Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Snuff
Some of what you saying has merit but, the rich still pay a vast majority of the taxes even even at a lower percentage. The non-rich still recieved tax cuts in proportion to their incomes. I by no means fall in the 2% that you cited but I still have a problem being penalized for going through 8 years of college to make a good living and paying enough taxes for 10 other people who didn't apply themselves. The %'s you quoted adds up. I pay in excess of 5k per month in taxes. Why should I pay 60k annually when some only pay 6k. I desreve a tax cut as much as that person. We already have enough avenues in this country to allow people to sit in their asses or not strive to be successful. Whether it be poor choices or a lack of responsobility. I'm sure that when FDR created welfare, that he had no intention of it being the parasite program that it is today. To be honest, I don't have as much of a problem paying more taxes to support defense, schools etc. but much of my tax dollar goes to pay for irresponsible people who leach off the system. That is why I feel the rich should get tax breaks also.
|
Everyone should get tax breaks, its just that under Reagan and the two Bush's admin, the 2%ers (just for names sake) get alot more breaks than they should so that it doesnt turn into a tax break, its just straight out more income for them. They arent even paying taxes. As for people leeching off welfare, the two largest pots of money in our country are for Social Security and Medicare. Are you going to cut these? These are almost necessities for the baby boomers who cant take care of themselves. Third is the Pentagon. No one seems willing to debate cutting the money for these three so the next to hit are domestic programs, which only make up 1/5 of the total budget. The problem isnt with these domestic programs, we need to completely re-evaluate the big 3 spenders.
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy ... st08z8.xls
But another aspect of this problem lies with spending. Even though each specific part of our system has a budget, some go over it, or some dont use all of it. Clinton got all kinds of flak for spending money on programs and is said to have created the defecit we have now because of his spending. If you look at the White House's own budget chart, you see that Bush is spending more than Clinton ever did, in fact he increased domestic spending by nearly 25%. If you have a defecit, you dont start spending MORE money. Clinton had a surplus, so he could afford the budget he had in his term.
The solution is simple, reverse what Bush is doing and go back to what worked in Clintons term. But it doesnt look like Bush will do that, so that is why its ironic when he says Republicans are for fiscal responsibility.
That sucks that you pay so much and I know it can be hard to see all that money disappear out of your check, but why should the people who make even more than you not have to pay anything because they get breaks on dividends, estates and the tax breaks given to them directly? I think it would be better for everyone to pay a flate rate percentage, but I dont know if any administration has ever done that before. How well were you doing under the Clinton admin? Is it better now or was it better then?