Are you willing to pay higher taxes?

[mudesi]

If it means

Universal health care
Quality education
Social programs for the most vulnerable
A prison system that focuses on rehabilitation
Solid infrastructure
Subsidies for clean industry
Redistribution of wealth


Because if not, then you can forget about ever turning this ship that is the United States of America around. Who here is willing join the rest of the civilized world and say it's about "we" instead of about "me"?

[AndyTiedye]

1. yeah

[ixion]

2. No, I am not. We can have everything you name without raising taxes

we just have to stop feeding the MIC.

[JerseygirlCT]

4. That's true, too.

But if the question is really -- are these your priorities and would you be willing to sacrifice some in order to have them -- then yeppers, I would.

[SharonAnn]

5. Well, we do have to put some taxes back to proper levels. Income from capital should be

taxed the same as income from labor. Wealthy people who live on their investments shouldn't pay less in taxes than people who have the same income but work for it and actually EARN it.

[ixion]

9. yep, I totally agree... labor is way over-taxed right now..

while investments are not. That's not really fair at all.

[dysfunctional press]

10. exactly.

the money going down the iraq shithole alone would have been able to provide for a lot of that list.

[Moochy]

12. $20,000 US per family

To your point, the cost of Afghanistan and Iraq Wars:

$20,000 USD per family.

'Hidden Costs' Double Price Of Two Wars, Democrats Say

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/11/12/AR2007111202008.html?referrer=emailarticle

The economic costs to the United States of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan so far total approximately $1.5 trillion, according to a new study by congressional Democrats that estimates the conflicts' "hidden costs"-- including higher oil prices, the expense of treating wounded veterans and interest payments on the money borrowed to pay for the wars.

[JerseygirlCT]

3. Sure thing. nt

[Fed_Up_Grammy]

6. No !

[CaliforniaPeggy]

32. Why is that?

What would you do in order to pay for those things?

:shrug:

[Amerigo Vespucci]

7. Not to support a "permanent presence in Iraq."

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/004772.php

[wildbilln864]

8. Not one cent of the federal income.....

tax you pay goes towards any of those things. It all goes into the pockets of IBs. According to the Grace commission. So no I am not!

[annabanana]

11. Yup. . Actually, for a starter, I'd be happy if I could be sure that

my money wouldn't just go straight into CronyPockets.

[scarletwoman]

13. Not until my taxes stop funding the Empire. (nt)

[GoneOffShore]

14. Hell yes, but .....

We need to eliminate "corporate personhood" and get the tax rate on the rich up. The nonsense of CEO's with payday's 100 or more times that of the guy on the floor has got to stop.

[goodgd_yall]

48. I'm with you there---tax the rich, offshore accounts, and spread the wealth

[Generic Brad]

15. I am paying higher taxes

And I'm not seeing government use that dough for anything on your list right now.

Over the course of the past seven years I have seen my property taxes double. And that middle class tax cut we have heard so much about kind of got erased by that VAT I have worked my way into.

I think we can get the things on your list if the government stops allowing corporate welfare, no bid contracts, massive black ops budgets, and mercenary armies to drain the national coffers.

[smitty]

16. No, raising taxes is not a panacea. I like to keep the money I

earn, I can spend it much more wisely than any city, county, state or national government.

[Mutineer]

17. There is adequate money to pay for those things without raising taxes

but it would mean the end to legislators pet projects like bridges to nowhere. Not to mention a certain war in iraq which is bleeding the treasury dry. Raising taxes is not the real issue here. It's budget reform. No more pet projects.

[durrrty libby]

18. No. The gov't needs to clean up fraud, waste and war first

[ChazII]

19. No.

See posts #16-#18.

[madokie]

20. for me its always been about we and not me

I have no problems with paying taxes and never had. this world would be so much better for all people if we all worked toward the common good some not for only me all the damn time like so many do.

[SoCalDem]

21. Some of the higher taxes would be off-set by the health care premiums

now paid by the employer/employee..

