Who should pay, and how much

[editec]

With all of the talk for the need to cut taxes and spending, if given the opportunity, what would the people here on this board offer as a solution? A couple making $50,000/year, what would be a fair percentage for them? If they made $100,000? Or $250,000? Why don't some of you suggest a fair percentage for those I just mentioned and for those making 1 to 5 to 10 million dollars/year? Do a little research and crunch some numbers and see what you would impose if you were fighting two wars, trying to maintain an infrastructure, keep the agencies open that serve the American people, etc. Do not forget to consider the special needs of your own state, things that are important to you, but those from the other forty-nine states call pork. See if you could balance a federal budget, and at the same time pay down the trillions of dollars of the national debt.
Google should have the information you will need to make a ballpark estimate.

How about we start by eliminating from the Budget at the Federal level ALL Unconstitutional Departments policies, business practices and laws.

You know , get rid of HUD, Depart of Education, All Welfare programs for non Government employees, ALL Social Programs for ALL non Government employees. What a concept. The Government at the Federal LEVEL is required by the Constitution to justify all expenditures and there is a very short list of things they can tax us to pay for.

Further it is illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the Federal Government to require the Individual States to do things that cost the State money that is not reimbursed from the Federal Treasury.

How about THAT. Something like 60 percent of our Budget goes for Social Programs, which are UNCONSTITUTIONAL You know ILLEGAL.

Gee, I wonder why you parced out non-government employees from NOT recieving welfare?

What a tool.

But at least you understand what side of the bread your slice is buttered.

 

[Iriemon]

How about we start by eliminating from the Budget at the Federal level ALL Unconstitutional Departments policies, business practices and laws.

You know , get rid of HUD, Depart of Education, All Welfare programs for non Government employees, ALL Social Programs for ALL non Government employees. What a concept. The Government at the Federal LEVEL is required by the Constitution to justify all expenditures and there is a very short list of things they can tax us to pay for.

Further it is illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the Federal Government to require the Individual States to do things that cost the State money that is not reimbursed from the Federal Treasury.

How about THAT. Something like 60 percent of our Budget goes for Social Programs, which are UNCONSTITUTIONAL You know ILLEGAL.

Why is it UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

Because the Constitution does not give the federal government authority to do those things.

Article I Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Sounds like it does to me.

 

[Iriemon]

With all of the talk for the need to cut taxes and spending, if given the opportunity, what would the people here on this board offer as a solution? A couple making $50,000/year, what would be a fair percentage for them? If they made $100,000? Or $250,000? Why don't some of you suggest a fair percentage for those I just mentioned and for those making 1 to 5 to 10 million dollars/year? Do a little research and crunch some numbers and see what you would impose if you were fighting two wars, trying to maintain an infrastructure, keep the agencies open that serve the American people, etc. Do not forget to consider the special needs of your own state, things that are important to you, but those from the other forty-nine states call pork. See if you could balance a federal budget, and at the same time pay down the trillions of dollars of the national debt.
Google should have the information you will need to make a ballpark estimate.

How about we start by eliminating from the Budget at the Federal level ALL Unconstitutional Departments policies, business practices and laws.

You know , get rid of HUD, Depart of Education, All Welfare programs for non Government employees, ALL Social Programs for ALL non Government employees. What a concept. The Government at the Federal LEVEL is required by the Constitution to justify all expenditures and there is a very short list of things they can tax us to pay for.

Further it is illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the Federal Government to require the Individual States to do things that cost the State money that is not reimbursed from the Federal Treasury.

How about THAT. Something like 60 percent of our Budget goes for Social Programs, which are UNCONSTITUTIONAL You know ILLEGAL.

Gee, I wonder why you parced out non-government employees from NOT recieving welfare?

What a tool.

But at least you understand what side of the bread your slice is buttered.

Let me guess, he's on the dole of some sort with a govt pension, so *that* spending is OK?

Lots of Cons rail about spending, until it comes to their "entitlements".

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Why is it UNCONSTITUTIONAL?

Because the Constitution does not give the federal government authority to do those things.

Article I Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Sounds like it does to me.

The "general welfare clause" doesn't give the government the authority to do anything. The powers of the government are explicitly stated in the Constitution, not hidden in double meanings to be "found" by corrupt politicians.

 

[Xenophon]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.

No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.

Just a straight tax on income.

 

[edthecynic]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.

No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.

Just a straight tax on income.

You got my vote.

