I have seen many liberals on Yahoo answers say that they are for higher taxes, universal healthcare, etc.... Without raising taxes, these programs are just dreams.
How many of you liberals are aware that your taxes are scheduled to go up by 156% in 2011? Can you afford this on your current salary / hourly wage? How much are you willing to pay in sales taxes, income taxes, etc. before it becomes a problem for you and your family?
The US Treasury has estimated that in 2011, a person making:
$50,000 annual income today ($55,100 in 2011) would see a $2,145 INCREASE (from $1,383 to $3,527) or 155 percent higher tax bill. .
• $60,000 annual income today ($66,200 in 2011) would see a $1,863 INCREASE (from $3,030 to $4,893) or 61 percent high tax bill.
Can you afford this?
Please don't give me any FAIR tax or revised budget numbers. Just answer this question. Your silence says a lot to me.
http://www.treas.gov/offices/tax-policy/library/2011-TaxRelief_2007.pdf
2007-06-05
08:57:46
·
20 answers
·
asked by
Anonymous
in
Politics & Government
➔ Politics
Do liberals have enough guts to answer this question honestly?
2007-06-05
09:04:18 ·
update #1
Funny how its Bush's fault. The last time I looked, the President of the USA cannot raise taxes or authorize spending. He "suggests" the budget or requests money to be spend.
Both democrats and republicans are responsible for spending. Nancy Pelosi and crew just authorized $17 Billion in PORK spending in the last military budget. We don't have a revenue problem. Both sides have a spending problem.
2007-06-05
09:13:36 ·
update #2
Why can't anyone answer this simple question? Can you afford this tax increase? Yes or no.
2007-06-05
09:15:42 ·
update #3
No, I cannot afford it. Unfortunately, unless the government stops hemorrhaging cash, that is only the tip of the iceberg.
The government needs to start looking at what we are getting for our money. As of 09/30/2006, we were $8,506,973,899,215.23 in the hole, $2.75 trillion of that directly attributable to this administration and a "conservative" Republican Congress.
So we have "tax-and-spend" Democrats and "cut-taxes-and-spend-more" Republicans. We need a better choice.
But, to answer the question, yes, I fully expect my taxes to go up. Someone needs to pay off the enormous debt our leadership has built up. Don't like it? Too bad.
2007-06-05 09:35:02
·
answer #1
·
answered by john_stolworthy 6
·
1⤊
0⤋
So you propose that we just keep the same tax cuts, don't raise them a bit and we should all just be fine as our deficit grows and grows with no relief in site? Explain to me why after Reagan did his tax cuts did Bush Sr. have no choice but to raise taxes? Was it because he is liberal and hates americans as you all like to put it? Or was it he had no choice because the country ran out of money and was starting to have to borrow which we didn't want to do? Funny after Clinton left and Bush's tax cuts, we have had no choice but to borrow the extra money needed from other countries in record amounts that most likely will not be able to be paid back. So I ask you how much do you want your dollar to be worth in the world market? Because we keep up this way, your 100k salary you make now which is about 50k in Europe will be worth about 20k in the next 5-10 years. That should make everything in the US even cheaper huh? Wake up learn math and realize that we are going to have to get screwed over at some point or we will all be speaking Chinese or some other crap language.
There I answered your silly question.
2007-06-05 09:24:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by bs b 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
You are assuming that wages won't keep pace. You are also assuming that some of us will still be paying taxes. I will be retired and probably will pay very little if any tax.
Why is it that the only issue the GOP seems to threaten people with in talking about their opponents is taxes. If you want good roads, fire protection etc. you have to pay for it some how. Do you think a firefigheter is going to work for nothing or put his life on the line for minimum wage, which if the GOP had their way would barely be a dollar an hour? There is more to it than the simple minded way it is put out by the GOP and the worse part is people are gullible enough to believe it until we get in dire financial trouble and then they are for raising taxes.
2007-06-05 09:05:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
No one can afford these kinds of taxes. They call it extortion when you do it. I have nothing good to say about the government. The peoples must have as much saw dust in their heads as the president does. And no one seems to think anything is wrong! I am beginning to believe the goverment is putting a mind altering drug in the city water, so that no one knows any better. The war is costing us billions, which the bill should be sent to Bush. He was the one who wanted war! It is a replay of the Viet Nam war!
He went after the wrong one, he should have been after Osama been whatever!
2007-06-05 09:14:06
·
answer #4
·
answered by cprucka 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
Considering the fact that you can't even do basic math, are we supposed to take this seriously?
In addition, there is no such massive increase in taxees "scheduled"--only the expiration of some of GWB's giveaway tax breaks for the rich.
And you misss the point--liverals (and most REAL conservatives) aren't advocating tax increases because of health care or other programs--it's because someone--sooner or later--has to pay for the neoconservaative raping of the US Treasury.
As for reforming health care--yes--that's going to cost some money. But most of the money can come from reducing costs by stopping the ripoffs (the inflated medicare charges, the subsidies to drug companies, etc.) that the neoconservatives have handed to the health care industry.
Either way--the liberals (and real conservatives) are willling to pay for what we get--instead of running up the national debt and leaving the bill for our kids, the way the neocons do.
2007-06-05 09:10:04
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
You have to pay back the system eventually....If the deficit and other economically significant figures (as opposed to the NYSE) don't improve soon, the value of the US dollar will be that of the shitlogs that you leave in your toilet.
You can't demonize taxes so broadly. Bush has tanked the economy by blowing any and all money on an empty war. Taxes will be needed to even begin to repair the economic damage.
2007-06-05 09:04:12
·
answer #6
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
2⤋
I have had many "liberal" answers voted down and reported. I have had many conservatives block me merely for providing an argument against them. It happens on both sides. The pretense that it doesn't just makes you look silly.
2016-05-17 12:02:44
·
answer #7
·
answered by isabella 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Truth seeker, that is exactly how they will try to sell it. That this war has cost us so much, there is no way around having to raise the taxes. Don't be fooled. The US Government is the largest business in this country. Are you telling me they can't do what Exxon can. If you say yes, wouldn't you then rather have Exxon run our healthcare system rather than the government. You can't have it both ways unless you are a lib.
2007-06-05 09:12:07
·
answer #8
·
answered by mbush40 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
Wow...a Bush administration department throws out scary numbers to support making his tax "relief" permanent. What a shock. I'm sure their numbers are correct. This administration has no record of presenting faulty data to the people in order to further their agenda.
Secondly, why do you prohibit discussion of changes to the tax code or the budget? That seems to limit the discussion to "I'm right, and you have to agree with me." Of course taxes can be changed, and the budget can be fixed. If we cut government waste, we can lower taxes and provide necessary services. If we make people pay their fair share, rather than putting a disproportionate burden on the middle class, we can do a lot.
I the future, try to ask questions fairly, without trying to prevent legitimate answers that you don't want to hear.
2007-06-05 09:06:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
6⤊
4⤋
Have you read your own source material? It assumes that there will be no further legislation on a variety of things. If we stop supporting the occupation of Iraq and giving away billions to Bush's cronies the economy will improve and there will be plenty of money to go around.
2007-06-05 09:05:38
·
answer #10
·
answered by jj raider 4
·
4⤊
3⤋