The USA speaks on raising taxes

Thedrewbert

Superior Member
Joined
Aug 16, 2005
Posts
850
Media
29
Likes
4,042
Points
398
Age
45
Location
Pittsburgh
Sexuality
99% Gay, 1% Straight
Gender
Male
People won't hire Americans to do the jobs the Mexicans do. Americans cost too much.

As for Springfield. You're telling me that we can't build a decent public transit system in Springfield because it was built in a grid about 75 years ago, yet London can have one of the best public transportation systems in the world and it is over a thousand years old? Sorry, that doesn't jive.

I am growing more and more frustrated with the U.S. because we've gone from the country of "Can" to the country of "Oh I can't do that, it'd be too hard and I have to harvest my Farmville".
 

EllieP

Worshipped Member
Gold
Joined
Sep 21, 2009
Posts
9,923
Media
4
Likes
22,057
Points
318
Location
USA
Sexuality
100% Straight, 0% Gay
Gender
Female
First of all, everybody does pay taxes. It's just that everybody doesn't pay income tax. And if you think any business or corporation pays tax think again. Where do they get the money to pay that "tax." So the middle class is automatically taxed twice.

The problem is living within a budget. It's a huge farce that the only government in the U.S. that does not have a balanced budget law is the Federal government itself. It is virtually illegal for any other governmental body to operate without a balanced budget.

First off, make every government worker pay Social Security. Every single one from municipal to state to federal. That would help the coffers a lot.

Secondly, strip the bureaucracy. How many layers do you need to run a government? It's other much, much more or a whole lot less, because, let's face it, it's not doing a good job right now. So start off with less. Fewer hands in the till might help move things along.

No residencies in Washington DC for any elected official. Make them live in dorms, private rooms OK. Once elected they are no longer constituents of their district but make their home in D.C. They even more their family there. If their family stayed back home maybe they'd hurry up and get some work done. Also, with a real vested interest back home they may be a little more attentive to matter back there.

Finally, and this is a virtual impossibility with political machines, but make them truly accountable to all of their constituents. When my candidate doesn't win I feel like I'm not represented, and guess what, I'm not! An elected official should understand that he/she must represented their entire area and not just the folks that voted for them. Unless you get 90% of the vote you don't have a mandate. Even then you still have 10% of your constituency who will be without a voice, and leaving them without representation would not be "what Jesus would do." Had to throw that in there because although most of them tout that phrase very few of them actually realize what that means.

None of this will ever come true in my lifetime, and I'm not OK with that. But none of these people in power have any grasp on real life.
 

itsthepopei

Legendary Member
Joined
Jul 22, 2010
Posts
486
Media
9
Likes
1,201
Points
273
Location
Atlanta
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
We can raise revenue by getting people back to work, by using the forever on food stamps population here to do the jobs mexicans come here to do. We can start making things in this country again.

We have a lot of ways to raise revenue.

Combine that with some spending cuts and getting O out of office and we can get this country going again.

And, a little isolationism wouldn't hurt either.

you have to work at least 20 hrs a week or be so mobility compromised as to not be hireable to get food stamps

the 50% you referenced earlier are predominantly the working poor if you add up all there assets its about 5% of the yearly income of the top 2% so to measurably effect the amount taken in by the fed just on that population you would have to raise taxes to 50 or 60%(liquidating there assets at the same time.

the tea is full of shit
 
D

deleted213967

Guest
First of all, everybody does pay taxes. It's just that everybody doesn't pay income tax.

Well, that's the point. So-called payroll taxes (FICA, Medicare,...) are not supposed to fund the US government, they're supposed to fund "entitlements".

...and for a full half of the population not to contribute a penny to support Uncle Sam and still receive government services is screamingly absurd.


And if you think any business or corporation pays tax think again. Where do they get the money to pay that "tax." So the middle class is automatically taxed twice.

I am not positive what you mean by "taxed twice".

...and if US corporations paid no corporate income taxes, where did the $191 billion the US Treasury received come from?

Joint Statement of Timothy Geithner, Secretary of the Treasury, and Jeffrey Zients, Acting Director of the Office of Management and Budget, on Budget Results for Fiscal Year 2010


Who do you think pays the other half of your FICA contributions, so your grandmas and grandpas (hopefully in good health) can retire more comfortably?

