I posted the same material in P&R, but when I saw some of the stuff that passes for "economics" in this forum, I think my thread belongs here as well: "Think your taxes are too high? David Stockman thinks they're not high enough. And he's a Republican who once helped engineer the largest tax cut in history. Ronald Reagan's former budget director tells Lesley Stahl why he's changed his tune on taxes." http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-504803_162-20021193-10391709.html <object width="640" height="385"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/SE9lPiZ16e8?fs=1&hl=en_US"></param><param name="allowFullScreen" value="true"></param><param name="allowscriptaccess" value="always"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/SE9lPiZ16e8?fs=1&hl=en_US" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" allowscriptaccess="always" allowfullscreen="true" width="640" height="385"></embed></object>
i have no problem with higher taxes as long ,as MY money are spend wisely by gvt..our local taxes are pretty high,but i have no complains..schools are great,police and firefighters very well funded and not begging for a money on every intersection on weekends,low crime and a lot of projects that improve the area. can't say same on federal level..they probably going to spend them to bailout rich and more control of the poor..full body scanners in every public building and airports? fuck that..another useless war on whatever? fuck that too
I can handle increases, especially when the return on the money spent is high. For example, it was published that every $1 spent increasing audits division brings in $58 in uncollected taxes. Collect more from deadbeats, maybe they won't need to raise other taxes
http://www.thefiscaltimes.com/Issues/The-Economy/2010/07/23/What-Can-the-Fed-Still-Do.aspx Bartlett was senior policy analyst in the Reagan Adm.
Its funny people complain about CA schools but they don't want their property taxes going up. I pay more in property taxes in South Denver Metro than some relatives in Southern CA. And guess who's schools are ranked much better. Now obviously you look at $ per pupil spent and its higher in many bad areas of the US with bad test scores so it's not just money, but you get the point hopefully. As Bob pointed out often people don't mind paying when they see value but when you rebuild Iraq instead of the US people get real upset, unless you are Haliburton.
Or this... Mumbai: The US would be spending a whopping $200 million per day on President Barack Obama's visit to the city.
Let's be real...any government is going to waste a lot of money. It's bad enough with local government, let alone state and federal government. We know that a shit load of that money is going to spent on bullshit and misappropriated. Stockman is entitled to his opinion, but regardless of his credentials he's not going to convince me that raising taxes is the course to a better tomorrow.
Closing the deficit with tax hikes won't work. Higher taxes don't increase the size of the pie. Give more to the public sector, and the private sector spends less. Even if the bulk of additional revenue goes to Government consumption - and not debt service - bureaucratic inefficiency wastes 30% of revenue collected. The goal is to starve the cancer. Not invigorate it. Government doesn't create jobs or wealth. The private sector does. Cut taxes and velocity, savings and investment would skyrocket. At this rate of spending, the cancer will kill the host in ~4 years.