Why not have a general tax and all the politicians pull money from that? That would make more sense. Then, you wouldn't have to worry about just the rich, elite running for office. Apply a 1 mil flat tax to all federal taxable wages?
2007-01-25 06:16:59 · 7 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Elections
Yes we are asking for trouble. The idea of the general tax is already in use sort of with the denotation block on income tax forms but that like many taxes is mishandled. I think all candidates should be allowed the same amount of funding and that it should be paid by taxes or some other form of government funding. I don't think that a person should be able to use their own money as it gives the upper hand to the wealthy. Contributions should not be allowed from special interest as they insure that the parties with the most representation by politicians gets the money (they by unfair business support). If it was handled this way a small Podunk farmer with good policies would stand a better chance to win than a career politician who has been corrupted by his office and special interest.
2007-01-25 06:32:09 · answer #1 · answered by joevette 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Public funded elections are the key to a government that represents the people first before the corporations. The problem is we can`t afford it right now. But what you can do now is start at the local level and put into law that only corporations that have home offices and main place of business in your town can fund candidates. The flat tax is part of the reason Iraqis are mad, they never had a flat tax. The problem with the flat tax is that the rich use more municipalities then the poor (under 17k yr. is poverty now) courts, roads, land, trash, water, gas, fire , police, etc.
2007-01-25 06:31:28 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
They do have, that 1.00 check mark box on your Federal Tax form 1040.. I never have done it I figure they are all richer than I am plus they always have big dinners and so how could my $1.00 help. I can use that dollar towards a loaf of bread!
>>>You must be a Dem only they would come up with more reasons for taxes when we are all taxed out as it is!!!<<<<
2007-01-25 06:21:35 · answer #3 · answered by Tapestry6 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Why should someone that nobody supports get as much from the peoples' pockets as somebody with large support?
Actually, what would be better is to eliminate the limits on the size of donations, but have all donations be listed on the net so everybody knows.
I actually think we'd be better served if our politicians weren't spending so much time chasing $2K donations.
IMO, limiting campaign donations is and abridgement of my 1st Amendment rights.
2007-01-25 06:29:28 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Chicken$hit idea there. You want your taxes going to a campaign fund to support someone that you don't want in office? Sound kind of like Socialism, not a Capitalistic fueled Democracy.
Survival of the Fit-ez babe!
2007-01-25 06:22:05 · answer #5 · answered by DJFresh 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I agree!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Too much corruption & favors with donations. Not to mention like you said only the rich can run for president, it's awfull!!!!!
2007-01-25 06:32:11 · answer #6 · answered by Keetah 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I couldn't agree more....well said.
2007-01-25 06:20:21 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