Forums → WEPR → What type of Government do YOU believe is right?
| 221 | 55775 |
This is just curiosity and so people can talk about how they feel about the government of their country or what government they believe is right.
Personally, I believe in a small government where the government hardly does anything to affect your life, but people just don't care nowadays what happens: They just want free stuff, like money, food to make them fatter, other free junk from what the government 'romises' also known as 'lies' and the government has just controlled people.
So, I believe in a small, democratic government that won't control your daily life. That would include Capitalism as well.
- 221 Replies
I feel that I should add that this "rotective net" would also include health care and other public services. So the goal is to privatize most of society, but keeping the vital parts on the governments paycheck, making sure that everyone gets the health care etc that they deserve.
I guess that is kind of small, but not small-ant small
It's actually quite puny. The only reason that they are fatal to us is because they refuse to compromise, and want to cut the government to nothing. They want to eliminate Medicare, lower taxes, increase tax breaks to the wealthy, and eliminate the middle-class. They are a danger to the US.
It's actually quite puny. The only reason that they are fatal to us is because they refuse to compromise, and want to cut the government to nothing. They want to eliminate Medicare, lower taxes, increase tax breaks to the wealthy, and eliminate the middle-class. They are a danger to the US.
My only problem with the TEA party movement is their adherence to ancient christian mythology. Other than that, I agree completely with them on economic policy. TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY. They do not support tax breaks to ANYONE, but rather advocate a flat tax rate, meaning everyone pays the same tax rate. But then again, equality is bad right?
I don't know, a flat tax rate isn't the worst of ideas, although I'm still off the opinion that it wouldn't do much because the rich are either ethical enough pay taxes and do lots of charity work, or selfish enough to find every way possible to evade them. Most of them tend to be the latter.
My major problem is that corporations often skate by on the taxes because states are desperate to have them provide jobs, as a result governments lose millions in tax revenue, this burden is then passed on to individual citizen.
Dover I would agree with you if it weren't for the fact that we would need massive budget cuts to even remotely approach that plan, and for budget cuts we need compromise, something that most politicians have forgotten about. Regardless of it's two party system, this nation was founded upon compromise, and in the past the parties were able to work together, but now those rifts have grown so large that our representatives would rather read a god**** phonebook during congressional sessions, than fix the country's economic problems.
Kyouzou:
You do realize that no corporation on earth pays tax right? When a corporation is taxed, they simply increase prices and pass it on to the consumer. In effect, a corporate tax is a form of hidden sales tax.
Or do you think a company, when faced with a tax hike, would simply eat the increased cost?
With a true flat tax plan, there are no write offs, no loopholes. No declaring losses, capital expenditure write offs ect. It is applied ONLY to individuals and is applied to ALL income regardless of source.
Under the current tax system in the USA, Warren Buffet claimed recently to have paid less tax than his secretary. A flat tax would make this scenario impossible.
I agree completely with them on economic policy. TAXED ENOUGH ALREADY
Then what is your solution to solving the debt crisis? Cut all government programs? Because what got us into this mess is the fact that we spend and spend, but then the people aren't willing to pick up the tab. Is a 5% tax increase on the wealthy really too much? Do you really need 500 million a year to survive? The super-rich should help us out more because they have the means, while the poverty stricken should be given tax-exemptions because taxes could mean not eating three squares a day.
zakyman:
You must have missed the part where I said all that stuff about eliminating loopholes ect. The rich should pay their FAIR share. No loopholes, no write offs. A 5% increase is meaningless if someone pays no tax due to loopholes. Look up what Warren Buffet said about taxation. Super rich man and he admits it's easy to get around taxes.
How about everyone pays 15% of all income in taxes? If you make 20k a year, that's $3000. If you make a million a year, that's $150000.
Seems a lot more fair than the million dollar a year guy paying next to nothing in tax due to write offs and loopholes.
Seems a lot more fair than the million dollar a year guy paying next to nothing in tax due to write offs and loopholes.
It is more fair, but the brackets still need to be in place. The super rich should pay AT LEAST 1/5 of their income, because to be honest, you don't need 500 million to survive. That would be 100 million for everyone who makes over 500 mil, which could generate billions of dollars of revenue. Also, close the loopholes so that they have to pay their taxes in full.
It is more fair, but the brackets still need to be in place. The super rich should pay AT LEAST 1/5 of their income, because to be honest, you don't need 500 million to survive. That would be 100 million for everyone who makes over 500 mil, which could generate billions of dollars of revenue. Also, close the loopholes so that they have to pay their taxes in full.