Who pays for the unemployment benefits? The US taxpayers (half the population) are only paying for the multiple extensions of benefits.

First off, make every government worker pay Social Security. Every single one from municipal to state to federal. That would help the coffers a lot.

That's because many are not eligible for Social Security benefits, because they are enrolled into a governmental pension plan.
 

w1952tq

Just Browsing
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Posts
36
Media
0
Likes
0
Points
41
Location
in a box of beans
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
what the fuck they want to give tax breaks to the fucking companies that send jobs to china yet the small businesses that do everything here in the states gotta pay more taxes then those fucks.
 

travis1985

Expert Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Jun 22, 2011
Posts
835
Media
1
Likes
103
Points
288
Location
Coeur d'Alene (Idaho, United States)
Verification
View
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
Seems to me that it's worse if the people affected are a small minority who can't outvote the rest.

Are you being facetious?

I fail to grasp the analogy:


  • Fewer than 18% of American smoke. Far less in California. Yet just about everybody depends on gasoline for transportation. A tripling of the gasoline tax (don't hold your breath for too long) would affect everyone, rich, middle class and poor, the latter being hit the hardest.
  • Cigarettes are poison: they kill nearly half-a-million people in the US every year. Tobacco, not gasoline, is the leading cause of preventable death.
  • The US is not the Netherlands. This country is vast and not nearly as densely populated, and its workforce is more mobile. Most folks need gasoline to be affordable so that they can afford commuting to work.
 

Officer5633

Admired Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Posts
122
Media
4
Likes
781
Points
423
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
So how about this for taxes and spending?

Cuts
-- Cut $100 billion in waste, fraud, mismanagement, inefficiencies, redundancies and bureaucracy. With added savings from more efficient procurement and eliminating failing programs.

-- Cut $125 billion in military spending, with savings being attained in the same fashion as above, plus reduction in personnel, streamlining departments and units, less spending on wars and not following colonialist/interventionist foreign policies.

Taxes
-- Personal Income Tax: Add 4 additional brackets for high-income earners. $500,000+ = 40%, $1 million+ = 50%, $2 million+ = 60%, $4 million+ = 70%.

-- Corporate Income Tax: Put in place, and flat tax rate of 30%.

-- Sales Tax: Put in place a National VAT of 20%, phased-in over 5 years. Exceptions should include healthy food, culture (movies, arts, domestic travel, books, etc).

-- Capital Gains: Long-Term rates should be raised to 25% (up from 15%), so more investors pay their fair share.

-- Gas Tax: Increase it 3 cents per month, for the next 5 years, and eliminate fuel economy regulations on the automakers in exchange. And watch the wonder of the market do it's magic. :biggrin1:

Investments
-- Invest heavily in R&D, education, mass-transit (Subways, elevated light rail, monorails, trams, trolleys, streetcars, buses, bike lanes, etc), high-speed-rail network, better airports, deeper-dredged ports/harbors to facilitate better trade..

-- Hire a million police officers, firefighters, nurses, doctors, teachers, college professors.
 

D_JuanAFock

Experimental Member
Joined
Sep 14, 2007
Posts
538
Media
0
Likes
9
Points
103
Cuts
-- Cut $100 billion in waste, fraud, mismanagement, inefficiencies, redundancies and bureaucracy. With added savings from more efficient procurement and eliminating failing programs.
I agree with cutting costs in terms of inefficiencies and mismanagement.

-- Cut $125 billion in military spending, with savings being attained in the same fashion as above, plus reduction in personnel, streamlining departments and units, less spending on wars and not following colonialist/interventionist foreign policies.
I can agree to cutting $125 billion if most, if not all of that, is from cutting our foreign involvement.

Taxes
-- Personal Income Tax: Add 4 additional brackets for high-income earners. $500,000+ = 40%, $1 million+ = 50%, $2 million+ = 60%, $4 million+ = 70%.
Are you serious? 70% for all people at 4+ million/year? Sure, this would generate an extra hundred billion or two in revenue, but would you really want anybody making that much to move out of the country?

