|
Korean Job Discussion Forums "The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 3:49 pm Post subject: Is paying taxes patriotic? |
|
|
Going all the way back to 'No taxation without representation', taxes have been a central issue in American politics. It actually goes back even further in our history. The English Civil War was also triggered in part by taxes and that war helped people New England with Puritans.
Biden recently addressed the question and Joe Klein wrote about it. "And Biden's right: in a system of progressive taxation, it is the patriotic duty of the wealthy to pay more than the middle class or the poor...and furthermore, since we're all going to be paying for the mess the Wall Street sharks made, I'd go Biden a step further: there probably should be a confiscatory shark tax for any and all executives whose companies have gone belly up and required a federal bailout.
http://www.time-blog.com/swampland/2008/09/patriotism.html
Jon Sanders responded with an article that may win a prize for repeating every single extremist conservative stereotype/distortion on one page.
He dubs paying taxes "patriotic." He did this on ABC's "Good Morning, America," saying that while Obama would increase taxes on the wealthy, "It's time to be patriotic." And has said it in it political rallies, telling a woman who said her friends are worried that under Obama they faced a tax increase, that she should say to them: "It's time to be patriotic."
Now this is a very strange definition of patriotism. True patriotism is not something that is demanded or coerced with the implicit threat of violence the way taxes are. Nations that demand acts of patriotism tend to be dictatorships. They also tend to be run by socialist blowhards, but that must be mere coincidence."
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/09/when_democrats_attack_your_pat.html
Ever since California's tax revolt that started with Proposition Whatevernumberitwas about 25 years ago, lowering taxes on the wealthy has been a regular policy in Washington. With the financial collapse and the soaring deficit, it's clear somebody is going to have to pay the bill.
Question: What is your stand on higher taxes? |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
RJjr

Joined: 17 Aug 2006 Location: Turning on a Lamp
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:23 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I wish we would cut spending. But if we're not going to cut spending, we need to raise taxes high enough to pay for all of this bullshit up front. It's definitely unpatriotic to saddle future generations of Americans with debt because we're a bunch of wasteful fatasses. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:24 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I've always been something of a fiscal conservative, believing that you don't buy what you can't pay for. I'm usually for a social program but believe that Congress has to figure out a way to fund the program, even if it means reducing expenditures elsewhere or raising taxes. I feel the same way about wars. You raise taxes to pay for them as you go.
I also feel that progressive tax systems are fair. Not long ago, Warren Buffet (not a raging socialist) made the point that it didn't make sense for him to be paying a smaller percentage in taxes than his secretary.
All during this decades-long tax revolt I've felt people were being unpatriotic, putting self before country. I don't think it's evil to think of all of us as one family, with obligations to each other. For example, it's perfectly correct, in my opinion, to tax people with no children to support public education. I see it as one of the obligations in life.
No surprise, but I agree with Biden. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jandar

Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 4:39 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Taxes are stupid.
If the government wants money they can print it.
Then the rich and poor will suffer equally under inflation. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Cornfed
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Jandar wrote: |
Taxes are stupid. |
Yes. Once you realize that money is simply records stored on bank and government computers or bits of paper, it should be obvious that taxes are completely unnecessary to "fund" anything. They are a social control mechanism.
Quote: |
Then the rich and poor will suffer equally under inflation. |
Actually, the poor would suffer more because the rich could invest their disposable income at returns greater than the rate of inflation. However, inflation would not be the inevitable consequence of government issued currency. Aside from the quantity theory of inflation being a croc, it would be a simple matter to tighten the requirements for fractional reserve lending to counteract any inflation. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Jandar

Joined: 11 Jun 2008
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 5:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Cool.
I may have over simplified. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Big_Bird

