Quote:
Originally Posted by infinite monkey
Stop deductions for popping out kids. Zero tax liability? Fine. Negative 3000 dollars tax liability? No.
Problem solved.
|
I'm a strong proponent for killing deductions. If you kill the ascending tax rate plan there is no need/room for deductions.
Quote:
|
I understand the ideology of wanting to tax everyone equally, but taxing those on the margin at the same rate as those at the top just doesnt make economic sense to me. Again, taxpayers will end up paying more as those on the margin are forced to turn to other programs just to survive.
|
As I said I believe everyone should pay something. I don't even believe 10% on the first $50-60K is necessary. 1% is a symbolic gesture that everyone pays their share. 20-25-30%... I don't really care what it is, so long as there aren't loopholes and shelters the money will come in. The mega rich have massive tax games to avoid paying at their current marginal rates and they already payin excess of 70% of every tax dollar collected. Eliminate the shell game, lower the rate, and actually collect more money. My problem is we seem to have this misguided idea that we should develop a giant system of all the things we want to do and then go taxing to try to pay for it all. Try doing that in your own life. Get the house, car, clothes, education, meal plans, medical care, retirement, toys, and while you're at it adopt a few of your neighbors needs as your own... then go tell your boss how much he needs to pay you. Let me know how that works for you.
F&B, I said nothing about killing R&D but gutting it like a fish is a good place to start. There is a vast difference between not researching and developing new technologies and letting R&D be driven by political forces. There is so much fraud, waste, and abuse in military R&D it would make an Enron executive blush. Design programs influenced by politicians and lobbiests are full of fluff and more often than not do not turn out the desired products. It should not take 15 + years to design a generation of fighters, armored vehicles, or body armor. Then again, the different services don't necessarily need individual camouflage patterns, and they certainly don't need to change their uniform designs every 24-36 months with a 5-7 year testing period beforehand.
Spexx, I'll assume you didn't read any of my posts before responding with some witty comment so you can skip this before going on to crafting your reply. Gutting R&D is a major cut in the military budget, withdrawing troops and closing bases around the world are major cuts. Fielding the best troops in the world with the best equipment in the world is possible if we quit trying to be the world's police force and focus on crafting a force to defend our country. A force capable of flat out destroying any nation or organization that chooses to provoke a response is what we should be aiming for. The military should be a hammer, not a swiss army knife.
Foreign aid? They all say we don't do enough anyway, so why bother? Cut the aid right now, toss the UN out on their asses and quit funding their corruption. Even if it's only 1% of GDP, that equals a lot of dollars that could be used to solve our own problems.