-- Corporate Income Tax: Put in place, and flat tax rate of 30%.
Interesting that you propose such a huge personal income tax increase but support a slight decrease in corporate income tax for big companies and a huge increase to small business. I certainly dont think the decrease would be enough to bring back big company money, and it would hurt the small businesses.

-- Sales Tax: Put in place a National VAT of 20%, phased-in over 5 years. Exceptions should include healthy food, culture (movies, arts, domestic travel, books, etc).
Do you really think the VAT is doing a good job overseas? All I see is it generates a lot of hate towards the government.

Investments
-- Invest heavily in R&D, education, mass-transit (Subways, elevated light rail, monorails, trams, trolleys, streetcars, buses, bike lanes, etc), high-speed-rail network, better airports, deeper-dredged ports/harbors to facilitate better trade..
I agree with investing more into R&D and transit, but I also think a lot needs to be invested into better energy production. In regards to education, I dont think throwing more money at it will solve the problems it has, there needs to be a reform on the entire system of teaching.

-- Hire a million police officers, firefighters, nurses, doctors, teachers, college professors.
Nurses/doctors/college professors are largely private industry, no? And why the increase in police officers when jails are already overflowing? Why firefighters?
 

Rikter8

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Posts
4,353
Media
1
Likes
125
Points
283
Location
Ann Arbor (Michigan, United States)
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
Every homeless person and newly homeless unemployed people should set up camp on the doorstep of their state representatives office. That way the representative has to walk through the mess every morning, and it won't go away until they fix the problem.

Michigan doesn't have a good mass transit system. Like others have mentioned, it was built with the automobile in mind, and thats why the Detroit and Flint areas sprawled out so far.

I think we are in for something much more worse than the Great Depression had ever seen, and I have a feeling this fall/winter is going to make people desperate.
 

Rikter8

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 30, 2005
Posts
4,353
Media
1
Likes
125
Points
283
Location
Ann Arbor (Michigan, United States)
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
-- Hire a million police officers, firefighters, nurses, doctors, teachers, college professors.

The world doesn't need more police officers. They need to restructure the system they currently have.
Instead of sitting in Krispy Kreme and pointing a radar gun at the working class, they need to focus on real crime such as break ins and Drugs.
Saginaw and Flint MI are prime examples of the Dysfunctional System. Drugs/murders/break in's all go unchecked, but you can bet your ass they'll be out on the road at 5PM looking for the first person going 5mph over the speed limit.
Don't even get me started on the Detroit Police Department and the level of corruption from Mayor to clerk.

Likewise with Teachers - the system itself is broken. The schools and universities are too busy building this social heirchy with big pay than putting the money back into the students, where it should go.
With Tuition as high as it's ever been, where's the money going? It surely isn't going to the instructors, or efforts to hire quality people.
Saginaw Valley State University rose their tuition bigtime, and built a new entry way to the college with dual fountains. That's great... meanwhile they lost their math accredidation to the state because of such poor instruction.

You can add Firefighters, but don't require them to put out abandoned buildings - observe and control the fire to the structure - but let it burn to the ground.
 
Last edited:

D_Percy_Prettywillie

Account Disabled
Joined
Jul 6, 2011
Posts
748
Media
0
Likes
22
Points
53
People won't hire Americans to do the jobs the Mexicans do. Americans cost too much.

As for Springfield. You're telling me that we can't build a decent public transit system in Springfield because it was built in a grid about 75 years ago, yet London can have one of the best public transportation systems in the world and it is over a thousand years old? Sorry, that doesn't jive.

I am growing more and more frustrated with the U.S. because we've gone from the country of "Can" to the country of "Oh I can't do that, it'd be too hard and I have to harvest my Farmville".

Well, first of all, Springfield is a little older than that (by more than a hundred years) and secondly, I didn't say they couldn't it just isn't practical. The local economy just can't support it. They're slashing funding in public schools, outsourcing infrastructure projects to out of state contractors, and reducing police and fire departments. There's simply not enough money to build the sort of transit system that could be effective for the majority of the population. Without a commercial center and with residential areas being spread out in all directions it would be the biggest undertaking in the city's history. The capital city of the UK, population 7 million, has far greater resources than a standard American city like Springfield, population 200,000. Saying "Well London can do it, why can't you" is like watching Michael Jordan dunk a basketball and then looking to someone in a wheelchair and saying "Be like Mike."