Joined: 31 Jan 2003 Location: Sometimes here sometimes there...
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:25 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paying tax is your subscription to a civilised and progressive society. I have never resented paying tax. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Pluto
Joined: 19 Dec 2006
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:35 pm Post subject: |
|
|
The Government isn't a proper mechanism for income redistribution. In fact, Governments have only proven themselves to be masters of inefficiency in this regard. Generally speaking, government/state power should be limited to protecting and securing the individual rights of its citizens, nothing more and nothing less. Paying taxes for this government obligation may be considered patriotic. Paying taxes to support useless, and perhaps counterproductive, bureaucracies such as the Dept. of Education is not.
Last edited by Pluto on Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
crusher_of_heads
Joined: 23 Feb 2007 Location: kimbop and kimchi for kimberly!!!!
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 6:37 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Paying as little taxes as possible is patriotic! |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Cornfed
Joined: 14 Mar 2008
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:15 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pluto wrote: |
The Government isn't a proper mechanism for income redistribution. In fact, Governments have only proven themselves to be masters of inefficiency in this regard. |
Let's be fair. Western regimes have been fairly efficient in redistributing wealth from the lower and middle classes to a tiny parasitical elite over the last 25 years. Also, family kangaroo courts have done a superb job redistribuing wealth from productive working men to grasping female dirtbags. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 7:47 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Pluto wrote: |
The Government isn't a proper mechanism for income redistribution. In fact, Governments have only proven themselves to be masters of inefficiency in this regard. Generally speaking, government/state power should be limited to protecting and securing the individual rights of its citizens, nothing more and nothing less. Paying taxes for this government obligation may be considered patriotic. Paying taxes to support useless, and perhaps counterproductive, bureaucracies such as the Dept. of Education is not. |
[/sarcasmon]
I agree, the Dept. of Education is our greatest drain on our treasury at this time. Its time to end the 9% funding we give those State/Local schools! We should stand down so they can stand up!
[/sarcasm off]
Edited for sarcasm indicators.
Last edited by Kuros on Fri Sep 19, 2008 7:06 am; edited 1 time in total |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
mises
Joined: 05 Nov 2007 Location: retired
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 8:17 pm Post subject: |
|
|
No. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Joo Rip Gwa Rhhee

Joined: 25 May 2003
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:26 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yes.
Quote: |
October 5, 2003
The Real Patriot Act
By THOMAS L. FRIEDMAN
This is a column about the war of ideas -- but first a word about gasoline prices and Hummers.
In case you missed it, OPEC just decided to slash its oil production to keep gasoline prices high. I guess it would be foolhardy to expect that maybe Saudi Arabia or Kuwait would use its influence in OPEC to hold down prices at a time when Western economies are struggling to climb out of recession. Everybody's just looking out for themselves. So why don't we?
There's all sorts of talk now about how to finance the $87 billion price tag for the reconstruction of Iraq. I say, let's make OPEC pay -- indirectly. Let's have a $1 a gallon gasoline tax and call it the ''Patriot Tax.'' We could use the revenue it would raise -- about $110 billion a year -- to finance the entire reconstruction of Iraq, with plenty left for other good works.
Here's the logic: The two things OPEC hates most are falling oil prices and gasoline taxes -- and the Patriot Tax would promote both. The reason that OPEC hates gasoline taxes is that if anyone is going to benefit from higher prices at the pump, OPEC wants it to be OPEC, not the consuming countries. It drives OPEC crazy that the Europeans pay roughly twice as much per gallon as Americans do, because their governments slap on so many taxes.
A $1 a gallon gasoline tax, phased in, would not only be a huge revenue generator (even with tax rebates to ease the burden on low-income people, farmers and truckers) but also a huge driver of conservation and reduced oil imports. Not only would it mean less money for Saudi Arabia to transfer to Wahhabi clerics to spread their intolerant brand of Islam around the world, but it would radically improve America's standing in Europe, where we are resented for being the world's energy hog.
President Bush could even say that this tax is his long-promised alternative to Kyoto, because the amount of energy conservation it would produce would result in a much greater reduction in U.S. energy consumption, and greenhouse gas emissions, than anything Kyoto would have mandated.
In short, a tax that finances the democratization of Iraq, takes money away from those who would use it to spread ideas harmful to us, weakens OPEC, makes us more energy independent, reduces the deficit and overnight improves the world's view of us -- from selfish, Hummer-driving louts to good global citizens -- would be the real patriot act. (It would also encourage Iraq not to become another oil-dependent state, but to build a middle class by learning to tap its people's entrepreneurship and creativity, not just its oil wells.)
''Until we raise energy prices we really aren't fighting the war on terrorism, because we're doing nothing to deny the countries who fund terrorists the cash they need to destroy us,'' says Philip K. Verleger Jr., the energy expert. ''We could use the excess revenues to fund a true Manhattan Project to cut U.S. oil consumption in half by 2007, thereby permanently making OPEC irrelevant. That would be a truly patriotic move.''
Yes, yes -- I know, the Bush team would never even consider such a tax. But that's my point. When you have an administration that will not even consider undertaking the most obviously right course -- a gasoline tax -- that would produce so many strategic, economic and political benefits for America, then how do we win this war in the long run? Because this war on terrorism is not simply a military fight. That's the easy part. More important, it is a war of ideas. And to win a war of ideas we need to do two things:
First, we need to successfully partner with Iraqis to create a free, open and progressive model in the heart of the Arab-Muslim world to promote the ideas of tolerance, pluralism and democratization. But second, and just as important, we need to set an example ourselves, in order to get others -- both potential allies and longtime adversaries -- to buy into our war, to believe that we are not just out to benefit ourselves or protect ourselves, but that we really are out to repair the world.
Unfortunately, this president -- for ideological reasons, because of whom he is beholden to economically, and because he knows that the American people never demanded this war, so he cannot demand much from them -- will not summon Americans to set that example. He will not summon us to be the best global citizens we can be. The Bush war cry is: ''Do as we say, not as we do. Good ideas for Iraqis, gluttony for Americans.''
That is so wrong. We may not get a better Iraq out of this war, but let's at least make sure we get a better America. |
|
|
Back to top |
|
 |
PBRstreetgang21

