What SHOULD the tax burden be? (user search)
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
May 01, 2024, 12:58:05 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  Political Debate (Moderator: Torie)
  What SHOULD the tax burden be? (search mode)
Pages: [1]
Poll
Question: What should the average American's tax burden be?
#1
0-10%
 
#2
11-20%
 
#3
21-30%
 
#4
31-40%
 
#5
41-50%
 
#6
51-60%
 
#7
60+%
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 26

Author Topic: What SHOULD the tax burden be?  (Read 2204 times)
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« on: December 21, 2004, 11:39:11 PM »

5% for the feds and 10% for the states.
Logged
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« Reply #1 on: December 23, 2004, 12:05:59 PM »

BRTD
I'm hoping you're joking, but based on your other posts I'm guessing that you are not. What does it take to convince you that socialism is a failure? The most socialistic societies that ever existed, the USSR and China, did a miserable job of providing for their people. Frequently they were not even able to provide enough food. Yes they achieved a greater level of economic equality, but only by making everyone dirt poor. We have poor people in America, but most people are doing quite well by the standards of the rest of the world. What is it about socialism that you find so appealing?
Logged
David S
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 5,250


« Reply #2 on: December 23, 2004, 01:00:40 PM »

I want basic needs provided for all and the income gaps between the classes closed. My economics professor last semester fairly agrees with me, he was also a big fan of many Marxist ideas.

Note that the examples you listed had massive military spending, and I want to gut the hell out of it.
Yeah the communist countries were big on military spending, but then they never spent as much as we do now and yet our capitalist economy is so robust that it can handle that and still provide a good living for all of us. Its a noble goal to want all people to have their basic needs met, but our system does that. When I think of poverty I think of pictures of starving people in Africa. I think of children whose tiny arms are nothing but skin and bone, children so we weak they can barely hold their heads up. But that type of poverty is extemely rare if it even exists at all in the U.S. Poor people in America are far more likely to be overweight than underweight. We have some homelessness in America, but  its far from common. Most Americans have a comfortable place to live and food on the table. Most Americans enjoy luxuries the communists could never have. In communist countries you are destined to be poor. In America you could be poor but more likely you will be middle class and maybe even wealthy. In America you can improve your own condition, and many have done exactly that.

Socialism may sound good in principle, but it does not work in practice. It has produced one disaster after another. Capitalism on the other hand, sounds like a terrible system based on greed, and yet it has produced in this country the highest standard of living, not just for the wealthy, but the vast majority as well.
Logged
Pages: [1]  
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.03 seconds with 14 queries.