But WHY should someone who, through their hard work, innovation and dedication be PENALIZED by being bumped up into a higher tax bracket? How is this even moral, to punish success. It is certainly not even close to fair as the rich guy is already paying more.
85% of millionaires are self made (Forbes Magazine). They EARNED their money. They employ others, who in turn drive the economy.
But yeah, lets take their money away, because I am sure the government will make effective and efficient use of it.
True, you don't need $500 million to survive, but why should one be forced to make due with only what they need to survive when they have the talent and work ethic and dedication to do more, to create wealth?
If you think a fair tax bracket for the rich is 20% then why not make everyone pay 20%? (1/5 is 20%)
I am a working class guy, I work a dangerous job, make pretty good money and my total income tax rate is 35%. (Not counting sales tax, property tax and whatever other gouges the government sees as "fair" I would love to pay 20% and I am NOT rich. I would also love if Warren Buffet, for example also payed 20%. I would consider this more than fair. And the government would come out ahead in this case.
Also, yes, budget cuts are needed, big time. How about not going to war? That'd save a few bucks. How about not bailing out GM, Chrysler and Wall Street? More money saved. Letting business fail is part of capitalism. Yet for some reason when it comes to corporate losses, big companies immediately become socialist.
Probably because letting those business fail would've put a rather large hole in our economy.
And yes I realize how corporations work, it's still ridiculous that states actually give them tax exemption simply for existing.
But WHY should someone who, through their hard work, innovation and dedication be PENALIZED by being bumped up into a higher tax bracket
If you have the means, then you should put up more than those who don't.
I want to agree with your views, but at the same time I want to say they're almost communist, or perhaps it's socialist, in nature.
UN has a good point, why should someone who has toiled to earn their money be forced to pay for someone who claims welfare not out of need, but laziness.
On the other hand, isn't it our civic duty to better our soceity, and the lives of our fellow man.
With that question, Kyouzou, it can be ambiguous. With welfare, comes the taxes of those that are obligated to support it. With less welfare, it comes less out of the rest of our pockets. Yes, it helps those on the bottom, but it hurts those that pay for it. One could argue that without welfare, more money would be given to the otherwise exempt people to spend more.
Yes, it helps those on the bottom, but it hurts those that pay for it
But those on the top are those that need it the very least.
but at the same time I want to say they're almost communist
They are not so much communist so much as more toward-pardon my creation of a new word-yourshareofthepieism. I feel that if you can do more for the country, you should. If you are poor and cash-strapped, then you should have to contribute less. That is why I feel that if you make less then 20k per year and you are married, then you should not pay any taxes because you have very little money to begin with after Social Security and other deductions from your paycheck are factored in.
"That is why I feel that if you make less then 20k per year and you are married, then you should not pay any taxes because you have very little money to begin with after Social Security and other deductions from your paycheck are factored in."
FYI: All tax rates are taken from the US government information. Google it.
If you make less than 20k you're paying a marginal rate of 10.35% plus state tax, which depending on the state can be around 5%, or it can be zero. Add in any other taxes and this climbs up even higher. A Family making 20k can not afford to pay roughly $4000 in tax, assuming they don't own property. So yes, I agree. You're getting ripped off.
The top bracket is roughly $370 000 and up. These folks pay 35% in federal tax. Factor in state tax, you're probably looking at 40% in income tax ALONE. Keep in mind that there are not a lot of these people around. These people are getting hosed as well.
Why not set the personal exemption at $20000 (Meaning no tax on income up to this amount.) and then tax any income over and above at a flat rate of 20%. No write offs, no loopholes.
Any revenue lost by eliminating tax on people basically living in poverty would be made up by ensuring people actually paid the tax on all ACTUAL income. This would simplify the tax code to the point where lawyers could no longer exploit interpretational errors in the law.
Kyouzou, you are dead right about it being our civic duty to better society and help our fellow man. That is EXACTLY my point. It's OUR job, not the governments. Oh, and notice I never said cut welfare. Audit who exactly is collecting welfare so that the truly needy get it. I say cut back on wars in countries where they don't want us anyway.
Also, on corporate tax. Would it not just be easier to tax the shareholders/owners of the corporations on their earning rather than applying a tax to an entity? Corporate taxes are WAY too easy to avoid paying. It seems like an exercise in futility.
You must be logged in to post a reply!