If the employer's share is $400 a month and the employee's share is 200, that employee would be getting a $600 a month RAISE..and would suddenly be free to change jobs for a better job if he/she found one.. THAT one thing would cause emplyers to have to start paying actual raises to keep employees from bolting for greener pastures...and it would mean real raises for people..not the "well I'm giving you a $50 a week raise, but your co-pay doubled and your share of health care went up $80.00 a week"..

Employers could go back to offering a WAGE for a job done, and would have less reason to go snooping through employees "personal lives" too

If they are no longer paying for health care, it's none of their business what medications you take, or if you drink or smoke on your own time..

[dysfunctional press]

22. what makes you think that the employer's share would convert to employee wages?

i don't see that happening.

the employee's share, taken directly from the paycheck, yes- but the employer will find other uses for their would-be former contribution.

[SoCalDem]

23. techincally, they are included as "employess benefits" and have been used as

an "instead of a raise" tool for decades.. Unions especially have had this one pulled on the,.. They routinely take LESS wages, in order to have the benefits, and employers always INCLUDE those bennies when they tell the employees how much they are REALLY being paid, so I would certainly think those monies SHOULD start going to the employees..

That withheld-for-health care money is probably why "wages have been flat".. Instead of raises going to the employees, it's been siphoned off to insurance companies & HMOs..

[dysfunctional press]

25. it might happen for some union workers...

but by and large, i'd be willing to bet that the employer portion will remain just that.

[AdHocSolver]

37. Employee wages would rise through competition if people could seek new jobs witout concern for...

health benefits from employers. Your health benefits should not be dependent on where you work. This ties people to a particular employer and discourages people from looking for new jobs, which is the main method for most people to obtain better pay.

An older person or a person with a family that needs health insurance is at a disadvantage in a job search. Employers expect to pay higher premiums for those people and either offer lower pay or completely eliminate these people from consideration.

[SoCalDem]

46. and any raises are usually "take-aways" anyway, since every raise

is coupled with an increase in the employee's share of healthcare..

It's indentured servitude, and as much as employers complain, secretly, they love it..

We were held hostage to a job my husband hated, but our firstborn required a lot of medical help, and we could not get insurance on our own, or when he checked into other job, he was told that our son would not qualify for a specified amount of time, and would have limited coverage..(the was at a time when he was having surgery at Mayo Clinic, 4-6 times a year)..so we were tethered to that company..and they knew that my husband would jump through any hoops they wanted him to..

[China_cat]

24. Absolutely.

AND I want more of what goes to war now to go to caring for people and bringing jobs, as well as soldiers, home.

[slackmaster]

26. Maybe

I'm one of the people who pay WAY more into taxes than I get back in services and other benefits.

If you want me to pay more, you'll have to show me a detailed cost-benefit analysis so I can decide whether or not your specific proposal is worthwhile.

[devilgrrl]

27. No. I'm for the Top 1% paying higher taxes.

:-|

[nadinbrzezinski]

28. Change the frame

are you willing to pay higher service fees to live in this society?

And my answer is YES

The investment usually pays with dividends

[CaliforniaPeggy]

29. Absolutely, unequivocally, YES...

All those things are certainly worth paying more taxes to me!

K&R

[Initech]

30. Tax the rich and tax their overseas bank accounts.

Add taxing the churches to that, and we'd have enough to pay for all those services without raising the taxes for the other 99% of the population.

[Blue_In_AK]

31. I would only agree to pay higher taxes

if all those filthy rich bastards had to pay higher taxes ... and I mean a LOT higher taxes. It's not fair that they get to skate while the rest of us carry the burden.

[Horse with no Name]

33. Yes. And under the right administration I would be willing to pay higher taxes

to pay down this horrendous bill we have left our kids and grandkids.

[Sanctified]

34. Nope,

I am already over taxed and can barely afford to live. This year I just got my property tax bill and it went up $400, that is $400 I did not have nor was I expecting, I fucking had to take out a payday loan just to pay my property taxes so I did not lose my home.

I suggest that the government stop wasting money on bullshit programs like NASA and the defense department before they ask me to foot more money I don't have.

