5 ms·

It's a shame that government spending is decoupled from tax collection. By requiring employers to withhold and make estimated tax payments for employees, emplo

by jcnnghm 17y ago

It's a shame that government spending is decoupled from tax collection. By requiring employers to withhold and make estimated tax payments for employees, employees are unable to quantify the magnitude of taxes. If the average family in the country had to write a check for $18,276 to the federal government each year, people would start demanding a reduction in spending.

rbranson 17y ago
This is the way most businesses operate. In reality, businesses often have to spend their way out of losses with innovative R&D and marketing. The fact that credit exists smooths out the ups and downs in revenues is a good thing. Imagine the long-term cost of winding down government services, just to have to wind them up again? There are huge ramping costs to take into consideration, not to mention the impact on the economy. While I agree that government spending is a little ridiculous at times, breaking it down into simplistic terms ignores the vast tasks that even a stripped down federal government must undertake. Also, because of the way most people spend money in reality, the government would go broke if they tried to collect taxes without witholding. Sad but true.
- jcnnghm 17y ago
  This is the way most businesses operate. In reality, businesses often have to spend their way out of losses with innovative R&D and marketing. The fact that credit exists smooths out the ups and downs in revenues is a good thing. My comment wasn't related to this, but you're missing a big difference. If a business doesn't get there finances straightened out, they go under. If a business is wasting their money on stupid consulting projects causing their prices to rise, you can stop buying their products. You can't do that with the government. Imagine the long-term cost of winding down government services, just to have to wind them up again? There are huge ramping costs to take into consideration, not to mention the impact on the economy. While I agree that government spending is a little ridiculous at times, breaking it down into simplistic terms ignores the vast tasks that even a stripped down federal government must undertake. You're assuming that it's desirable to ramp them back up. I am totally comfortable doing away with Social Security and Medicare, lowering defense spending back to $3599 from $6071, drastically cutting anti-poverty programs so that everyone has to work to survive, and using the surpluses created by those reductions to pay down the federal debt to eliminate the interest expense. I'd also be for moving the Education and Mass Transit taxes back to the states so a bunch of stupid restrictions don't have to be met, like the 65mph speed limit and No Child Left Behind. While at it, we should drastically reduce our health research funding since the US represents 81% of global health R&D spending, and eliminate future federal employee retirement benefits. The mortgage credits can take a hike as well. Also, because of the way most people spend money in reality, the government would go broke if they tried to collect taxes without witholding. Sad but true. That's a feature, not a bug. If the average family had to write a check for $1,523 every month, it wouldn't be long before everyone was demanding accountability and cost reductions, instead of more services.
SamAtt 17y ago
Maybe. But this deals with federal taxes and 47% of the country doesn't pay federal taxes (http://bit.ly/dBESEf http://bit.ly/dBESEf). Plus these are averages meaning of the 53% of those who pay federal taxes a good portion of them pay less than that while a smaller portion pay quite a bit more. So a very large portion of the country is forcing much of the burden of the state on a very small (and admittedly much more well off) part and I'm not sure if people would choose to do that or not if shown the numbers outright
- bwh2 17y ago
  47% don't pay federal income tax. To quote the article: "The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property." So it's quite inaccurate to simply say they don't pay federal taxes, particularly when discussing an article identifying 32% of federal spending going towards Medicare and Social Security.
  - SamAtt 17y ago
    Fair enough. Though I think the point still stands which is that most would be choosing whether a person far richer than themselves should pay a chunk of their money and more people would be willing to do that.

by jcnnghm 17y ago

rbranson 17y ago

This is the way most businesses operate. In reality, businesses often have to spend their way out of losses with innovative R&D and marketing. The fact that credit exists smooths out the ups and downs in revenues is a good thing. Imagine the long-term cost of winding down government services, just to have to wind them up again? There are huge ramping costs to take into consideration, not to mention the impact on the economy. While I agree that government spending is a little ridiculous at times, breaking it down into simplistic terms ignores the vast tasks that even a stripped down federal government must undertake. Also, because of the way most people spend money in reality, the government would go broke if they tried to collect taxes without witholding. Sad but true.

jcnnghm 17y ago
This is the way most businesses operate. In reality, businesses often have to spend their way out of losses with innovative R&D and marketing. The fact that credit exists smooths out the ups and downs in revenues is a good thing. My comment wasn't related to this, but you're missing a big difference. If a business doesn't get there finances straightened out, they go under. If a business is wasting their money on stupid consulting projects causing their prices to rise, you can stop buying their products. You can't do that with the government. Imagine the long-term cost of winding down government services, just to have to wind them up again? There are huge ramping costs to take into consideration, not to mention the impact on the economy. While I agree that government spending is a little ridiculous at times, breaking it down into simplistic terms ignores the vast tasks that even a stripped down federal government must undertake. You're assuming that it's desirable to ramp them back up. I am totally comfortable doing away with Social Security and Medicare, lowering defense spending back to $3599 from $6071, drastically cutting anti-poverty programs so that everyone has to work to survive, and using the surpluses created by those reductions to pay down the federal debt to eliminate the interest expense. I'd also be for moving the Education and Mass Transit taxes back to the states so a bunch of stupid restrictions don't have to be met, like the 65mph speed limit and No Child Left Behind. While at it, we should drastically reduce our health research funding since the US represents 81% of global health R&D spending, and eliminate future federal employee retirement benefits. The mortgage credits can take a hike as well. Also, because of the way most people spend money in reality, the government would go broke if they tried to collect taxes without witholding. Sad but true. That's a feature, not a bug. If the average family had to write a check for $1,523 every month, it wouldn't be long before everyone was demanding accountability and cost reductions, instead of more services.

SamAtt 17y ago

Maybe. But this deals with federal taxes and 47% of the country doesn't pay federal taxes (http://bit.ly/dBESEf http://bit.ly/dBESEf). Plus these are averages meaning of the 53% of those who pay federal taxes a good portion of them pay less than that while a smaller portion pay quite a bit more. So a very large portion of the country is forcing much of the burden of the state on a very small (and admittedly much more well off) part and I'm not sure if people would choose to do that or not if shown the numbers outright

bwh2 17y ago
47% don't pay federal income tax. To quote the article: "The vast majority of people who escape federal income taxes still pay other taxes, including federal payroll taxes that fund Social Security and Medicare, and excise taxes on gasoline, aviation, alcohol and cigarettes. Many also pay state or local taxes on sales, income and property." So it's quite inaccurate to simply say they don't pay federal taxes, particularly when discussing an article identifying 32% of federal spending going towards Medicare and Social Security.
- SamAtt 17y ago
  Fair enough. Though I think the point still stands which is that most would be choosing whether a person far richer than themselves should pay a chunk of their money and more people would be willing to do that.