income redistribution and having a rescue me mentality? What makes so many people extremely hesitant to accept self-responsibility and self-accountability? Don't they realize that many people are in dire life and socioeconomic circumstances because of poor decision making and life choices on their part? Don't they also realize that the welfare system as we know it is further destroying the United States? Why don't they see that American society have regressed from a go-getting, independent society where work and responsibility were honorable to a society where entitlements and the rescue/support me ethic are now prevalent and commonplace?
Have you watched Robert Reich's "Inequality For All"? It gives a clear message where these welfare statistics come from.
From where i'm looking (which is the UK), it's pretty obvious what the real problem is.
The real problem isn't that you government has let them, become what they've become.
No, the real problem is your government, has "forced" them, "brainwashed" them into becoming what they've become.
Their doing the same in the UK right now, brainwashing the masses with bulls**t on the T.V etc.
Now the "average" Brit can't think for themselves, and have no opinion on what their own government is doing to them!.
Our economy thanks to our politicians is about to completely collapse, but the "average" Brit is totally oblivious to that fact.
Because our government wants it that way, they don't really give a f**k about us, and neither does your government.
Maybe you can blame your people for letting themselves become brainwashed, but the government is very tricky devious & clever.
In Britain right now their trying to break down society, & the family unit.
Then nobody will give a F**k about anybody, just how they want it.
So i do blame the people however it wasn't a fair game to begin with, we was ALL born into slavery just like our parents, & their parents etc. :-(
You need to start further back and consider why the establishment desires welfare for the people over giving the people the ability to provide for them selves.
Corporations are people also and they also believe in entitlement programs (Tax breaks, corporate substidies, corporate handouts) Corporate people don't lose jobs because of technolgy and jobs going off shore. The Government lost in revenue for corporations income due to tax breaks is much more than the government pay out for foodstamps. The Boston teaparty was about taxes and one reason given for the Civil War was about taxes the south had to pay on sugar imports. If fair taxes was paid by all people and corporations, unempolyment aid and foodstamps would be too small to fail.
What do you consider "fair" taxes? Total confiscation of the top 1% of earners won't run this country, with all it's giveaway programs, for even a year. Total confiscation of the wealth of the top 1% will - for just one year, whereupon you're back in the same fix.
So who will you tax, and how much? (While you're at it, can you explain why money earned by stockholders must be taxed twice?)
Watch Robert Reich's "Inequality For All" and you may find some of the answers to your questions.
wilderness: What every taxeThe American people pay on their incomes would be a good starting point for corporations, because they are people. I heard, some large corporations pay no taxes. Not just the 1&2%er's should pay their fair share but the rich and super rich which raises the percentage and pays for all give away programs for 3 years. Money earned by stocks is income, it is fair tax. If income is generated by means of the Government (local, state, or federal) infrastructure, fair taxes should be collect. If people have the money to pay other people(Corporation)to invest they are not Entitled to have that income tax free. If you are among the 47%er's without enough tax deductions, stocks is hard, but for some people with money it's been a cash cow. Stocks after the Republican HANDOUT! and Obama's election is the only thing thats been positive. Yes, tax incomes should be taxed twice That's up to federal state and local government. I know the private sector charge tolls to use their infrastructures every time you use their stuff. All governments need tax revenue to protect and serve the people.
So money earned by stockholders really should be taxed first as corporate income and then again as shareholder income when it is given to the owner of the money. I disagree.
If you don't like the uber rich or corporations paying no income tax, eliminate the loopholes. It will mean stopping the majority of social engineering congress likes, but that's probably a good thing, anyway.
You again say "fair taxes should be collected" but again refrain from indicating what is fair.
I did not refer to federal, state, local, sales income taxes in mention of taxing stock dividends twice. See above.
Absolutely all governments need tax revenue to protect the people. When the "serve" part comes to mean supplying luxuries to those that can't or won't afford them I draw the line: govt. is then collecting too many taxes. Same for supporting people that won't support themselves. Same for people that make the same poor decisions time after time (thinking building a house below sea level on the shoreline of Louisiana).
