I was just thinking the other night about possible ways to change the way our tax system is set up. I'm not a master on the topic, so im not really aware of any of the problems that may arise with the situation.
Say you pay 10,000 a year in taxes.
What if the government sent you back a form saying
5,000 is for to the general crap
5,000 is for
A.XXX
B. XXX
C.XXX
D.XXX
Can choose more than one and how much you would like to go to each sector.
Is this a ridiculous idea?
2007-06-21 16:55:37 · 6 answers · asked by The Dude 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Other - Politics & Government
The issue here is popular does not always align to the proportion of money required - or even to the importance or urgency of the project. Budgetary control would become a nightmare.
Bunz how is a tax that will impact the rich less "fair" (and before you argue of course it will - the rich have the lowest propensity to spend - if you tax spending you tax those who spend the higher proportion at a higher rate).
Sales taxes are regressive in nature - if that weren't the case you would not need to spend so much effort trying to tell people it is fair.
Also why would it get rid of the IRS? The implementation of the GST in Australia created huge amounts of new beauracracy not to mention horrendous compliance costs for businesses.
2007-06-21 17:22:27 · answer #1 · answered by Sageandscholar 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Actually, that was a science fiction story about 20-odd years ago - can't recall who wrote it. But when you filed your taxes, you specified where you wanted different percentages to be spent. So it told about all these different people doing their taxes, then ending up with a percent here and there left over so on a whim, they each wrote in "peace on earth" -- and so many people did that and the gov't had to use the money that way that...tada!
2007-06-21 17:00:03 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'd rather just have them implement the 'Fair Tax'. Abolish federal income tax and have a federal sales tax. That way you are only taxed on what you consume not what you earn. You would basically be in control of how much you get taxed federally! Plus it would pretty much get rid of the IRS and us spending hundreds of dollars a year to get our taxes done!
2007-06-21 17:04:56 · answer #3 · answered by Bunz 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Not a bad idea but if they were to do that would be a waste of paper. All they would say is that it was used to pay interest to the federal reserve for printing money.The money printed or coined is just a loan. Which means that the more money you have, the more you own of the debt, therefor the more money you'll pay in taxes.
2007-06-21 17:04:22 · answer #4 · answered by Jose R 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes, sorry but it is a ridiculous idea,. Mostly because every wants good roads & welfare for the poor but no money & we would be waiting years for passports, & court dates.
We will have "trust" them to split it fairly.
We vote how to spend by who we elect - basically Republicans are into safety & strong economy & Democrats are into more welfare & social issues. Both support all to some degree but their main focus is Republican - national security & safety with a growing economy & Democrats - welfare, musuems, parks
2007-06-21 17:55:05 · answer #5 · answered by Wolfpacker 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No its not a ridiculous idea however budgets could end up far short to cover costs for one thing and a surplus in another.
Probably not practical but its a well intentioned idea.
2007-06-21 17:00:06 · answer #6 · answered by sociald 7 · 2⤊ 2⤋