Possinbilty of a Dem Prez and tax increases...what would you be willing to sacrifice?

[Dueller]

There is a real possibility we'll end up with a Dem prez in office and we may see tax increase. iLet's keep this simple, not bash candidates or the sitting president and talk in terms of what yYOU would be willing to sacrifice for the betterment of the country.

I never would have expected under this administration we would be faced with the economic situation we're in with regard to pork barrel spending. We are faced with a huge budget and trade deficit, a possible recession, etc. I think we can all agree that we don't mind paying our fair share of taxes provided the government would use the money wisely.

If it meant 2 or 4 or 8 years of belt tightening and ponying up to get this country under control what would you be willing to pay? What government program that YOU personally benefit from would you be willing to seen cut back?

The argument is always advanced that increased taxes take away the incentive to make more. I'm sorry, but I disagree. Even if I'm taxed at an additionaal 10% when I make and additional $100,00 I still have only "lost" $10,000 of that to incresed taxes. And I would be motivated to make even more to cover that "loss." Weak example but you get my drift.

Bottopm line: what would you be willing to pay to get the deficit down? What program that directly affects YOU would you be willing to see cut back if it wouild benefit the nation?

[NICKG]

i think it shoukld be done by taxing higher income people and cutting spending...before they tax the middle income bracket.

[kang]

What’s better, borrowing and leaving the dept to future generations, or paying more taxes now?

Personally, I’d like to see a balanced budget each year, whether or not it takes a constitutional amendment to achieve that. I think it is irresponsible to spend more than you take in, year after year after year. I don’t run my own finances that way, businesses don’t run that way, and the country shouldn’t run that way either.

[HardDrive]

I would vote for higher taxes IF EVERY SCRAP OF THE MONEY WAS GOING TO REDUCE THE PUBLIC DEBT.

But that will never happen.

[Porsche-O-Phile]

I'd like to see a balanced budget (like kang said), decreased taxes overall and huge cuts to federal spending in order to accomplish #1 and #2. Preferably leaving a little extra (on the order of 2%-3% a year) to pay down the deficit over time.

Way too much bureaucracy and government spending out there. WAY too much.

Also, get rid of social security entirely. Pay out what's owed to those who have paid into the system (or better still, give them the option to be "bought out" of the system now), but no new withholding from people born after today. In otherwords, sunset the program entirely. It's a loser and will be nothing but a drain on the economy in the future - we need to end it NOW.

[the]

Originally Posted by Dueller

There is a real possibility we'll end up with a Dem prez in office and we may see tax increase. iLet's keep this simple, not bash candidates or the sitting president and talk in terms of what yYOU would be willing to sacrifice for the betterment of the country.

Even assuming that increased tax rates results in increased tax revenues, the problem with the question is that it assumes that additional collected taxes would be used for the betterment of the country.

The problems with our country are not on the revenue side, it's on the spending side. Getting more revenue through increased tax rates (even assuming that works), just feeds the beast and makes it bigger and hungrier.

[Dueller]

So Nick & Kang...you wouldn't be willing to pay more taxes to fix it?

In my case wife and I paid about $22,000 in income axes last year. I certainly would be willing to pay an additional $5-6000 in taxes if it meant getting the country fiscally healthy. Programs affecting me that I would be willing to see cut back? The war in Iraq but not at the expense of cutting the military in general....

[lendaddy]

Nationalized health care will be so amazingly expensive that there will be no chance for debt reduction. Unlimited supply=unlimited demand.

[sammyg2]

I'd be willing to pay almost $40k a year in federal tax (along with my wife filing jointly, not counting SS or anything else, just fed tax). Oh wait, We're already doing that.

So I guess the answer is, I'd be willing to do absolutely nothing more than I already am to support the deadbeats, illegals, and the rest of the irresponsible sector of our population except to tell em to keep their blankety-blank hands off my paycheck.

