It's taxation without representation, I tell you!!

[TurtleDude]

It seems to me you would rather live in a plutocracy rather than a democracy.

seems to me you want mob rule where the votes of the mob are bought with the wealth of others

 

[drz-400]

Okay, so 47% of Americans don't pay any income tax. They get the exact same vote I do. Where is MY representation as a taxpayer?

People who don't pay Federal taxes have no incentive to hold down spending or make government smaller. They are over-represented.

I'm under-represented. Where's the justice in that?

Should people who pay income tax get TWO votes? (I'm really kinda' serious here.)

No, No, you have it backwards. You want representation with taxation.

 

[drz-400]

do you think 100 such mothers have the right to vote away the wealth of some hard working doctor merely because he makes more than all of them do?

Do you think a hard working doctor has the right to take away the vote of 100 such mothers?

 

[MaggieD]

Do you think a hard working doctor has the right to take away the vote of 100 such mothers?

Yes, if they pay no income tax. They don't need representation. Taxpayers need representation.

 

[drz-400]

seems to me you want mob rule where the votes of the mob are bought with the wealth of others

Typically, would you say politicians are "rich" or "poor?" Are the offices and positions of the United States open to everyone? Technically, the answer would be yes if they are of age, but the fact is most politicians in the US are not a part of the group that pays no income taxes. It takes a substantial amount of money to run a political campaign.

 

[TurtleDude]

Do you think a hard working doctor has the right to take away the vote of 100 such mothers?

if he is the only one paying taxes he should be the only one determing what the rate should be

but nice avoidance. maybe if we made voting contigent on being a tax payer, those who want to vote would try harder to be tax payers

 

[TurtleDude]

Typically, would you say politicians are "rich" or "poor?" Are the offices and positions of the United States open to everyone? Technically, the answer would be yes if they are of age, but the fact is most politicians in the US are not a part of the group that pays no income taxes. It takes a substantial amount of money to run a political campaign.

Obama wasn't exactly rolling in money before he became a politician. remember al gore senior-the poor country school teacher who died a multi millionaire? or how about bill clinton-he wasn't exactly loaded until he got office

 

[drz-400]

Yes, if they pay no income tax. They don't need representation. Taxpayers need representation.

So you are literally saying no representation without taxation. Not to mention if they happen to pay any other form of federal taxes, you would be advocating taxation without representation. If someone does not pay income tax, with your proposal, would you allow them to be exempt from all other federal taxes to avoid this conundrum?

 

[drz-400]

if he is the only one paying taxes he should be the only one determing what the rate should be

but nice avoidance. maybe if we made voting contigent on being a tax payer, those who want to vote would try harder to be tax payers

Maybe, or they might just get pissed off because it is unfair.

 

[drz-400]

Obama wasn't exactly rolling in money before he became a politician. remember al gore senior-the poor country school teacher who died a multi millionaire? or how about bill clinton-he wasn't exactly loaded until he got office

Which shows another fundamental flaw in your position. Its not the same people "voting" (I put quotes because I have never seen or heard of a federal tax referendum) that are in low income taxes. It is not literally this group of people that always vote for less taxes because they always make less money. Classes are not cemented in place.

 

[MaggieD]

So you are literally saying no representation without taxation. Not to mention if they happen to pay any other form of federal taxes, you would be advocating taxation without representation. If someone does not pay income tax, with your proposal, would you allow them to be exempt from all other federal taxes to avoid this conundrum?

Taxation without representation is one of the primary factors that precipitated the American Revolution. You may turn it around to suit yourself. Good point re other Federal taxes. Don't know how one would resolve that.

The average American household's tax bill is a whopping $17,338. Oh, and then there's the other 47% who pay no taxes at all. http://www.heartland.org/policybot/results/21135/Americas_Tax_Bill_Tops_26738_Per_Household.html

 

[drz-400]

Taxation without representation is one of the primary factors that precipitated the American Revolution. You may turn it around to suit yourself. Good point re other Federal taxes. Don't know how one would resolve that.

