kdsub
Posts: 12180
Joined: 8/16/2007 Status: offline
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: variation30 there is a larger issue here. does anyone on this forum believe that their tax money pays for all of the services, programs, salaries, and subsidies a government wants to enact? that is to say, if a government only takes in a trillion dollars in taxes, they will only carry out a trillion dollars worth of actions. of course not. if tax money does not cover a government's agenda they will either borrow the rest of the money or create it. so if taxes are not required for a government to carry on, why have them? why not just let the government borrow or print all the money it wants to play around with and let the citizens keep the fruits of their labor. well, there is the obvious problem of inflation which diminishes the prosperity of a nation as quickly as taxation...but I am curious if people actually think how much or how little a government takes in with taxes does anything at all to effect their budgets and spending. If you are not going for something new and better than why go at all? Would it not be nice to force our government to make priorities then confine them to the money taken in? Of course in time of war borrowing may be needed but I would make that the only exception. I believe the new formulas for sales tax would bring in more money than they take in, under the existing system, so there should be a cushion starting out that would allow proper budgeting. If not then the next year the rate would need to be raised allowing debate on its need. Just think...no money for bailouts...as it should be Butch
< Message edited by kdsub -- 4/9/2010 10:12:24 AM >
_____________________________
Mark Twain: I don't see any use in having a uniform and arbitrary way of spelling words. We might as well make all clothes alike and cook all dishes alike. Sameness is tiresome; variety is pleasing
|