English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

I mean shouldn't we raise taxes at least some to partially pay for it instead of borrowing it all.

2007-10-27 13:16:41 · 19 answers · asked by ? 6 in Politics & Government Politics

19 answers

Bush wants to leave a massive debt for the incoming Democrats to struggle with. Then after they raise taxes to pay for Bush's ridiculous spending and get the economy under control, Republicans will attack them as the "party that raises your taxes." Duh-uhh...

2007-10-27 13:46:26 · answer #1 · answered by Who Else? 7 · 3 2

Politicians would never do it because nobody has the courage to call for a tax hike. Even Democrats, the supposed tax and spend party, have dodged the issue because raising taxes is politically unpopular.

But right now, borrowing is all we do and it will come back to haunt us in the future.

In truth, borrowing money is a tax hike; a tax hike for future generations that is.

2007-10-27 20:21:39 · answer #2 · answered by yo yo yo 3 · 3 0

I think we should put it in the budget and make cuts in places where we can make cuts, like Department of Defense has a budget of 500 billion and a lot of that is going to stuff thats like Nuclear Missiles, and I just don't think the United States needs anymore.

I also think Department of Vetran Affairs just gave senior managers a 2 billion dollar bonus, now this is money that didn't go to help any Vetrans unless they were managers of the VA and quite frankly, thats just money on top of an already high enough government salary.

I propose an end to the welfare state, no more government cheese, etc.

I think raiseing taxes on the highest income level might raise some revenue obviously but we'd have to really sit and figure it out, is it people over 200,000? 500,000? and what %, 1 % 5 %?

My wife and I heard about Hillary wanting to raise taxes and we think we might in the next 8 years be affected by Hillary raiseing taxes.

I don't know. Borrowing money really isn't that bad, I think its dangerous "Who" we are borrowing it from thou, China and japan and rich middle eastern men.

2007-10-27 20:22:54 · answer #3 · answered by Spartacus 3 · 2 2

There's no way we can pay for this war. Taxes will have to be raised. The cons keep griping about the Dems wanting to raise taxes but it's the cons who are spending $$ in Iraq, like it's going out of style.
Doesn't "borrow" imply we'll be paying it back? Howz that gonna happen?

2007-10-27 20:21:09 · answer #4 · answered by katydid 7 · 4 1

We must not let our rulers load us with perpetual debt. We must make our election between economy and liberty or profusion and servitude. If we run into such debt, as we must be taxed in our meat and in our drink, in our necessaries and our comforts, in our labors and our amusements, for our calling and our creeds… we will have no time to think, no means of calling our miss-managers to account, but we will be glad to obtain subsistence by hiring ourselves to rivet their chains on the necks of our fellow suffers… And this is the tendency of all human governments. A departure from principle in one instance becomes a precedent foe another… till the bulk of society is reduced to be mere automatons of misery… And the fore-horse of this frightful team is public debt. Taxation follows that, and in it’s train wretchedness and oppression.
Thomas Jefferson 1743-1826

To compel a man to subsidize with his taxes the propagation of ideas which he disbelieves and abhors is sinful and tyrannical.
Thomas Jefferson 1743 - 1826


There is no distinctly native American criminal class save Congress.
Mark Twain

Reader, suppose you were an idiot. And suppose you were a member of Congress. But I repeat myself.
Mark Twain

No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the congress is in session.
Mark Twain

Congressman is the trivialist distinction for a full grown man.
Mark Twain

Fleas can be taught nearly anything that a Congressman can.
Mark Twain

CAPITAL, n. The seat of misgovernment. That which provides the fire, the pot, the dinner, the table and the knife and fork for the anarchist; the part of the repast that himself supplies is the disgrace before meat.
Ambrose Bierce (1842-1914)

Government is not reason, it is not eloquence. It is force, and like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. Never for a moment should it be left to irresponsible action.
George Washington

“In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way.”
Franklin D. Roosevelt