How long do you think this country will survive if we keep punishing the hard working successful people and rewarding the deadbeats? Not long, that's for sure. Eventually the successful people will leave or just stop trying so hard, then the greedy lazy good for nothings will have to fight over their own table scraps because there won't be anyone to carry them anymore.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by NICKG

i think it shoukld be done by taxing higher income people ...

OK, I'll try to be polite. (But I have SMOKE coming out of my ears!)

The top 1% of earners pay 40 % of ALL the income taxes!

The top 10% pay 70%!!!

If you are not in the very highest tax bracket, I will submit that the higher earners are carrying your dead weight. WE are already paying your taxes for you!

If you are not in the top tax bracket, I suggest you get a second job or insist on paying in the top tax bracket unless you enjoy living on the hard work of others.

You know the $600 economic "stimulus" that you will be getting? Guess who's $600 it is? It's damn sure not yours unless you are in the highest tax bracket.

When you pay lower taxes than you should due to the largesse of the "rich", you should feel gratitude, not hostility.

[lendaddy]

Thanks Moses

Oh and in advance...thanks for my families health-care (in case I forget later).

[nota]

''Fact II: Total federal spending on a safety net for
the poor costs the average taxpayer about
$400 a year, while spending on corporate welfare
programs costs the same taxpayer about
$1400 a year. (source: CBO figure]''

[KFC911]

Originally Posted by Moses

...You know the $600 economic "stimulus" that you will be getting? Guess who's $600 it is? It's damn sure not yours unless you are in the highest tax bracket....

Sorry to add fuel to the fire Moses, but most of us are probably excluded from getting any of "our" money

[Moses]

Originally Posted by KC911

Sorry to add fuel to the fire Moses, but most of us are probably excluded from getting any of "our" money

Yep. Goes without saying. We do not qualify for the $600 rebate.

[sammyg2]

Originally Posted by kang

Personally, I’d like to see a balanced budget each year, whether or not it takes a constitutional amendment to achieve that. I think it is irresponsible to spend more than you take in, year after year after year. I don’t run my own finances that way, businesses don’t run that way, and the country shouldn’t run that way either.

I agree, we need to simply STOP SPENDING MONEY LIKE DRUNK SAILORS ON LEAVE!

If we stop spending so much money, we will be able to afford our bills without borrowing, and without raising taxes. My parents called that being responsible.

[Burnin' oil]

Originally Posted by Moses

OK, I'll try to be polite. (But I have SMOKE coming out of my ears!)

The top 1% of earners pay 40 % of ALL the income taxes!

The top 10% pay 70%!!!

If you are not in the very highest tax bracket, I will submit that the higher earners are carrying your dead weight. WE are already paying your taxes for you!

If you are not in the top tax bracket, I suggest you get a second job or insist on paying in the top tax bracket unless you enjoy living on the hard work of others.

You know the $600 economic "stimulus" that you will be getting? Guess who's $600 it is? It's damn sure not yours unless you are in the highest tax bracket.

When you pay lower taxes than you should due to the largesse of the "rich", you should feel gratitude, not hostility.

Typical rich person response.

[lendaddy]

Originally Posted by nota

''Fact II: Total federal spending on a safety net for
the poor costs the average taxpayer about
$400 a year, while spending on corporate welfare
programs costs the same taxpayer about
$1400 a year. (source: CBO figure]''

define "safety net for the poor" Me sees some wiggle room there.

[widebody911]

Well, we're still hemorrhaging $1B a week in IraqNam....

[Burnin' oil]

Hey, wait a minute. Oh, never mind.

[Moses]

Originally Posted by sammyg2

I agree, we need to simply STOP SPENDING MONEY LIKE DRUNK SAILORS ON LEAVE!

If we stop spending so much money, we will be able to afford our bills without borrowing, and without raising taxes. My parents called that being responsible.

The ONLY way to limit government excess is to mandate a balanced budget with only inflationary increases in spending allowed.

Congress should be given an absolute dollar figure to work with then they can allocate the money in whatever way they deem most prudent.