 

[Skull Pilot]

With all of the talk for the need to cut taxes and spending, if given the opportunity, what would the people here on this board offer as a solution? A couple making $50,000/year, what would be a fair percentage for them? If they made $100,000? Or $250,000? Why don't some of you suggest a fair percentage for those I just mentioned and for those making 1 to 5 to 10 million dollars/year? Do a little research and crunch some numbers and see what you would impose if you were fighting two wars, trying to maintain an infrastructure, keep the agencies open that serve the American people, etc. Do not forget to consider the special needs of your own state, things that are important to you, but those from the other forty-nine states call pork. See if you could balance a federal budget, and at the same time pay down the trillions of dollars of the national debt.
Google should have the information you will need to make a ballpark estimate.

How about we start by eliminating from the Budget at the Federal level ALL Unconstitutional Departments policies, business practices and laws.

You know , get rid of HUD, Depart of Education, All Welfare programs for non Government employees, ALL Social Programs for ALL non Government employees. What a concept. The Government at the Federal LEVEL is required by the Constitution to justify all expenditures and there is a very short list of things they can tax us to pay for.

Further it is illegal and UNCONSTITUTIONAL for the Federal Government to require the Individual States to do things that cost the State money that is not reimbursed from the Federal Treasury.

How about THAT. Something like 60 percent of our Budget goes for Social Programs, which are UNCONSTITUTIONAL You know ILLEGAL.

You are positive that your proposal would get the country back on track and provide jobs and affordable housing, education, repair infrastructure, support the wars, etc? You offer no numbers to support your position, it is easy to eliminate agencies in theory, but what are the repercussions or advantages when this is done in realty? Talk is cheap, the needs of the American citizens are not. The wealthy need roads to move their products and supplies, it is alright for the rest of us to walk or drive on dirt trails, but how would you explain your failure to serve the needs of the wealthy in this and many other ways that require great amounts of tax dollars?

For those who propose cutting social programs, that is fine, but there will still be the need for government subsides to corporations and agriculture. These are GOP favorites, and do not benefit the poor so they must be preserved. Housing subsides help sell homes, and that benefits many large corporate builders, so cutting those would also be out of the question. If the legislative layman wants to make cuts in federal agencies, it is best to understand who put these policies in place, and if it was done to benefit corporate interests or other influential people, eliminating favorable programs to these powerful folks will not be acceptable.

Just as i predicted the same partisan bovine scatology.

 

[Mad Scientist]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.
No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.
Just a straight tax on income.

Good point.
Also, Fed Payroll Tax Deduction discourages work because the more you work, the more taxes you pay.
What it should be is a tax instituted at the retail level. You go to the store, you pay state and federal taxes at the same time based on the total bill.

Also, no one can cheat on their taxes either because the tax is collected at the point of sale on all economic activity. No way to weasel out of them with loophole ridden tax laws written by greasy lawyers either.

 

[Truthmatters]

Because the Constitution does not give the federal government authority to do those things.

Article I Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Sounds like it does to me.

The "general welfare clause" doesn't give the government the authority to do anything. The powers of the government are explicitly stated in the Constitution, not hidden in double meanings to be "found" by corrupt politicians.

what did they mean by the general welfare when they put that in?

 

[Truthmatters]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.
No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.
Just a straight tax on income.

Good point.
Also, Fed Payroll Tax Deduction discourages work because the more you work, the more taxes you pay.
What it should be is a tax instituted at the retail level. You go to the store, you pay state and federal taxes at the same time based on the total bill.

Also, no one can cheat on their taxes either because the tax is collected at the point of sale on all economic activity. No way to weasel out of them with loophole ridden tax laws written by greasy lawyers either.

That would create a pennalty on commerce.

Not very smart economic policy.

 

[Iriemon]

Because the Constitution does not give the federal government authority to do those things.

Article I Section 8. The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes, duties, imposts and excises, to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but all duties, imposts and excises shall be uniform throughout the United States;

Sounds like it does to me.

The "general welfare clause" doesn't give the government the authority to do anything. The powers of the government are explicitly stated in the Constitution, not hidden in double meanings to be "found" by corrupt politicians.

That's just your interpretation. It's clear to me. "The Congress shall have power to .. provide for the ... general welfare of the United States." I don't know how it could be much clearer.

 

[IMDaugur]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.
No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.
Just a straight tax on income.

Good point.
Also, Fed Payroll Tax Deduction discourages work because the more you work, the more taxes you pay.
What it should be is a tax instituted at the retail level. You go to the store, you pay state and federal taxes at the same time based on the total bill.

Also, no one can cheat on their taxes either because the tax is collected at the point of sale on all economic activity. No way to weasel out of them with loophole ridden tax laws written by greasy lawyers either.

What about the elderly who worked all of their lives and just make ends meet now, an additional 10% on their shoulders would be unbearable for most, do you propose some kind of exemption card for them?

 

[Iriemon]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.

No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.

Just a straight tax on income.

Sure and we can eliminate the entire US armed forces, military pensions, Homeland Security, DEA, CIA, and FBI to pay for it. That might about cover it.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Personally, I say start at the top.

