Steel]

Pretty high, I'm not exactly sure. But I believe I get more out of my money spent on taxes than you do. Just a hunch. Sure I know the healthcare isn't exactly free, but it's one thing I gladly pay taxes for.