3 ms·

That's nice to hear. I'm nowhere near the upper tax brackets at the moment, but I like to think that I would be okay (and even encouraging) of the taxes I did

by mmorris 16y ago

That's nice to hear. I'm nowhere near the upper tax brackets at the moment, but I like to think that I would be okay (and even encouraging) of the taxes I did face in such a situation. I know many people who make lots of money and are bitter about paying so much tax on it, but very few people who realize that the taxes they pay make a real difference in everyone's lives (especially the lives of those who are less fortunate). Or that the taxes they pay make possible all of the benefits the Federal, State, and local governments offer. Sure, the government may not be the most efficient of entities, but I think it's difficult to make a serious argument that we would be better off without most of the services provided by the various levels of governments, or that they could easily be replaced. And none of these would be possible without some form of taxation (though how the taxes should be structured is up for reasonable debate). While I believe that people should be fairly compensated for their hard work, and that we shouldn't penalize people for working harder, I also believe that it would benefit most people to stop and think about how much their taxes help to make this/any country a great place. *disclaimer: this is mostly about the US, as this is my main experience, but I'd guess most of it applies to (at least some) other nations as well.

grandalf 16y ago
I don't disagree in principle, but I think there is far more value provided by state and local governments than by the Federal government. Roads, hospitals, schools, etc. are all local and state funded. The Federal budget is mostly military spending (the US has no significant military adversaries) and Medicare spending (physicians, pharma and other "caregivers" prey on the elderly and have managed to channel this spending into profits... see Bush's prescription drug benefit/handout to those firms). After that, the remaining 10% of the Federal budget probably makes a lot of sense. Sadly, most of what comes out of everyone's paycheck goes to fund military and medicare overspending.
- diziet 16y ago
  Out of local spending, almost 30% come from federal government grants. Only 45% of the federal tax base is income tax, and only 15% of the local tax comes from income taxes. Out of federal expenditures, about 45% of them are covered by defense, healthcare and medicare spending.
  - grandalf 16y ago
    On your first point, local spending is so small that the 30% coming from federal grants is insignificant. On your last point, the following pie chart seems to disagree: http://bit.ly/aG9Oj5 http://bit.ly/aG9Oj5
    - diziet 16y ago
      On your second point:What year is that data for? It looks to me as roughly 50% is covered by "Pentagon" and "Health" spending, not a far cry difference from the 45% my (seemingly outdated) economics textbook seems to show.
      - grandalf 16y ago
        See this chart: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010_Receipts_%26_Expenditures_Estimates.PNG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010_Receipts_%26_Expendit...
- Locke1689 16y ago
  Roads, hospitals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Financing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Finan... Hospitals are indirectly funded by many different sources, both public and private.
  - grandalf 16y ago
    Hospitals are to varying degrees Federally tax exempt, and they of course collect payment from Medicare/Medicaid, but many, many hospitals are primarily supported by local and state governments. This isn't to say that Federal funding isn't sometimes useful. Federal central planning built the interstate highway system for military purposes, and this had the side effect of making suburban living desirable, draining the tax base from cities and destroying some urban environments, leading to urban crime, poverty, etc. Nonetheless, the highways have probably been helpful to the economy as a whole even if they did destroy some cities along the way. My point is mainly to highlight that the primary interface with government services should be the local and state level. That we get so disproportionally excited about Federal laws/elections/officials shows that politics is mostly for entertainment/signaling purposes and that the useful roles of government are unglamorous and are typically accomplished quite effectively by the local municipality. Incidentally, today is garbage day. I derive tremendously more utility from garbage day than I do (or ever will) from the Iraq war, Afghanistan war or Social Security.

by mmorris 16y ago

grandalf 16y ago

I don't disagree in principle, but I think there is far more value provided by state and local governments than by the Federal government. Roads, hospitals, schools, etc. are all local and state funded. The Federal budget is mostly military spending (the US has no significant military adversaries) and Medicare spending (physicians, pharma and other "caregivers" prey on the elderly and have managed to channel this spending into profits... see Bush's prescription drug benefit/handout to those firms). After that, the remaining 10% of the Federal budget probably makes a lot of sense. Sadly, most of what comes out of everyone's paycheck goes to fund military and medicare overspending.

diziet 16y ago
Out of local spending, almost 30% come from federal government grants. Only 45% of the federal tax base is income tax, and only 15% of the local tax comes from income taxes. Out of federal expenditures, about 45% of them are covered by defense, healthcare and medicare spending.
- grandalf 16y ago
  On your first point, local spending is so small that the 30% coming from federal grants is insignificant. On your last point, the following pie chart seems to disagree: http://bit.ly/aG9Oj5 http://bit.ly/aG9Oj5
  - diziet 16y ago
    On your second point:What year is that data for? It looks to me as roughly 50% is covered by "Pentagon" and "Health" spending, not a far cry difference from the 45% my (seemingly outdated) economics textbook seems to show.
    - grandalf 16y ago
      See this chart: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010_Receipts_%26_Expenditures_Estimates.PNG http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:2010_Receipts_%26_Expendit...
Locke1689 16y ago
Roads, hospitals http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Financing http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_Highway_System#Finan... Hospitals are indirectly funded by many different sources, both public and private.
- grandalf 16y ago
  Hospitals are to varying degrees Federally tax exempt, and they of course collect payment from Medicare/Medicaid, but many, many hospitals are primarily supported by local and state governments. This isn't to say that Federal funding isn't sometimes useful. Federal central planning built the interstate highway system for military purposes, and this had the side effect of making suburban living desirable, draining the tax base from cities and destroying some urban environments, leading to urban crime, poverty, etc. Nonetheless, the highways have probably been helpful to the economy as a whole even if they did destroy some cities along the way. My point is mainly to highlight that the primary interface with government services should be the local and state level. That we get so disproportionally excited about Federal laws/elections/officials shows that politics is mostly for entertainment/signaling purposes and that the useful roles of government are unglamorous and are typically accomplished quite effectively by the local municipality. Incidentally, today is garbage day. I derive tremendously more utility from garbage day than I do (or ever will) from the Iraq war, Afghanistan war or Social Security.