Cap and index the salaries of ALL elected officials at 1.5 times the median income of all Americans. Do not allow elected officials to vote for their own pay raises. No more perks, no more pensions no more expense accounts. After all they're not in it for the money, right?

Cut all government programs not expressly defined in the Constitution and let each state take care of the rest as what was always intended.

Dump Social Security. Require that all people save the 15% of their income in privately owned retirement accounts that the government cannot pilfer to cook its books.

Dump the IRS by simplifying the tax codes with either a purely flat tax or an indexed tax with the top rate not above 20%. For example everyone pays 5% on the first 20K of income, 7% on the portion between 21K and 40K etc. Not perfect but better than what we have now. Do not tax interest on savings accounts and cap long term capital gains at 10%.

End all foreign military operations and use the military to secure our borders and to protect against attack at home.

End all foreign aid, charity after all starts at home.

And I don't have time to punch in all the numbers. But here's a question for you. Instead of having everyone else do the work so you can snipe at their comments, come up with your perfect budget and we'll pick it apart.

 

[Iriemon]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.
No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.
Just a straight tax on income.

Good point.
Also, Fed Payroll Tax Deduction discourages work because the more you work, the more taxes you pay.
....

Yet during the Clinton administration, when taxes were increased from 31% to 40%, 22 million new jobs were created. I guess work wasn't discouraged a heck of a lot by that tax increase.

But aside from facts completely undermining your assertion, it's a good point.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.
No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.
Just a straight tax on income.

Good point.
Also, Fed Payroll Tax Deduction discourages work because the more you work, the more taxes you pay.
....

Yet during the Clinton administration, when taxes were increased from 31% to 40%, 22 million new jobs were created. I guess work wasn't discouraged a heck of a lot by that tax increase.

But aside from facts completely undermining your assertion, it's a good point.

it was called the tech bubble.

 

[Iriemon]

Good point.
Also, Fed Payroll Tax Deduction discourages work because the more you work, the more taxes you pay.
....

Yet during the Clinton administration, when taxes were increased from 31% to 40%, 22 million new jobs were created. I guess work wasn't discouraged a heck of a lot by that tax increase.

But aside from facts completely undermining your assertion, it's a good point.

it was called the tech bubble.

Wow, a "tech bubble", like Bush's real estate bubble and Reagan's micro computer bubble.

But somehow, despite a 30% tax increase, and the temendous discouragement of work that provided, and just like Cons today, Gringrich and all the other Cons predicting economic collapse -- the economy managed to have a "bubble" and create 22 million jobs.

Simply amazing.

 

[Agnapostate]

You know , get rid of HUD, Depart of Education, All Welfare programs for non Government employees, ALL Social Programs for ALL non Government employees. What a concept. The Government at the Federal LEVEL is required by the Constitution to justify all expenditures and there is a very short list of things they can tax us to pay for.

That's quite ridiculous. Welfare plays a critical role in maintaining the physical efficiency of the workforce, and is thus necessary for the sustainment of capitalism. I don't doubt that this ranting is related to a grossly inaccurate depiction of welfare as constituting "socialism."

Everyone should pay a flat tax on the dollar, say 10%.

No exceptions, no loop holes, no deductions, nothing.

Just a straight tax on income.

That's a rather odd suggestion. Progressive taxation is merely rational, considering the diminishing rate of marginal utility. It then plays a critical role in the aforementioned funding of welfare and the maintenance of the physical efficiency of the workforce.

 

[IMDaugur]

Just as i predicted the same partisan bovine scatology.

Yes, you are high and mighty and condemn others, but offer nothing in any way towards a solution. You complain about the government, but do you vote against the incumbent on election day? It is the incumbent who keeps the status quo in Washington, the experienced legislators that so many of you hold in such high regard. Those experienced Congressmen who collect their honoraria from the lobbyists for stabbing their constituents in the back. That is something the government officials always agree to keep intact in a bi-partisan agreement.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Yet during the Clinton administration, when taxes were increased from 31% to 40%, 22 million new jobs were created. I guess work wasn't discouraged a heck of a lot by that tax increase.

But aside from facts completely undermining your assertion, it's a good point.

it was called the tech bubble.

Wow, a "tech bubble", like Bush's real estate bubble and Reagan's micro computer bubble.

But somehow, despite a 30% tax increase, and the temendous discouragement of work that provided, and just like Cons today, Gringrich and all the other Cons predicting economic collapse -- the economy managed to have a "bubble" and create 22 million jobs.

Simply amazing.

where were you in 2001 when the tech bubble popped and the market nose dived and a lot of businesses saw their income cut in half.

And all those Clinton "created jobs" weren't affected right?