A Question No One Seems To Know Or Want To Answer

**NJCardFan** · 04-17-2010, 01:20 PM

I've noticed a common theme this week, this being tax week and that's that no one really wants to answer the question "How much should we be paying in taxes?" Meaning, what % is too high? Should we be paying 20%? We're already being taxed over 35% by the federal government. 40%? Add in state and local taxes and in some cases we're creeping up to or surpassing 50%. And once the taxes for Obamacare kick in, we may be looking at at least 60%. So, where does it end?

**djones520** · 04-17-2010, 01:33 PM

*shrugs* Hard to say. I technically pay no federal income taxes right now, and because of my military status I pay no state income taxes as well. With that though, we find it hard to "get ahead". Granted, our spending habits are a bit looser then they should be, but even were we to restrict ourselves to the minimums, we still wouldn't be able to put a lot of money away. Introducing higher taxes would not make anything easier on us in any stretch of the imagination, and I doubt it would on the other 47% or so who share my tax bracket or worse.

It's a sticky situation, balancing whats "fair" with whats "fair".

**PoliCon** · 04-17-2010, 01:53 PM

Originally Posted by NJCardFan

I've noticed a common theme this week, this being tax week and that's that no one really wants to answer the question "How much should we be paying in taxes?" Meaning, what % is too high? Should we be paying 20%? We're already being taxed over 35% by the federal government. 40%? Add in state and local taxes and in some cases we're creeping up to or surpassing 50%. And once the taxes for Obamacare kick in, we may be looking at at least 60%. So, where does it end?

ANYTHING in income taxes is too high. If we switched to consumption taxes I'd be willing to go as high as 20% total tax burden.

**Speedy** · 04-17-2010, 02:06 PM

10% is good enough for God. 10% should be good enough for the government.

**PoliCon** · 04-17-2010, 03:24 PM

Originally Posted by Speedy

10% is good enough for God. 10% should be good enough for the government.

AND once we pear down all of the crap that the fed is not supposed to be doing - 10% may well be enough for them. But I'm saying 20% total tax burden for ALL taxes - state and local as well.

**Troll** · 04-17-2010, 04:01 PM

Originally Posted by PoliCon

ANYTHING in income taxes is too high. If we switched to consumption taxes I'd be willing to go as high as 20% total tax burden.

+111111111

I'm of the opinion that enacting the FairTax as it's written would either completely or partially fix a good 60% of the problems in this country. The Income Tax, apart from being unconstitutional, is squelching the only thing that could potentially lift America out of this mess.

Can you imagine if they enacted the FairTax right now? America would become the biggest tax haven on the planet overnight. We could cap the federal budget at $2 trillion a year, and use all the surplus FairTax revenue to start paying down the national debt. You would have to hide under your bed to avoid getting a job. Only legal households would qualify for the prebate, so illegal aliens would be taxed double what US citizens are.

Conservatives in this country need to stop pushing for "lower taxes" and start pushing for the FairTax yesterday.

**marv** · 04-17-2010, 04:47 PM

It's not really about what kind of tax, "fair", "flat", "income", or even "VAT", it's about how the tax is administered, and who/how the actual tax rate is set.

.........and how the revenues are spent!

**Articulate_Ape** · 04-17-2010, 07:35 PM

I think the question is not just how much, but to whom we are obligated to pay taxes to. In my mind, I think taxes paid to the federal government should be quite low (cover the military and a few other things). The majority of taxes should go to local and state government where there is a better opportunity to hold people accountable. The Constitution intended the states to be the primary governing bodies, and with them the people. The federal government's role was to be an arbitrator between the states, not a master. It was supposed to defend and promote the general welfare (i.e. look out for the best interests of the Union in dealing with foreign powers).

We've come a long way, baby.

Sonnabend · 04-17-2010, 10:04 PM

. The Constitution intended the states to be the primary governing bodies, and with them the people. The federal government's role was to be an arbitrator between the states, not a master. It was supposed to defend and promote the general welfare (i.e. look out for the best interests of the Union in dealing with foreign powers).

Paging CITM...THIS is what you don't understand,

Taxes? I'd be satisfied with 10%..I am sick and tired of paying over 30% to the damned government. That's MY money I worked for.

**Kay** · 04-18-2010, 12:47 AM

I don't mind paying my share, because after all I have great roads to drive on, safe
drinking water, police and fireman that are just a phone call away, etc. We all have to
chip in for those services. I'm with Marv on this - it's not so much what we are paying
as how they are using the funds with reckless abandond.

I would be for doing away with the current tax system all together and going to a flat
consumption tax. That seems to me to be the fairest way to do it. You pay according
to what you buy and use.