And Springfield was just an example. That layout isn't uncommon nor is the application of the philosophy behind it- a premise built on cheap and affordable gasoline. Simply tripling gas prices won't fix the problem. The chain reaction that would cause would put a viable solution in terms of implementation of cost even further away.

Eventually, something is going to have to be done. What has been proposed here, however, aren't solutions for towns like Springfield- they're extremes that will exacerbate the problem for decades and still leave the problem unsolved.




JSZ
 

FuzzyKen

Sexy Member
Joined
Nov 10, 2006
Posts
2,045
Media
0
Likes
97
Points
193
Gender
Male
One of the things I do not understand here is that we claim all kinds of things. The one thing conspicuously absent in the whole thing are wide sweeping audits. We can start with the job being done by the guy fixing a road paving machine and how many of his fixes have to be done over and over again, all the way up to high level local state and government officials.

I would very much like to see wide sweeping changes in transportation. The first would be a reinstatement of the 55 mile per hour speed limit on long haul trucks and vehicles with GVWR's over 26,000 pounds. At the same time under federal regulation require changes in how truckers and others in this industry are being paid. Currently many are paid by the mile which is a disaster and nearly requires high speeds and results high fuel consumption for the poor driver to make a living on which he can eat. Under current guidelines a trucker driving at 75 miles per hour makes more money than a driver reducing fuel consumption and driving in a more "eco-friendly" manner and reducing fuel consumption by a staggering amount.

Also, make company dispatchers responsible for schedules that again encourage excessive fuel consumption. The difference in an 80,000 pound truck driven at 50-55 versus 75+ can be up to 50% based on wind resistance and friction losses. I used be part owner of a company doing this a couple of decades ago. If Law Enforcement Agencies were able to cite not only the driver but the dispatcher and or company ownership on speed violations it would raise revenue and cut fuel usage a great deal.
During the days of the double nickel truckers themselves got caught in the middle and were encouraged to break the law by false promises made by others in company management over his head. If the trucker picked up tickets because of unfair scheduling he was canned and management recruited their next victim, It happened!

Another audit is needed to see if the Government is getting screwed on things they buy, and even worse things that they throw away in a trash can. We all remember the $50 coffee cup, the $200 toilet seat and the $35 sixty watt lightbulb. Want to take bets that this is not taking place again? How much is being thrown away that would be sale-able to the civilian market as replacement parts for obsolete equipment that they sold off five years ago?

Military Modernization to please "gadget freaks". This is something also that needs to be stopped. Currently the United States military has been removing all the vehicles from service that have manual or "stick shift" transmissions because new recruits don't know how to drive a stick or use a clutch! Now we buy a $3,000 transmission instead of a $600 clutch!

There was at one time patriotism in this country. General Motors built numerous vehicles for war efforts. The CUCV 2 1/2 ton truck being one which was phased out by the M35- series of 2 1/2 ton trucks made initially by Kaiser and finally AM General.

The retrofitting and changes made in those trucks alone are a monumental tribute to "new and more expensive" is not necessarily new and improved.

M-35 series started in WWII and were gasoline engines and 5 speed manual transmissions.
M-35-A2 series were new (but identical appearing) trucks and some earlier ones were retrofitted to the new specification with improved brake systems and the transmissions were all upgraded to syncromesh. They were either manufactured with or retrofitted with LD-465 multi-fuel engines which would run on nearly anything if you were ambitious enough to hassle it. That engine was called in again and then retrofitted with a turbocharger for more power bringing these back in again. That did improve both performance and mileage. Nobody used any fuel for the most part in these trucks other than #2 Diesel, but they would run on heating oil, diesel #1 or #2, Jet-A- or JP-4 jet fuel. When they turned them into M-35A3's they yanked out the retrofitted multi-fuel turbocharged engines replacing them with a pure diesel engine made by Catepillar that was on the verge of being obsoleted by Catepillar at the time the retrofits were done. They also added Allison automatic transmissions and air assist power steering. Woops! Now we have to auction all of them because there is a new whiz-bang truck out there that has performance specs that are substantially the same, the new truck (m-35 replacement) is heavier, uses more fuel, has a GVWR rating that requires a CDL in all 50 States (the M35A2-A3) only requires a CDL in California because the State Government over there thinks we are all really stupid and can't drive. The other 49 States as of now only require a standard license. Did I mention that the new truck is nearly 3/4 of a million dollars per copy?