Joined: 19 Feb 2007 Location: Orlando, FL--- serving as man's paean to medocrity since 1971!
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 9:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
the Dept. of Education is our greatest drain on our treasury at this time |
The biggest drain on our treasury is the Defense budget which is almost more the the defense budget of all the countries in the world combined, and eight times more than the second largest spender (China) at a whopping: $439.3 Billion not including our wars which would bring the total to: $626.1 billion per year and counting.
We need a Military and a strong one no question, but only $263 billion is actually going to feed the troops and maintain our army. The rest is giant corporate contracts for the development of new weapons the majority of which never see the light of day like that ospery project. Nevermind the amount of financial malfeasance and impropriety that occurs like KBR overcharging us billions in Iraq or Paul Bremer "losing" $6 billion. We could maintain our armed forces, STILL be the biggest in world and shave $200 billion off the pentagons giant industrial complex, that former General of the Army and Republican President Eisenhower warned us about--- no problem.
Republicans are the first to say we should "give back" to our country, I guess they ment give back everything except where it hurts them-- their pocketbook.
Lesson in economics: in order BUY things, like say--- police and firefighters--- you need to get MONEY. Thats why we have governments who get taxes, so they can do things FOR US
Privatize education? Anyone who works in or knows anyone who works in a Hagwon in Korea and thinks privatizing education is a good thing needs to see an optometrist. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
Ya-ta Boy
Joined: 16 Jan 2003 Location: Established in 1994
|
Posted: Thu Sep 18, 2008 11:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Quote: |
Paying taxes for this government obligation may be considered patriotic. Paying taxes to support useless, and perhaps counterproductive, bureaucracies such as the Dept. of Education is not. |
I'm interpreting your comment as saying taxes for defense are OK. If I'm wrong in that, correct me.
My question would be: Why is support for the programs you like patriotic but support for the programs I like not patriotic? (The Dept. of Ed is not a good example because I don't like it either.) I do think the people have a right to programs they want. I contribute to the education of your kids and you contribute to the highway in front of my house. Neither of us directly benefit from contributing to the other, but we both indirectly benefit from both programs. |
|
Back to top |
|
 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|