The American Spectator

Kingofthenet| 7.19.11 @ 11:38AM

I often ask my Conservative 'friends' So we pay too much taxes? Compared to WHAT? Compared to what the rates were under Reagan? Compared to what they were under Eisenhower? Compared to what Modern European Democracies pay? Unless you can answer THAT question, it just sounds like baseless whining.

Warrior| 7.19.11 @ 12:29PM

Take away everything in which the federal government does not specifically have an enumerated power provided for in the Constitution and there would be no need to raise taxes whatsoever. In fact, a huge reduction in federal taxation would be in order. All else is left to the states to decide.

If you want government supplied medical, move to Mass. If you believe illegals should be given the same rights as citizens, move to California. If you want to live supporting a massive number of welfare recipients move to New York. If you enjoy back alley deals and cut throat politics, move to Chicago.

Since you won't agree any of that, why not just have a flat tax rate or a consumption tax. Eliminate all loopholes and write-offs and have everyone pay about 12%. This would enable you to live with your Marxist leaders edict of everyone sharing the burden.

Wayne | 7.19.11 @ 2:54PM

I'll go with the flat tax, but hard to pay that consumption tax would be grossly unfair to those who have paid income tax for 40 years and must live on what they saved after tax. In fact it would impoverish them in taxes.

Wayne | 7.19.11 @ 2:47PM

Kingofthenet. I bet you have no conservative friends.

Wayne | 7.19.11 @ 2:51PM

To answer the question. Compared to what one makes. We pay too much taxes compared to the income we make. See, no need to compare us to Europe. As we know, if you give more in taxes, the government will just waste more and regulate more and take away as much individual liberty as it can. It is time to starve the beast. Imagine a time when the government sells guns to Mexican drug cartels. That's would be a beast out of control.

Al Adab| 7.19.11 @ 3:46PM

Too high compared to the legitimate requirements of the federal government and the necessity of state governments. Personal income is property, the property of the earner, it may not be taken from us without due process. When it is taken and given to others whom the government may temporarily favor the action is nothing less than theft. There is no justification for the so called social programs, the funding of private concerns or special interest groups by government. So KOTN, we speak of redistibutionist rates used only to punish success and reward favored classes. The current programs we oppose are those that create the "too high taxes" which are extracted from us without - I dare say - our consent. Perhaps instead of a balanced budget amendment the states won't adopt, we could simply repeal the ill concieved income tax amendment.

Thom| 7.19.11 @ 6:04PM

Kingofthenet,
You speak like a person that either pays next to nothing in taxes or has no idea what you pay or for that matter how skewed the tax burden is and thus makes your statement just plain ignorant sounding.

I have my tax records back to 1968? Do you? In the last two dozen years since Reagan I’ve paid 14-16% of my income to Federal income taxes. When Reagan took office I was at 20% and climbing every year thanks to the progressive tax rate, tax bracket creep and double digit inflation which drove every tax payer higher and higher into higher marginal tax rates with no real net income increase to show for that.

Last year I paid 14.7% of my income to Federal income tax. What did you pay last year? My only deduction is a home mortgage which knocks between $4-5,000 off my income, my personal deduction and that stupid $400 credit paid to people who pay no Federal taxes at all. On top of this I paid 15.3% to fund someone else’s retirement income and medical care and provide hundreds of billions of free Healthcare to people who pay absolutely nothing in income taxes. To this you can add over 10% to State and Local taxes which include a tax assessment on my home that is twice what it was 6 years ago. We are over 40% before you even get to all the taxes passed on in every legal good and service you purchase and that nominal figure is around 20% of the cost of everything you. No Business pays taxes; it collects them from you in the price of everything. Over 60% can be documented, how much did you pay in taxes last year?

Given the skewed nature of the Karl Marx Progressive tax burden for which 46%+ of those required to file Federal tax returns pay 0 taxes and the upper .03% of filers pay 37% of the income tax and the upper 3% pay over 50% you see a problem here with raising taxes on those that already pay the bulk of the burden? Under the Lord Marx’s gift to the Democrat Party, those that actually pay taxes currently will get an even larger rate increase if you try to raise taxes on those that currently don’t because each dollar you earn is taxed at the lowest rate first and up through the brackets you go. That is by design in case you missed that point.

Get a clue here comrade, the half that pays 96% of the income tax burden isn’t going to continue to pay for those that pay little to nothing. What percent of your income did you pay in income taxes last year Comrade?

martin j smith| 7.19.11 @ 11:52AM

Hey Pawnof the nyet: The issue is NOT TAXES BUT SPENDING AND THEN THE NEED FOR HEROIN ( OH I MEAN TAXES ) THAT IS THE PROBLEM.

Oldefarte| 7.19.11 @ 3:22PM

Of course HIGHER TAXES is the political agenda of these Democrats. Don't you get it....TAX & SPEND, but in Obama's philosophy, obviously its the reverse [SPEND & TAX]. BEND OVER AMERICA!!!!!!!!!!!

Jeff| 7.19.11 @ 5:09PM

go ahead Presentdent Obama, run on raising taxes in 2012 ... see what happens ...