I can go on and on and on about waste. The problem is that a good vehicle is being retired and replaced by an inferior one so some corporation making them can make money and not because we need new trucks!

The Hummer is another case of absolute stupidity multiplied by multiple people over time. The U.S. Government specified diesel power, an automatic transmission, power steering and power brakes for the original Hummer H1 in military trim. They did not specify 2,000 pounds of armor plate. The vehicles were not originally specified with Air Conditioning for the cabs or operating people. That had to be retrofitted and was retrofitted with a system that has had a great number of problems. The engines and transmissions were supplied by General Motors. They specified originally a 145 horsepower 6.2 liter diesel V8 and an transmission commonly known as the turbo hydromatic 400 3 speed automatic. The engines did not hold up in the Hummer any better than they did in the civilian vehicles and have been over time replaced by the 6.5 diesel, then the specs were increased as the weight increased because of the armor and they changed the engines out again to an upgraded version with a turbocharger. That engine made 190 horsepower. In the intervening years GM bough AM General and made this a cushy toy for the ultra rich. Where the military complained of power problems, but would not change their specification, the civilian market by the 1990's would not tolerate the underpowered fuel sucking 6.5 engine. General Motors introduced the Duramax in a detuned version for the Hummer. The Hummer version was basically the one used in heavy trucks and was toned down to 300 horsepower from something like 350. Though they had been complaining of lack of power, the Government would not alter the specification and insisted on the obsolete 6.5 engine until virtually the end of Hummer production. It was dirty on emissions, it used more fuel, it was less reliable and yet the military insisted on an albatross. This refusal to use common sense was one of the things that obsoleted the Hummer H1!

The United States military has unlimited funding simply because they ask and they get as a whole. They do not get flat turned down as the money wasters they are. The list of failed vehicles and weapons retired because of "problems" that they just had to have and then had to retire sell of or destroy has been a very long one. Computer gizmos are not always great. Sometimes we sacrifice reliability for convenience and that applies to more than the military.

Over the years I have been a regular at GSA auctions and have bought a great deal from the Government. One of my favorite haunts for GSA used to be the really obscure places because what was sold there went for next to nothing because nobody was willing to drive to these locations for these sales and to inspect the items.

The only thing that the United States Government hangs on to until it is idiotic are electronics used in office administration. By the time they get rid of computers or other office equipment it is junk, but that certainly does not apply to everything. Some years ago I bought a handfull of W-200 Dodge Power Wagon 3/4 ton crew cab 4x4 pickups for $400 each and drove them home with a few friends. I repainted them and resold those trucks at rather hefty profit margins. All of them were in outstanding condition and most at the time they were auctioned had less than 50,000 miles. Not all vehicles are like this, but if you know what it was used for the Government gives bargains like crazy on YOUR tax dollar because they don't care about resale.

I have cited areas here of specific waste and I think that this waste is probably still going on.

The big thing here is to audit the spending and the work being done by employees and the standards at which it is being done. This would apply to regular employees and to higher level people as well to see to it that we are getting what we are paying dearly for!
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
what do you propose be done for those that are just stuck living too far away because prices rose too quickly and now nobody wants their property?
I'd propose doing what europe did, start raising taxes slowly on fuel 30 years ago so people had time to adjust. But the US STILL doesnt agree even with the idea of doing this.

The problem is, this country is built around cheap car transport.
Exactly. Past time to change because this policy is doomed to lead to disaster.

everything would be a giant mess and it would take decades to fix.
, as I said above. This is not a new problem. The arabs caused a world economic crash by breaking the US monopoly and raising prices 30-40 years ago. The US ignored this warning.

Take Springfield, Missouri; this town was set up as a grid and doesn't really have a "central commerce downtown." Grocery stores and gas stations are all over the place.
Isnt that just what is needed if you have limited transport? Visiting a choice of stores is the luxury.

It's not uncommon that people will live on one side and work on the other (based on the location of the best paying jobs.)
which will no longer be best paying taking into account transport...