But the bottom line is that to do what you want - support everyone on the backs of somebody else - just isn't workable. There isn't that much money in the country.
wilderness: Fair Taxes is at the income rate as indiviual American people and groups of people pay. Those who pay no taxes need to start somewhere. Louisiana people don't build expensive coastal homes. What happened to New Orleans, New Jersey, New York, and the Eastern coast of America or often the State of Florida are the results of decisions made by some Forefathers and Capitalist who thought these cities near water was worth developing. Are you saying New Orleans should have been abandant after The Louisiana Purchase. Do you think New Orleans shouldn't have been rebuilt, because it was full of liberals and people that couldn't afford to rebuild inland? Many people who are accused of making poor choicies have no choice, because of generational poverty. Only those who could but done pay taxes have a choice. If the money made in America stay in America rather than off shore there would be enough money in the country.
The only individuals I know of that pay no taxes are those on the poor end of the stick - the 47% group. Are you suggesting we need to tax them?
There are a handful of corporations that don't, but then it because of what I said - congress trying to engineer the country under the table, where it isn't noticed so much. Instead of writing checks to companies to behave as congress wants, they hand out tax loopholes instead. Like "paying: farmers to let land set idle. Like paying companies to hire in specific localities. Like selling/buying carbon credits. The list is endless of places where the tax code is being used to virtually force cooperation in government schemes that can't stand the light of day.
And yes, to rebuild New Orleans in the same place, for the umpteenth time, is stupid in the extreme. Not a person that built could not have built a little upstream just as easily; it's long past time we stopped paying people to build houses we know are going to be blown down again. If we need workers that badly right there, put up a half million Quonset huts; when the next hurricane takes them away we haven't lost much.
wilderness: Do you know how many times the city of New Orleans flooded since The Louisiana Purchase. If umpteen is over twelve years and as many as one thousand years. Within a thousand years the land may have flooded over twelve times, but since NewOrleans has been New Orleans and a part of the United States, Katrina caused the First Flood of city of New Orleans. Was it "stupid and extreme" to rebuild Irag,Japan,Germany, Europe, and now Viet Nam but not one of America's oldest city, even though it is Still a majority liberal city. People living on the Atlantic and Pacificcoast need to know Y'all are tired of paying for their bad decision making and not moving upstream. P.S. an individual with enough deduction and write offs can earn millions and pay little or no taxes because of loopholes.
Eisenhower who enjoyed economic prosperity and a balanced budget was on record as having a 92% tax rate in place for the very rich. How does that compare to in some cases a 11% rate for some 1%'ers?
Compassion and economic efficiency. Uneducated, malnourished children do not make good workers.
by ptosis32 minutes ago
federal income tax rates history, During the eight years of the Eisenhower presidency, from 1953 to 1961, the top marginal rate was 91 percent. (It was 92 percent the year he came into office.)What does it mean, though?...
by GA Anderson19 months ago
Much is heard of a demand that corporations and the wealthy pay their "fair share" of taxes, but I have heard little of what that share should be.With only a single restriction; that the discussion is about...
by Don W3 weeks ago
I want to get people's views on this. The thread's inspired by comments I've seen from people in and outside of this forum that suggest taxes are theft. The idea goes: if the government forces people to pay taxes (under...
by Nickny798 years ago
Issue: Why raising taxes on corporations is BAD economics and does NOT serve any social justice:1. when gov't raises taxes on corps., corps. don't pay more money, CONSUMERS do with increased prices that...
by Tony Lawrence5 years ago
Is nobody going to call Peter Schiff on his "I pay 50% tax" crap?Recently, Peter Schiff marched into OWS and confronted demonstrators, claiming that he pays 50% of his income to taxes. Unfortunately, the...
by rhamson7 years ago
With costs escalating and the economy in the tank what areas should the government suspend, reduce or end?
Copyright © 2017 HubPages Inc. and respective owners.
Other product and company names shown may be trademarks of their respective owners.
HubPages® is a registered Service Mark of HubPages, Inc.