Income and property taxes are the tip of our tax iceberg.
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tax-rates-are-far-higher-than-we-realize-2015-06-08
http://www.marketwatch.com/story/tax-rates-are-far-higher-than-we-realize-2015-06-08
Tax rates are far higher than we realize
- Thread starter Banjo
- Start date
it is called the monetary illusion which making the ordinary person think that he is better off.
I would never live in a state that has state income tax, yes real estate taxes are higher than some states, and you have to ask questions whether some cities/town have extra real estate taxes, but if you are pulling in decent money, saving much more than what is spent on house taxes. If federal government did it job better with illegal aliens taking away USA jobs, get rid of green cards altogether, declining hospital and welfare, states like California and others would not be in such a bad shape, but this is only going to get worse and not better. Get the convicts to work farms, give them a reason not to do crime. Taxes have to be raised for all the free loaders and many people now on rolls of disability cause they don't want to work.
The big picture is that the budgets of all the entire public sector are more than half the GNP. That seems unsustainable, no?
Although these articles make us aware that our tax burden is greater then it may seem; they also reinforce simplistic thinking; the kind of that puts emphasis on indiscriminate tax cuts.
Where should the emphasis instead be then? Obviously it should be on spending priorities, and efficiency, i.e., value received per dollar of taxes paid.
We should be concerned about efficiency in the mandatory part of the Federal budget, which is dominated by entitlements, but the size of the entitlement budget is simply a reflection of our investment in these programs. It is our money plus interest that we are owed, that is why the entitlements part of the budget is mandatory. I often read articles exclaiming over the huge size of the mandatory budget and saying we must cut our entitlements. Either this is nonsense or it represents a sea change in philosophy. If people are objecting to the size purely on the grounds that it is too large, it is nonsense; if a philosophical objection is being raised, it is misguided.
The part of the federal budget we should spend the most time discussing and debating is the discretionary part:
This understates "defense" spending, because it treats veterans benefits as though they were independent of military spending. And debt servicing for money borrowed to pay for wars -- ~ 4+ trillion, for Iraq and Afghanistan -- is not in the discretionary budget. The U. S. Constitution requires that the Nation pay its debts, so interest on public debt is a part of the mandatory budget. I am going to assume that NSA and CIA spending is rolled into that category called "government". If so, that would be a significant fraction of that category.
Where should the emphasis instead be then? Obviously it should be on spending priorities, and efficiency, i.e., value received per dollar of taxes paid.
We should be concerned about efficiency in the mandatory part of the Federal budget, which is dominated by entitlements, but the size of the entitlement budget is simply a reflection of our investment in these programs. It is our money plus interest that we are owed, that is why the entitlements part of the budget is mandatory. I often read articles exclaiming over the huge size of the mandatory budget and saying we must cut our entitlements. Either this is nonsense or it represents a sea change in philosophy. If people are objecting to the size purely on the grounds that it is too large, it is nonsense; if a philosophical objection is being raised, it is misguided.
The part of the federal budget we should spend the most time discussing and debating is the discretionary part:
This understates "defense" spending, because it treats veterans benefits as though they were independent of military spending. And debt servicing for money borrowed to pay for wars -- ~ 4+ trillion, for Iraq and Afghanistan -- is not in the discretionary budget. The U. S. Constitution requires that the Nation pay its debts, so interest on public debt is a part of the mandatory budget. I am going to assume that NSA and CIA spending is rolled into that category called "government". If so, that would be a significant fraction of that category.
Last edited:
Taxes shouldn't be confusing.
No one should ever have to do the government's work by filling out insane forms every year.
WHAT YOU EARN AND WHAT YOU OWN IS NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S DAMN BUSINESS.
www.fairtax.org
No one should ever have to do the government's work by filling out insane forms every year.
WHAT YOU EARN AND WHAT YOU OWN IS NONE OF THE GOVERNMENT'S DAMN BUSINESS.
www.fairtax.org