Ursa Majoris Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 It takes a minute to wrap your head around this chart but once you understand it, it's pretty cool. Taxes too high? Really? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deathpig Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 To some extent, this chart suffers from the same problems that you pointed out in the USA Inc. thread... that comparing present rates to an historical average (especially when that historical average contains outliers) can generate a false message. Arguing that taxes are too low to pay for social programs with people who believe we should be cutting back social programs so that we can have lower taxes doesn't really get you anywhere. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ursa Majoris Posted March 18, 2011 Author Share Posted March 18, 2011 To some extent, this chart suffers from the same problems that you pointed out in the USA Inc. thread... that comparing present rates to an historical average (especially when that historical average contains outliers) can generate a false message. Arguing that taxes are too low to pay for social programs with people who believe we should be cutting back social programs so that we can have lower taxes doesn't really get you anywhere. That's correct. The problem comes with the one set of people who want to raise taxes to cover everything we currently have versus those who think we should hack and slash all we've built to reduce it to cost no more than current revenue. Both groups are wrong, IMO. One would tax us to death, the other would drag us back to the 18th century. It's really simple when reduced to it's basics - what is it we want to have and what will that cost? Taxes / govt revenue (at all levels) must then cover that number. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
westvirginia Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 What I find very telling was an article I read in the last week or two that indicated even if you took all the wealth of private individuals in the US over $2MM and taxed at 100% all income over $200K, you'd only pay off about $4BB of the current debt, and then wouldn't probably ever be able to pay off any more (why would anyone work for more than $200K? :shrug). That's an indicator that we CANT keep doing what we're doing. But you have congressmen saying with a straight face that there is NOTHING that can be cut. I've come to be with ursa on this, hammer defense, SS and medicare/caid. If you were REALLY able to eliminate waste & fraud in those three that might solve the problem all on its own. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Square Posted March 18, 2011 Share Posted March 18, 2011 I've come to be with ursa on this, hammer defense, SS and medicare/caid. As long as we hammer all three I'm ok with it. I get tired of the paranoia that happens when people worry about cutting the US attack department. Its loony that we spend that much on defense. Ol Dwight had a good point. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.