Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Madmartagen
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.
|
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? |
The people that make more than I do are paying taxes. A lot of taxes. A majority of the taxes. One thing I think we can both agree on is that the economy's health is not just soley a tax issue. I mentioned welfare and you mentioned medicare and social security. I do think that we have an obligation to help others that truely need it, but there are way too many people using and abusing the system at others tax expense. No I don't don't agree with health benefits(medicare/medicaide) for every numbnut who just won't pay health insurance premiums. I do agree that people who are disabled congenitally or by some bad turn of events deserve our support. I do not feel that I owe people who make poor choices in life anything. ( mothers who decide to become sexually active and have 5 kids by the age of 22, high school drop outs that deal drugs, the guy who was laid off from his job for coming to work drunk and used what little money he had to by alcohol and ciggerettes instead of paying for health insurance) the list goes on. It is not our responsibility to support all the baby boomers who can't take care of themselves. Social security is owed to the older folks because they have paid into it. The problem is that it is now so top heavy that it won't work. I do not expect to see a penny of my ss benefits when I retire. So yes , I am all for axing social security if an alternative can be found for the existing retirees. The responsibility lies on us know to plan for our own retirements and not have to rely on the government. That would make SS unneccessary. The whole burden of funding the federal government should not just fall on the hands of the wealthier people in this country. I would like a flat tax also as a fairness issue,but then we would lose massive funding for the goverment and talking about creating deficits.In closing, the issue is much more complex than either of us are saying but I do support tax cuts for the rich because they simple pay most of the taxes period.
I can't really speak specifically on how things differed under Clinton. I was in a totally differnt financial situation then. I do know one thing, when I got married I payed more taxes even though I now had another person to support. Now I get a tax credit for my child biggrin: