americans need to pay higher taxes

[Accountable]

Be realistic. Someone needs to be paying more money. And if you're expecting it to come from people who have no money to give, then that's completely insensible.

Take your own advice. The "cuts" (which are not cuts at all, but are microscopic snips in the increase of spending spread over an entire decade) will come from federal programs, not local, and they will be primarily in the form of not hiring replacements for people that quit or retire. Stop being melodramatic.

 

[anathelia]

And you think states aren't changing things?

Once upon a time, not all that long ago, I could apply and be approved for AHCCCS. Not anymore. My mom can only keep her insurance if she's proven to be "seriously mentally ill" despite the fact that she has diabetes and high blood pressure.

But no. You're right. Obviously they're not changing anything at the local level. I'm just being melodramatic.

 

[Accountable]

And you think states aren't changing things?

Once upon a time, not all that long ago, I could apply and be approved for AHCCCS. Not anymore. My mom can only keep her insurance if she's proven to be "seriously mentally ill" despite the fact that she has diabetes and high blood pressure.

But no. You're right. Obviously they're not changing anything at the local level. I'm just being melodramatic.

My mistake. The thread started out at the national level. I'd apparently missed when we broadened the discussion.

Just curious: what's AHCCCS?

 

[anathelia]

My mistake. The thread started out at the national level. I'd apparently missed when we broadened the discussion.

Just curious: what's AHCCCS?

Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment System. It's the state healthcare run by DES here.

And I was keeping things at a national level. But you can't deny that changing things in the Federal Government will change things at the state level as well.

 

[retro]

I would agree to paying a tax increase under two conditions...

1) The increase in tax percentage was used to pay down the principle of the national debt

2) Discretionary spending was pared down significantly. In all areas... and especially from defense, simply by getting ourselves out of Iraq, Afghanistan, and now Libya.

We need to cut spending, balance the budget, and pay down the national debt. Isn't that the same philosophy that the average American citizen is supposed to use? The President told us that we need to tighten our collective belts to get through this recession... yet all the government has done is spend more money. It's a ridiculous case of do as we say, not as we do. Unfortunately, increasing taxes isn't going to do anything as long as we don't require a balanced budget. For every dollar spent, there should be a correlating dollar in government revenue. It's simply common sense... to me anyway. Unfortunately, there's a huge contingent in Congress that didn't even understand what the debt ceiling was or why people didn't want to raise it without there being a correlating reduction in spending. These people are by and large, well off career politicians... they don't understand the real world, because they've been living in a political fantasyland for their entire adult lives in a lot of cases.

If we raise taxes on their own, even on one specific subset of the country... it won't fix the problems with a change in mentality by our elected officials. We can't spend money that we don't have.

 

[All Else Failed]

And how many of that 47% are unemployed? Probably close to half? Should unemployed Americans have to pay taxes? Where on Earth would they get the money?

No. Instead of raising taxes, we should definitely continue to cut government spending. Let's pare down all the government funded programs helping those who are unemployed. Let's continue to destroy DES so that people get turned down for unemployment or long term healthcare or even regular healthcare. Let's keep cutting spending so that we can turn mothers and children away from programs like WIC.

Be realistic. Someone needs to be paying more money. And if you're expecting it to come from people who have no money to give, then that's completely insensible.

You do realize that the top 5% pay the vast majority of the income tax because they make infinitely more money than the average American, right? I said in my previous post that I won't say you can't raise taxes for everyone. Go ahead, that's fine. But you can't make money appear out of thin air.

Please don't talk to me about fairness when our government is bent on punishing the poor and unemployed because it's "their fault" for not having a job.

Sorry but 47% of Americans aren't unemployed. In the great depression no more than 24% of Americans were unemployed at any one time.


Yes they have more money but I see it as unethical and discriminatory to ask such a small minority to fund everything and basically carry everyone on their backs.


and oh please, no one is punishing the poor.

 

[retro]

Sorry but 47% of Americans aren't unemployed. In the great depression no more than 24% of Americans were unemployed at any one time.


Yes they have more money but I see it as unethical and discriminatory to ask such a small minority to fund everything and basically carry everyone on their backs.


and oh please, no one is punishing the poor.