Indeed it was, and I have noticed you have brought up that the US at one time did not favor such universal suffrage. Now, I may be appealing to a common practice here, but I think it is interesting to ask why nearly all modern democracies have striven for universal suffrage. Can we identify why countries have developed the way they did? One answer could be that such an institution is necessary, or at least more efficient at achieving the levels of cooperation needed for improving society.

Basically, in a broad sense it follows the golden rule.

criterion of reciprocity: citizens must reasonably believe that all citizens can reasonably accept the enforcement of a particular set of basic laws. Those coerced by law must be able to endorse the society's fundamental political arrangements freely, not because they are dominated or manipulated or kept uninformed.

 

[TurtleDude]

Maybe, or they might just get pissed off because it is unfair.

what is unfair is being able to jack up someone else's taxes when you pay none yourself

and we are talking about income tax rates-not gasoline taxes, sales tales or the forced SS and MC payments.

 

[drz-400]

what is unfair is being able to jack up someone else's taxes when you pay none yourself

and we are talking about income tax rates-not gasoline taxes, sales tales or the forced SS and MC payments.

Turtledude, I am a college kid. I pay very little federal income taxes. I work a part-time job and the worst fed taxes I pay are SS and medicare. My states flat income tax rate hits me the hardest. Despite all of this, my primary goal when I go and vote is not to screw over rich people and raise their taxes.

 

[MaggieD]

Indeed it was, and I have noticed you have brought up that the US at one time did not favor such universal suffrage. Now, I may be appealing to a common practice here, but I think it is interesting to ask why nearly all modern democracies have striven for universal suffrage. Can we identify why countries have developed the way they did? One answer could be that such an institution is necessary, or at least more efficient at achieving the levels of cooperation needed for improving society.

Basically, in a broad sense it follows the golden rule.

criterion of reciprocity: citizens must reasonably believe that all citizens can reasonably accept the enforcement of a particular set of basic laws. Those coerced by law must be able to endorse the society's fundamental political arrangements freely, not because they are dominated or manipulated or kept uninformed.

Re bolded sentence. May I also point out to you that democracy as a truly sustaining form of government in world history has yet to prove itself....that modern democracies are descending further and further into socialism?

"Those who rob from Peter to pay Paul will always have Paul's support."

This criterion of reciprocity. I've never heard of it. But, if citizens must reasonably believe that all citizens can reasonably expect the enforcement of a particular set of basic laws -- should not one of those laws be that citizens should all be paying income tax?

 

[TurtleDude]

Turtledude, I am a college kid. I pay very little federal income taxes. I work a part-time job and the worst fed taxes I pay are SS and medicare. My states flat income tax rate hits me the hardest. Despite all of this, my primary goal when I go and vote is not to screw over rich people and raise their taxes.

many of those who voted for obama bought into his claims that he was only going to raise taxes on "the rich"

if those the majority of voters expect only the rich to keep facing more and more taxes, the majority of voters have no incentive to stop the idiocy of massive spending and massive deficits

 

[MaggieD]

Turtledude, I am a college kid. I pay very little federal income taxes. I work a part-time job and the worst fed taxes I pay are SS and medicare. My states flat income tax rate hits me the hardest. Despite all of this, my primary goal when I go and vote is not to screw over rich people and raise their taxes.

So. What dog do you have in the fight? A sense of fairness? One can only hope.

Edit: After thinking about your comments on this thread and the way you're presenting yourself here, DRZ, I suspect you'll be paying your fair share in no time. ;-)

 

[drz-400]

So. What dog do you have in the fight? A sense of fairness? One can only hope.

Edit: After thinking about your comments on this thread and the way you're presenting yourself here, DRZ, I suspect you'll be paying your fair share in no time. ;-)

Honestly I do vote on what I think is right or wrong, or who I think has the best ideas. But you also bring up a good point. I do have a reason to care about what the upper tax rates are, namely because I have the potential to pay them in the not so distant future. I am not going to be a full-time college student w/ a part-time job for my entire life. I can only hope (sadly) that I do move into that $250,000 /yr. tax bracket eventually.