“It is to be regretted that the rich and powerful too often bend the acts of government to their selfish purposes.”
Andrew Jackson

The government consists of a gang of men exactly like you and me. They have, taking one with another, no special talent for the business of government; they have only a talent for getting and holding office.
Henry Louis Mencken (1880- 1956)

When a new source of taxation is found it never means, in practice, that an old source is abandoned. It merely means that the politicians have two ways of milking the taxpayer where they had only one before.
H L Mencken


The state remains, as it was in the beginning, the common enemy of all well-disposed, industrious and decent men.
H L Mencken

Government is actually the worst failure of civilized man. There has never been a really good one, and even those that are most tolerable are arbitrary, cruel, grasping and unintelligent.
H L Mencken

The only good bureaucrat is one with a pistol at his head. Put it in his hand and it's good-bye to the Bill of Rights.
H L Mencken

Denial ain't just a river in Egypt.
Mark (Samuel Longhorne Clemens) Twain 1835-1910

2007-10-27 22:14:08 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

I see in some of the answers that cutting taxes increases revenue. That was done but still we have to borrow from foreign countries to fund the wars. In other words, we can't pay for the wars.

A week or so ago, a couple of congressmen proposed a 2% surtax to pay for the war. This is how the Vietnam conflict was funded. We had no war debt. Their proposal was met with bitter opposition from other congressmen. Our government is pathetic and irresponsible.

2007-10-27 20:40:24 · answer #6 · answered by BekindtoAnimals22 7 · 2 1

OK I have a better idea.
We have all these people claiming we are taking oil from Iraq and they obviously like doing things like they did 1000 years ago so lets start taking a percentage of the oil they are shipping out.
I'm not saying forever just until we break even.
Don't go screaming Imperialism I'm not saying run their country or even making a profit, just cost.

2007-10-27 20:47:11 · answer #7 · answered by CFB 5 · 0 0

Because the cons would scream holy murder & Bush wouldn't be able to continue his game. As long as they don't have to pay taxes, they don't mind the war. Bush only has another year to go, then the dems can be blamed for the high taxes....as usual.

2007-10-28 10:11:29 · answer #8 · answered by mstrywmn 7 · 0 0

The cost of the war/occupation of Iraq is expected to be at least 1 *trillion* dollars before we can pull out... even if we started packing up today. This is literally an unthinkably large number, but if we are going to borrow it and spend it it will need thinking about.

1,000,000,000,000 divided by 151,400,000 people to pay it gives you an additional tax burden per earner of $6,605, or $13,210 *more* tax payment per family.

the CIA factbook estimates our population at 301,139,947 (July 2007 est.) Our workforce is 151.4 million. That workforce already pays over half of their earnings in one form of tax or another. Although the median income is about $45,000, but 25% of all households earn less than $25,000...

That 25% of the workforce would have to pay *every penny they earn* leaving nothing at all for food or housing, to pay their tax share for this war....

The median household income is about $45,000/household (depending on who you listen to) and of that $25,000 is already paid in some form of tax. The people earning less than they do are not making their fair share of the war burden, so guess who gets hit up next?

The people who make over $80,000 pay a smaller percentage of taxes, and always do, because they are the people who decide who pays taxes. They support cadidates with their donations and they are the people mostly working out the nuts and bolts of the white collar world. Things that bug them enough just do not happen.

The upshot is that if people earning under that amount are expected to pay the whole cost of the war, now, in tax-cash, then they will not be able to make that payment and we cannot ask those who do not generally pay over 50% of their income in tax to begin paying 75%...

They will not stand for it.

2007-10-27 20:49:43 · answer #9 · answered by Gina C 6 · 0 1

I am totally against raising taxes, especially income tax, which is a fraudulent tax to start with. I am also against borrowing , but I am also against paying for an occupation that should never have existed in the first place. *sm*

2007-10-27 20:36:50 · answer #10 · answered by LadyZania 7 · 1 2

fedest.com, questions and answers