Would you agree to pay a little more in taxes if you could choose?

Question

I for one would be happy to pay a little more if I could designate where it was spent. I think there is so much money wasted on absolute drivel at the expense of our country's future. If we don't start addressing social injustice like poverty, malnourishment, poor education, healthcare, elder care we won't have a very bright future....the leaders of today are here and suffering to the point that they can't even participate in political discussion and change. I know there would be deficits in certain areas that no citizen cared about but let us go in debt over that stuff instead of Social Security, Medicaid, Food Stamps, WIC, police, education. Wouldn't this further allow our population to have in-put on what our government focuses on. Also it would cut some of the complaining and feeling of helplessness. Wouldn't this act as a preventative measure to crime, drugs, medical issues, etc. which typically result from poverty, unhappiness, bad eating habits, and lack of education?

I am not advocating paying more on top of taxes, but think this change might cause tax tables to go up a percent or so. I am talking about choosing where our income tax goes. I appreciate your comments about weapons costing more -- I know this and I wouldn't give to that at all, or space exploration, or the bridge to no where, or other obscure things that don't help us preserve what we have and improve it.

I have worked in social services and it is a falsehood that poverty is cause by laziness and welfare encourages it. People who use those services, for the most part, are ashamed and think of it as a temporary "must" in their lives. Typically poverty is created by circumstances. Think of all of the single mothers with children whose husbands are going to be / have been killed in war. What skills do they have? Also, the disabled have legitimate needs. I favor Republican politics (in theory) and do not favor socialism. I think those who can should -- it's just so hard for those who truly can't.

Sorry to hear about Oregon -- perhaps if there were some way to publish results so people wouldn't be giving blindly -- like a wedding shower where all you receive is towels because "everyone needs towels."

Answer 1

Excellent Question.

I am assuming that you are meaning that you would pay more tax on top of the government taxes already I'm place .

I was thinking there is always a question on my tax return about donating $ to the presidential campaign or even something about duck rescue or some thing like that.. I cant remember , but I NEVER agree to give money to the presidential campaigns! I think they should give us other choices, such as to the Deficit , or to homeless shelters, or feeding programs for children or something worth giving money to.. I would give money from my tax return to a worthy cause for sure!
if everyone gave $5 out of their returns to put toward the deficit or to worth causes this would surely make some difference every year.. just think of the money we all spend senselessly, think of all the people who stop at dunkin donuts and spend a dollar or two just on coffee to go every day before work! what if we took the money from just one weeks worth of coffee to go and put it toward a worth cause.. we could all make a difference!

Answer 2

We already spend about $1 Trillion in federal money on transfer payments and the bureaucrats that run the programs. And that doesn't include funds from the states. How much more does it take? Assuming that there are 20,000,000 truly poor people in the US, that's $50,000 per poor person, or $200,000 per family of four.

Some of the programs go back as far as FDR's admin. That's 70 years of dismal failure. When will you learn that most poverty is caused by lack of effort by the poor. Throwing more money at it won't solve it. It just makes it easier to be non-productive.

All four of my grandparents came to the US in the 1890's. All they had in this world was the clothes on their backs. Two of my uncles had to drop out of school to work in the 1930's.

I have 6 first cousins. 1 Dentist. 1 Psychiatrist. 2 Teachers and 1 Audiologist (6th cousin is a bit of a hippie and is just getting by). I have a BA in math and an MBA. I was a teacher and I worked with computers. I retired before my 53rd birthday because I had enough money to last me for the rest of my life. I never earned more than $55,000 per year.

I'm generous, donating both time and money to many humanitarian organizations. But I can't stand whiners who think that the world owes them a living just because they are here.

I'd leave all 'charity' in the hands of NGOs like the Salvation Army and Habitat for Humanity.

The only difference between the extortion of gangsters and welfare programs is that gangsters use baseball bats and fire bombs, and welfare recipients use votes and politicians.

Answer 3

But, you will never be able to choose how it is spent. Once money leaves your hand it is not yours anymore (government thinking). If you want, spend the money you would on doing what you can for the issues you stated.
In Multnomah county Oregon, they implemented a retroactive 3 year tax that was supposedly going to be used for schools (60%) and other social issues (other 40%). After the first year 6 more schools were closed, 2nd year - 3 more schools and the school year shortened. 3rd year - shortened school day and year.
Many social organizations had to turn away people because they had no means to help them.
But, the police department was able to purchase enough tazers so every officer had one since the tax was implemented.
Plus, I have worked for quite a few 501c3 non-profit org's and many of them are run by unscrupulous people.
Again, try to do something yourself, don't rely on Govt. or Org's to do it.
We pay 82% more taxes in Oregon than any other state.

Answer 4

i do no longer think of the priority is not any be counted if the taxes are paid by ability of the wealthy. fairly, the priority is the incentives that the taxes create, in accordance with what (no longer who) is being taxed. by ability of adjusting the tax gadget to create the suited incentives, you're able to no longer only have all people pay a fairer share of the taxes, yet concurrently develop up the real earnings of the decrease training even after taxes have been accounted for. the only genuine reason this has no longer been carried out yet is that the present gadget is greater advantageous for permitting corrupt, grasping people to siphon off financial lease into their very own wallet on the cost of all people else. and that's no longer a stable reason.

Answer 5

I personally would gladly pay a little more in taxes like the 90s to have all those high-tech, high paying jobs back. I have friends in the engineering field that are now working in call-centers being treated like slaves.

Btw, entitlements don't even make up 1% of the cost of the war and subsidies to large corporations such as weapons companies. That is a propaganda myth in order to force the poor to work in low paying jobs thereby benefiting corporations... .just so you know.

Answer 6

I would like to see the current income tax system
replaced with a National Sales Tax.
Everyone who buys, pays.

Answer 7

If you want to do this, just donate to your favorite charities and take the donations off your tax bill. If you really want to pay a little more in taxes, just don't claim the donation. The IRS won't mind.

Answer 8

Our money isn't worth anything anyway. The banks are in control anyway. If you don't think so...key word 'Joe Banister interview' and watch it.
It's also on youtube.com.
It's an interview from a former IRS agent-turned wistleblower. Watch it if you dare...it's an eye-opener....really.....

Answer 9

Hello socialism!

Answer 10

hell no the damnocrats social programs (food stamps, welfare, etc...) are killing my check as it is.