Land mass alone should be the end of this conversation anyway; it should be more of a luxury expense to drive places in the UK. If you drove from the Northern most tip to the southern most tip you'd barely cover half the distance from North Dakota to Texas. Thanks our infrastructure we have more area to cover in our every day lives and matching what we pay per gallon to what people in the UK pay per gallon is simply unrealistic.
Funnily enough people and freight actually do drive right across europe just as they drive right across the US. People have a legal right to live in any EU state they fancy and move freely between them, just like the US. Are you really saying the US is incapable of reorganising itself to survive expensive gas (as everyone else is), or it will just stick its collective head in the sand and deny there is a problem?

I know more than a few people who will actually state how they HAVE to start looking for a job because their benefits are running out. What does that tell us?
Generally it tells us they havnt the least idea how they might get a job. This would presumably mean they are in agreement with congress on this point.

We can raise revenue by getting people back to work, by using the forever on food stamps population here to do the jobs mexicans come here to do. We can start making things in this country again.
Well id agree mexicans arent helping much, but do not suddenly start thinking US citizens are willing to work for those wages. Again, Ill bet you congress doesnt want them to either. To accept wages at that level is to admit that the US is economically bankrupt and revenues can only fall indefinitely. But it isnt. There is loads of money sloshing about, it is just unevenly distributed. The US collectively can afford to pay itself way more than mexican wages.
 

Jason

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Aug 26, 2004
Posts
15,616
Media
50
Likes
4,782
Points
433
Location
London (Greater London, England)
Verification
View
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
....

Taxes
-- Personal Income Tax: Add 4 additional brackets for high-income earners. $500,000+ = 40%, $1 million+ = 50%, $2 million+ = 60%, $4 million+ = 70%.

-- Corporate Income Tax: Put in place, and flat tax rate of 30%.

-- Sales Tax: Put in place a National VAT of 20%, phased-in over 5 years. Exceptions should include healthy food, culture (movies, arts, domestic travel, books, etc).
Investments

Interesting stuff.

The paradox is that you cannot tax the truly rich. :frown1: They will take money in forms other than income, use tax havens, all sorts of things. You could stick 40% income tax on around $80,000+ - this is a group you can catch.

PLEASE DO increase your Corporation Tax! Many companies would come to the UK. :biggrin1:

Sales Tax - yes, this makes sense, though the reality of the situation is that it is needed more quickly than 5 years.

On environmental grounds gas tax needs to be high enough to reduce consumption - ie it should be so shockingly high that there is a substantial reduction in the miles Americans drive. This is the reality of climate change. Unless the USA cuts its gas use and greenhouse gasses there is no moral argument to get China and India to do the same. The figure is at least European levels of gas prices, around $10 a gallon.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
Of course you can tax the rich! It is just that no one is trying. The UK government still operates its own tax havens for goodness sake! The only issue now is that people generally have started to realise they are losing out compared to the rich. That the social changes and wealth redistribution (downwards) of the 20th century are starting to run backwards. The rich have hired some spin doctors.

PLEASE DO increase your Corporation Tax! Many companies would come to the UK. :biggrin1:
I dont think so. China is where they are going and it is little to do with tax. Cheap labour. Expanding markets. Large reserves of capital to buy out major companies lock stock and barrell. Most of all, using their brains to create brand new companies which are fundamentally more efficient.

The Us in particular has two choices. intensive protectionism or cutting edge technology. Though incidentally I understand it has basically been living on tick for years, so better decide what to do quick.
 

Officer5633

Admired Member
Joined
Feb 11, 2010
Posts
122
Media
4
Likes
781
Points
423
Location
Chicago (Illinois, United States)
Sexuality
50% Straight, 50% Gay
Gender
Male
GAS TAX
- The gas tax is currently 18.4 cents for gasoline, and 24.4 cents for diesel. This is unacceptably low. It should be increased 30-40 cents per year, for the next 5 years or so... gradually-phased in to reduce pressure on consumers. Of course, I understand people NEED to drive to work, get groceries, etc. But having stupid fuel economy standards for cars and trucks is dumb and inefficient. Regulations only make cars more efficient, which means people will not adjust their driving habits. More expensive gas means automakers will adjust their vehicles to meet the market demands- which will be slightly-smaller cars, with more efficient engines and transmissions.