[nadinbrzezinski]

35. While the Defense Department is the lion's share of taxes

you realize that NASA is less than what one percent of the US Budget, ON A GOOD YEAR?

My god, people should get informed

Oh and by the way... those property taxes have gone up nationwide because local governments have lost federal grants due to the war in Iraq

Oh and in case you wonder, many of those programs which were once funded are mandatory

[Sanctified]

45. Less than 1% is still a lot of fucking money for a bullshit program.

[1932]

36. I would pay more for a better functioning society.

[provis99]

38. definitely

I'm in the bottom 20% of income earners thanks to my crap jobs, but I'd be willing to pay much more in taxes to have those things for everybody (not just me). If universal health care meant people even worse off would have their basic health needs met, I'm all for it. But I do realize your list is probably a pipe dream at this point; too much selfishness and libertarianism in American society to make it work.

[Lil Missy]

39. Yes, as long as that includes a halt to corporate welfare

Many of the things you have listed are a spit in the ocean compared to corpoate welfare.

[Mind_your_head]

40. After the top 1% income "earners" (meaning they make the money off

of every one else's back) and corporate welfare is stopped DEAD IN ITS TRACKS.....Yeah! Count me in!

Until then....nah.

Peace,
M_Y_H

[AdHocSolver]

41. The economic assets of a country are like a big pie. You can allocate the pie to war and boondoggle-

or you can allocate the pie to health care, education, infrastructure, research and development, etc., that is you SHIFT the funds, NOT increase them.

A study of the REAL cost of the Iraq war to date indicates that it has reached a trillion dollars so far, and there is no end in sight. That money alone would cover universal health care and improvements in education.

The U.S. sends several billions of dollars each year to Saudia Arabia and other Middle Eastern oil states. When you add in the billions of oil profits each year to Big Oil and you have the price of upgrading our infrastructure. Pass laws mandating better gas mileage for cars as was done after the "Arab oil embargo" in the 1970's and you reduce demand for oil, stabilize its price, and you save billions of dollars to spend in America.

Last, but not least, the loss of jobs to Asia, as much as the tax cuts for the rich, has drained the federal treasury due to the fact that Chinese workers don't pay taxes to the U.S., but American workers do. One gigantic boost in revenue to pay for all of the goodies mentioned in this post is to change the trade laws to bring manufacturing jobs back to the U.S.

Increase jobs and you increase the tax base and generate lots of revenue. There is no need to raise taxes. Just stop wasting them on wars, gas-guzzling cars, huge, unwarranted profits for big oil and big insurance and you can have all the goodies you want.

[Hoof Hearted]

42. of course. n/t

[geek_sabre]

43. hmm

Universal health care-perhaps, though I'm not impressed with any plans so far. We need to come up with a system that will work for 300,000,000+ people. We need to make sure that we can sustain a universal system without compromising innovation in the medical technology/pharmaceutical industry. We need to see success at a city, state, and regional level before wasting our time and money trying to turn the US into Europe overnight.

Quality education- yes, but not until there is a serious plan to change the system (ie, throwing money at failing schools doesn't make the students learn) We need to reform our entire preK-12 education system.

Social programs for the most vulnerable- sure

A prison system that focuses on rehabilitation- sure

Solid infrastructure- sure

Subsidies for clean industry- Yes, though I think removing subsidies from businesses that aren't ecologically sound is more important

Redistribution of wealth- Hell no. The only real way to narrow the gap between rich and poor is through education. Fix the education system, encourage people not to drop out of high school, discourage materialism and living outside of one's means, and promote saving, investing money, and an entrepreneurship. Giving everyone the tools to help themselves is the only long-term solution.

[B Calm]

44. We shouldn't have to pay higher taxes. Stop wasteful spending

on the military budget, and raise taxes on the rich. If we had universal health care, corporations would be more apt to build here instead of Canada.

[goodgd_yall]

47. Yes

I don't mind paying taxes if I get something back for it or if it improves someone else's life.