 

[Grim17]

It's my belief that every income earning American should be required to pay a minimum of 10% of their earnings in federal income tax, no matter how little they make. Nobody that lives and works in our society should be exempt from having to help maintain it.

The way America is structured today, is a recipe for disaster. When you have those that represent the half of the country that pays almost no income taxes, calling the shots and controlling those who represent the half of the country that pays nearly all of the income taxes, you know something has gone terribly wrong with our system.

It's kind of like a mom and dad who earn the money needed to support their family, but allow their kids to control the finances and dictate where every dime of that money is spent.... It just wouldn't make sense.

 

[haymarket]

Yeah. That whole system of representative democracy with all adults getting the right to vote certainly mucks up the works doesn't it? Oh to only return to the glory days of the late 18th century.

 

[spud_meister]

Okay, so 47% of Americans don't pay any income tax. They get the exact same vote I do. Where is MY representation as a taxpayer?

People who don't pay Federal taxes have no incentive to hold down spending or make government smaller. They are over-represented.

I'm under-represented. Where's the justice in that?

Should people who pay income tax get TWO votes? (I'm really kinda' serious here.)

I'm a bit worried about your maths, if 53% of the population pays income tax, then are they not better represented than the 47% that don't? By weight of numbers. And the 47% actually get representation without taxation, and the 53% get representation with taxation. I don't think any of your points are valid.

 

[drz-400]

It's my belief that every income earning American should be required to pay a minimum of 10% of their earnings in federal income tax, no matter how little they make. Nobody that lives and works in our society should be exempt from having to help maintain it.

The way America is structured today, is a recipe for disaster. When you have those that represent the half of the country that pays almost no income taxes, calling the shots and controlling those who represent the half of the country that pays nearly all of the income taxes, you know something has gone terribly wrong with our system.

It's kind of like a mom and dad who earn the money needed to support their family, but allow their kids to control the finances and dictate where every dime of that money is spent.... It just wouldn't make sense.

Actually it would be more like a dad who makes money needed to support a family and a mom who stays at home, but both of them control the finances. Just because someone makes less money does not mean they are incapable of voting responsibly. Do you think I am incapable? Do you want to take away my vote?

 

[MaggieD]

I'm a bit worried about your maths, if 53% of the population pays income tax, then are they not better represented than the 47% that don't? By weight of numbers. And the 47% actually get representation without taxation, and the 53% get representation with taxation. I don't think any of your points are valid.

Well, Spud, there we disagree, 'cause I think my point is valid. When 47% of the households in the United States don't pay income tax and have a vote in how MY income tax is spent, I don't like it. It's all about, "Those who rob from Peter to pay Paul will always have Paul's support." It's all about Congress pandering to that 47% and pimpin' out their votes.

 

[spud_meister]

Well, Spud, there we disagree, 'cause I think my point is valid. When 47% of the households in the United States don't pay income tax and have a vote in how MY income tax is spent, I don't like it. It's all about, "Those who rob from Peter to pay Paul will always have Paul's support." It's all about Congress pandering to that 47% and pimpin' out their votes.

I understand, but I think your "us vs. them" mentality is clouding your judgement (to paraphrase Yoda), not all 47% would be welfare junkies, I imagine a fair chunk would be retired people, or stay at home parents, or members of a single income household, there are a variety of reasons for people to not pay income tax that you would have as second class citizens.

 

[MaggieD]

I understand, but I think your "us vs. them" mentality is clouding your judgement (to paraphrase Yoda), not all 47% would be welfare junkies, I imagine a fair chunk would be retired people, or stay at home parents, or members of a single income household, there are a variety of reasons for people to not pay income tax that you would have as second class citizens.

Now that's the best argument I've heard yet. I'm not, though, calling anyone a second-class citizen. I simply want everyone to have a dog in the fight. That a household can be making $50,000 a year with two dependent children, pay no income tax and yet have the same weighted vote that I have paying my, let's say $20,000 a year in taxes, is unfair. When 47% of the voting population doesn't have a dog in the fight, how can we not look at the mess we're in and blame that stacked system right along with Congress?