Added bonuses: more expensive gas means creates a demand for engineering more efficient engines (from cars and tractor trailers, to commercial equipment and airplane engines). A demand for high-paying engineers and designers.

Another added bonus: People will drive less, waste trips less, and use more mass-transit wherever possible (which helps pay for better mass-transit). Also, less driving means less accidents. Less accidents mean less injuries and fatalities- which potentially reduces the costs of health care, and insurance costs for other motorists.

HIRING POLICE OFFICERS, FIREFIGHTERS & TEACHERS
- Police Officers & Firefighters: I didn't say hire MORE police officers. I said hire police officers. Yes! The criminal justice system needs some tweaks. Like legalizing, regulating & taxing marijuana. Reducing mandatory harsh sentences for small possession of harder drugs. This would dramatically help the Black and Latino communities who have been hit hard by discriminatory drug laws over the past 40 years.

Hiring police and firemen reduces the direct property tax burden on homeowners. It reduces the urge of municipal governments to lay off to balance their budgets. It reduces the urge of State Governments to lay off to balance their budgets. It also can reduce the total cost of the annual budget because hiring new police officers/firemen means the higher-paying officers with 30 years on the job can retire. Many military/combat veterans go into law enforcement and firefighting, and this helps them directly.

- Teachers. Paying for hiring new teachers also helps slow the increases in property taxes. As for college professors for universities and community colleges, this helps the States more than anyone else.
 

davidjh7

Expert Member
Joined
Jan 12, 2006
Posts
2,607
Media
0
Likes
111
Points
283
Location
seattle
Sexuality
90% Gay, 10% Straight
Gender
Male
The US dug a huge hole. Most countries have dug a huge hole, but the US really went big on it. if you are in a deep hole, and you stop digging (cut spending--even completely), you are still in a deep hole. If you alternate digging (spending) and filling in the hole (increased taxes) you are still in a deep hole. The only way to get out of the hole is to stop digging AND fill it in; otherwise, you still have a hole. This is about as simple as it gets, folks. Nobody likes the hole, but nobody wants to stop digging, and fill it in. eventually the hole will collapse from lateral pressure (the global economic demands), and what is left is a huge collapse of the structure of the ground (the US becomes a third world nation, economically, and politically). Amazing how basic ditch digging applies to global economics, isn't it?
 

Drifterwood

Superior Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Posts
18,677
Media
0
Likes
2,811
Points
333
Location
Greece
In the UK there are no longer any tax breaks for the average person. No married man's tax allowance, no mortgage interest relief, no company car benefit, no tax free pension investments. Not a lot is tax deductable, which i understand is not the case in the US. So, simply, get rid of all these kick backs. Pretty much the same with business, though you may have a genuine reason to foster investment in R&D etc etc.

Next, to stimulate the economy, you need to get money in the pockets of the bottom 50% of earners, so if anyone needs a lower tax rate it should be this group. The well off already pay low taxes in the US,I can't see why they would benefit the immediate economy by having any more money.

The US has the benefit that the property market dropped considerably, so at least young people coming through will have a chance of a life without a mountain of debt.

And start subsidising higher education.
 

dandelion

Superior Member
Verified
Gold
Joined
Sep 25, 2009
Posts
13,297
Media
21
Likes
2,705
Points
358
Location
UK
Verification
View
Sexuality
100% Gay, 0% Straight
Gender
Male
The US dug a huge hole. Most countries have dug a huge hole, but the US really went big on it.?
Thats the US for you, everything has to be bigger.

In the UK there are no longer any tax breaks for the average person. No married man's tax allowance,
still get allowances for children, tax credits (ie money paid to people on low-medium wages) for partners and children, transferrable tax allowance from spouse if spouse not employed and using theirs...

no company car benefit
Im not really up on this being penniless, but last I checked there were still complex rules about how company cars are taxed or allowances for same. Yet company cars still exist, so someone thinks they are a benefit.

And start subsidising higher education.
Im afraid I think the 'grammar school' principle was correct. It is not general education which matters so much as having enough very well educated in areas which are vital. That is, general education to degree level. I understand the UK still has a significant amount of illiteracy, which is outrageous.