36% of the available workforce is currently unemployed... the discouraged worker totals (people that aren't on unemployment and aren't actively looking for jobs) have reached nearly 1.2 million now. 6.5 million people have been unemployed for over 27 weeks, and the average length of long-term unemployment has reached 40 weeks. 5.1 million people are underemployed, and their relatively low income results in them not paying taxes after you factor in credits, etc.

http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.a.htm

I'm also not necessarily a proponent of raising the tax rate on one specific subset of people... but nobody has actually stated that unequivocally either. Ana mentioned the top 5%, but said that she would support raising taxes on everyone, but you apparently ignored that because it was convenient for you. Nobody is saying that the "rich" should fund everything and/or carry everyone on their backs. That was your own editorializing, and completely disingenuous on your part to try and claim that's what anyone said.

 

[Panacea]

Sorry but 47% of Americans aren't unemployed. In the great depression no more than 24% of Americans were unemployed at any one time.

Not to speak for her, but from what I read she asked specifically how much of the 47% who don't pay income tax are unemployed, I don't think she was claiming the 47% of people who don't pay income tax are unemployed.

 

[Mystic]

The current system is designed to force the U.S. government into an ever-increasing amount of debt with no escape. They could solve the problem by shutting down the Federal Reserve and restoring the power to issue U.S. currency to the U.S. Congress. (for the yanks not educated on their current banking system I'll educate you by telling you that the Queen of England has a VERY large ownership of the banks that currently make up your Federal Reserve)



They need to change the current system which is not working or quit complaining about the U.S. national debt because it has only been paid off twice in the US's lifetime and is currently impossible to pay off because there is more debt than actual real money.


Also, the US government could use its assets to help pay off the debt.


BUt on a personal level, each and every US person NEEDs to stop using their credit cards and start using cash only. ANd you need to spend not save. You need to buy into your country and not buy into other countries when you do buy. So buy USA made products ONLY.


Taxes do shit all...they just decrease spending and jobs and therefore increase the problem in most areas.


Plus, what other people, who have never ever stepped foot on the America's don't understand is, our continent is HUGE!!!! and our energy consumption can not be compared to tiny little countries like the United Kingdom. For example, in my province, Ontario, I could fit England in 8 times. Thats right Eight. So please take that into consideration when speaking about the USA and Canada's consumptions of gas and oil. You can however argue our automobiles are less efficient than European and therefor would be right.

 

[anathelia]

Sorry but 47% of Americans aren't unemployed. In the great depression no more than 24% of Americans were unemployed at any one time.


Yes they have more money but I see it as unethical and discriminatory to ask such a small minority to fund everything and basically carry everyone on their backs.


and oh please, no one is punishing the poor.

Okay. I'll write it this way since you seem to ignore 98% of my post.

EVERYONE CAN PAY MORE TAXES. NOT JUST THE RICH.

Clear enough for you?

And read again, AEF. I also didn't say all the 47% were unemployed. I asked you how many of that percentage was unemployed? And not the 9.2% the government is claiming. The ACTUAL number of unemployed/underemployed people.

 

[Accountable]

Arizona Healthcare Cost Containment System. It's the state healthcare run by DES here.

And I was keeping things at a national level. But you can't deny that changing things in the Federal Government will change things at the state level as well.

It will affect state and local levels only because the federal system routinely overreaches into areas prohibited by the Constitution. Any short term pain of extracting the federal cancer would be well worth the long-term benefit.

 

[skyblue]

take income tax for instance,if america has a workforce of,and just to give it a number 100'000'000.....they each pay a mere $5 extra out of their wage packet,thats an awful lot of money generated each week

and to elaborate on what elsa said about buying american,i'd expand it to paying a little extra and buying from the north american continant and europe,cheap products made in sweatshops in asia are crippling westrern industries

 

[Zorak]

and to elaborate on what elsa said about buying american,i'd expand it to paying a little extra and buying from the north american continant and europe,cheap products made in sweatshops in asia are crippling westrern industries

You can't blame Asia for that. It's nobody else's fault but our own. Germany still manages to export more than it imports.

 

[Panacea]

take income tax for instance,if america has a workforce of,and just to give it a number 100'000'000.....they each pay a mere $5 extra out of their wage packet,thats an awful lot of money generated each week

and to elaborate on what elsa said about buying american,i'd expand it to paying a little extra and buying from the north american continant and europe,cheap products made in sweatshops in asia are crippling westrern industries

The extra $5 from each person is akin to spooning out buckets of water in a boat with a hole in it without plugging the hole. Sure, there are lots of ways to get the water out, but how does one stop the water from coming IN?

