Yeah, it it long past time to scrap the current tax code and come up with something that makes sense and does not take billions of dollars a year to implement and enforce. The biggest place I think the government should help is in educating people. One who cannot support themselves should be given the opportunity to go to college or trade school in order to make themselves marketable. Once in the job market, they are able to work and pay taxes like the rest of us. The biggest problem I have with leaving it all up to private charities is that historically, this type of system has underserved the people in need and has not led to those people becoming productive members of society. Any type of public assistance that I would design would require the person to get educated and would also require them to do community service in lieu of actual work. Companies that are in good fiscal health do not have to take out debt to finance these types of things, they build up a surplus and "open the purse" out of money they already have. It is always harder to spend money that you have in the bank than money you are borrowing to pay on a payment plan. BTW, Microsoft does not carry any debt, they have tens of billions banked because they do not pay dividends, instead rolling the profits into the company and further increasing the value of the stock. The same thing could happen in this country if anyone would show enough fiscal discipline to not only stop deficit spending, but also retire the debt.
Dude, we're all in this together. Just because you and I "got ours" doesn't mean we turn our backs on those in need. I mean, c'mon: even monkeys pick bugs off each other.
A flat tax would greatly increase the tax burden on the bottom 50% of wage earners in this country. Right now the top 50% of wage earners pay 96% of income taxes received. NINETY-SIX PERCENT. The top 1% of wage earners pay around 36% of the income taxes received by the goverment. The next time the democrats are crowing about "only the wealthy" receiving tax breaks, guess what: ONLY THE WEALTHY PAY TAXES HERE.
And it will be impossible to fix the system if people are hard hearted and unflinching in their desire to eliminate the safety net entirely. Using your method of elimination, we will not be able to make America the land of opportunity for all Americans, only the rich ones. Here is the economic plan, get people educated and on their feet and when they get a good job, they will repay that kindness by becoming a taxpayer. The government is not there to take care of people, but it should make sure that people have the ability to make it on their own. Otherwise, people fall through the cracks and become homeless, commit crime to support themselves, or both. This speaks more to YOUR nature than human nature. The "benefits" you decry can be limited so as to minimize fraud, as we have seen over the past decade. SOME of this help needs to be provided by the government in order to serve the people that are not covered by private charities. In addition, we can create requirements for community service so that NOBODY gets a "free ride." Nobody is asking you to give up 2/7 of your salary for welfare, which is what your analogy implies. The amount of money going to welfare is miniscule when compared to the drug war, corporate subsidies, and campaign financing. Why don't you turn your sights on programs that waste significant sums of money or help focus on how we can maximixe our investment? Welfare should not be a COST, it should be an investment in future taxpayers.
First, a link please. Second, I personally believe that a consumption tax is a fairer method of taxation. With a consumption tax, people can decide EXACTLY how much they pay in taxes every year. In addition, if we build in a slight surplus every year, we can have a tax holiday every year like Texas does.
Here's your link. Now please tell the democrats that by definition, there can only be a tax cut for "the rich" because they are the only ones who pay taxes. http://www.irs.ustreas.gov/pub/irs-soi/00in01rt.xls The consumption tax will get slammed by the democrats because it would increase the tax burden on the poor and lower-middle class.
Don't give me that crap. I have done more for the less fortunate this year than you have done in your life. Not only am I involved with Rotary, but the Boys and Girls Club, NAM and international help projects. You doubt me? On October 3rd we're having a Charity Ball in which I am the co-chair in Northwest Houston that will raise at least 30-40 thousand for charity. We have designated the funds to go to: - TEW Taking Education to Work - Boys and Girls Club of Houston - Klein and Spring Independent School Districts I don't talk about 'empathy', but I show it. Every program I support is based on what ANDYmoon was talking about: education. Allowing those that strive to achieve regardless of their financial situation. What I do not support is handouts and I never will. We offer scholarships on a merit basis, not based on race, religion or nonsense like that. I believe that you must show people that if they don't work hard there will be DIRE consequences. They must have that fear of poverty which will scare them into working hard and not falling back on others. If they don't, there should be some private sponsored relief for the short-term, but after that, sorry buddy. You must have that in order to show the world there are consequences to not saving, working and achieving. I believe in workforce and US productivity and I feel that enabling a system to educate and for all to maximize their potential is the most 'empathy' I can show and is the best way to help people and give back to this society that has helped me.
Not if it is a tax on new goods and services with necessary items like food, medicine, etc. excluded from the tax. There are ways to make it fair, we just need for everyone to see past ideology (difficult) and override their campaign contributors (very difficult) who are the ones receiving the huge tax breaks.
