View Single Post
Old 02-17-2006, 03:48 PM   #26 (permalink)
aceventura3
Junkie
 
aceventura3's Avatar
 
Location: Ventura County
Quote:
Originally Posted by shakran
We are not talking about having the government steal from the rich and give to the poor. We are talking about having the government make the rich pay their fair share. They have more money, they enjoy more benefits of the american capitalism system, they should pay more into the system. This is not a tough concept. But as it is, we keep giving tax cuts to the rich, while forcing the middle class to shoulder the burden. That's ridiculous. Works out great for the millionaires, but not so well for the majority of the people.
Taxing income from labor and savings is not fair in my opinion. I suggest taxing consumption. A billionaire can show little or no income, but have a billionaire lifstyle. Taxing consumption addresses many problems. To me the real issue is not tax cuts but developing the most effecient way to tax.

Perhaps it is not you, but hearing about how the tax cuts are wrong over and over is making me delirious especially given what happens when excessive tax rates are lowered to more reasonable levels.

Quote:
If government spending is a drain on productivity, why does productivity go up in times of war, when the government is spending lots of money on arms?
Because government employs labor (soldiers) at little costs. Resource directed towrd the "war machine" negatively affects the quality of life. During WWII we had all kinds of shortages of goods and services. Quality of life does not improve during times when war consumes major portions of an economy. I could write a report on that and cite sources, but do I really need to?

Quote:
..but let's take your ideas to the logical conclusion - let's say the government stops spending money on anything but defense and running itself (power bill for congress, etc). No more spending for roads. We'll make 'em all toll roads (worked great for Chicago right? Those are just silky smooth roads right?) Let's cut government spending on the agriculture industry. For example, no more meat inspections. Of course, some people will die from contaminated meat, but at least we're saving money right?
We can look at markets that have developed without significant government involvment, what happens? The market finds a way to regulate itself. I am not an anarchist but there is a really, really long road between what we have today and a country where government is only involved in defense. Personally I beleive local and state government should do many of the things we expect from the federal government.


Quote:
Just a couple of examples of why government spending is necessary. Of course, whining that the government is too big is very popular for the "conservatives" (who then come in, cut social programs, and spend just as much, and more, on attacking innocent countries, therefore not saving a dime anyway). But they fail to point out what smaller government really means.
Here is what it means. You don't send money to Washington and then have them send some of it back. No Pork. Zero based budgets. Cost benefit analysis for programs anually. Sunset provisions. Part-time law makers. Accountability, I can have lunch with my local school board president. I can not meet with the head of education at the federal level, lobbiests can. If my school board does something stupid, they hear about it. If they do something stupid in Washington, they blame someone else. There is no accountability for most federal government programs. Does FEMA come to mind?

Quote:
And tax cuts are very popular, and irresponsible, ways for a politician to gain favor with the voters. Look how well it worked for Minnesota. Everyone got tax refund checks, then suddenly they were millions in the hole. Looks pretty stupid in hindsight doesn't it.
Government spending acounts for $1 out of every $5 in our economy. How big do you want government? Pork is a bigger problem than tax cuts, don't you agree?

Quote:
I agree that the government spends entirely too much, but that does not mean that the solution is to cut income. That's just senseless.
Government income is up after the tax cuts, not down. Check the CBO website.
__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on lunch."
"It is useless for the sheep to pass resolutions on vegetarianism while the wolf is of a different opinion."
"If you live among wolves you have to act like one."
"A lady screams at the mouse but smiles at the wolf. A gentleman is a wolf who sends flowers."

aceventura3 is offline  
 

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360