I personally do not like to see it come at the expense of health, education, and the poor, but they're always the first boat holes the politicians want plugged.

 

[retro]

take income tax for instance,if america has a workforce of,and just to give it a number 100'000'000.....they each pay a mere $5 extra out of their wage packet,thats an awful lot of money generated each week

Good God dude... just stop already before you make an even bigger fool out of yourself. $26 billion/yr isn't anything in the grand scheme of things. We're talking about a national debt of $14.5 trillion. $26 billion is 0.18% of that $14.5 trillion number. We're also running an estimated budget deficit (which is where the extra tax revenue would actually come into play) of $1.2 trillion, of which that $26 billion would be 2.17%. That's akin to trying to bale the water out of a sinking aircraft carrier, using only a thimble.

Honestly, just do a little bit of research before you post anything... you'll come across as far less of an idiot that you're appearing right now. I'd honestly just recommend not saying anything at this point, unless you want to continue looking like a fool.

More taxes aren't the answer... we can't tax our way out of the mess. It has to come from decreased spending, a balanced budget, and a commitment to paying down the principle of the national debt. Simple fucking economics here people.

 

[retro]

Good God dude... just stop already before you make an even bigger fool out of yourself. $26 billion/yr isn't anything in the grand scheme of things. We're talking about a national debt of $14.5 trillion. $26 billion is 0.18% of that $14.5 trillion number. We're also running an estimated budget deficit (which is where the extra tax revenue would actually come into play) of $1.2 trillion, of which that $26 billion would be 2.17%. That's akin to trying to bale the water out of a sinking aircraft carrier, using only a thimble.

Honestly, just do a little bit of research before you post anything... you'll come across as far less of an idiot that you're appearing right now. I'd honestly just recommend not saying anything at this point, unless you want to continue looking like a fool.

More taxes aren't the answer... we can't tax our way out of the mess. It has to come from decreased spending, a balanced budget, and a commitment to paying down the principle of the national debt. Simple fucking economics here people.

Oh, here are the actual numbers. The workforce in the United States minus those unemployed (but including underemployed) is 138.9 million. So, by Sky's suggestion...

An extra $5 from everyone's paycheck would be an extra $36.4 (rounded) billion.

$37.4 billion is 3% of the budget deficit of $1.2 trillion
$37.4 billion is 0.25% of the national debt of $14.5 trillion

Sky... I'd recommend that you stick to taking pictures. Or make this your avatar...

 

[All Else Failed]

Okay. I'll write it this way since you seem to ignore 98% of my post.

EVERYONE CAN PAY MORE TAXES. NOT JUST THE RICH.

Clear enough for you?

And read again, AEF. I also didn't say all the 47% were unemployed. I asked you how many of that percentage was unemployed? And not the 9.2% the government is claiming. The ACTUAL number of unemployed/underemployed people.

Okay so lets tax the 47% who don't pay taxes when we get out of this and when they get jobs instead of throwing all of the responsibility on people with money


and sorry I'm just not convinced that even half of that number is totally unemployed. People who are underpaid don't count.



Still, the fact remains: anyone who makes 100k + and up has the total burden of funding almost everything. The poor can thank the people with money.

 

[All Else Failed]

Actually, you know what, fuck this. The income tax shouldn't even exist.


Flat tax.

 

[retro]

Okay so lets tax the 47% who don't pay taxes when we get out of this and when they get jobs instead of throwing all of the responsibility on people with money

Now you're just being completely obtuse. I don't even know how else to respond to that absolutely idiotic comment.

 

[retro]

Actually, you know what, fuck this. The income tax shouldn't even exist.


Flat tax.

:24:

So this is what happens when you get completely owned... you try to change the premise of your argument. I'm impressed. :thumbup

You do realize that a flat tax would still be an income tax though, right? It's a flat percentage taken from everyone's earnings. All it really does is eliminate the progressive tax structure that is in place right now, and replaces it with a single tax bracket. I'm not disagreeing that we need serious tax reform in this country, but you seem to be completely clueless about what those reforms actually mean.