Thread: Why Shouldn't The Rich Pay More Taxes?

Taxes go to pay for things like road improvements, the FAA, the EPA, and corporate bailouts.

Seems to me that people with more money benifit the most from these sorts of government agencies. Poor people can't afford to fly, I'd assume most poor people don't even own cars. Those who are functional and poor surely don't do much traveling between NYC and Boston, so it would stand to reason that those who do have money use the roads the most. So if wealthy people use these services more often than poor people, why shouldn't they have to pay more for them? How many low income people are going to benifit from a corporate bailout?

Taxes help enable us to have a commercial infrastructure in the first place. By "infrastructure" I include a broad swath of services and structures that include, education, healthcare, Internet connectivity, research and development, NOAA, airports, roads, bridges, all kinds of common carrier services, a legal system to assure everything from small claims court to royalties...

The more you earn, the more you should pay. I'm happy to participate in this, too.

It seems amazingly obvious as a necessity and, potentially, an enormous benefit to business of all sizes.

Originally Posted by Sparta

Taxes go to pay for things like road improvements, the FAA, the EPA, and corporate bailouts.

Seems to me that people with more money benifit the most from these sorts of government agencies. Poor people can't afford to fly, I'd assume most poor people don't even own cars. Those who are functional and poor surely don't do much traveling between NYC and Boston, so it would stand to reason that those who do have money use the roads the most. So if wealthy people use these services more often than poor people, why shouldn't they have to pay more for them? How many low income people are going to benifit from a corporate bailout?

Why don't people understand that roads are payed for with state taxes. Mine are really low and, guess what, my state has one of the highest unemployment and has a small debt per person, while, Rhode Island, the state with the highest taxes has the highest unemployment and the most 4th highest debt per person. hmmmmmm interesting!

Originally Posted by Moderates of America

Why don't people understand that roads are payed for with state taxes. Mine are really low and, guess what, my state has one of the highest unemployment and has a small debt per person, while, Rhode Island, the state with the highest taxes has the highest unemployment and the most 4th highest debt per person. hmmmmmm interesting!

I understand just fine, since you mentioned little Rhodie, lets bring up the Coast Guard. How many poor people find themselves marooned off the coast in a monsoon?

Why should I have to pay as much for the Coast Guard as a guy who owns a schooner?

And yes, roads are paid for by the fed often enough. Here you go, more Rhode Island content for ya...

RIDOT

Originally Posted by Davocrat

Taxes help enable us to have a commercial infrastructure in the first place. By "infrastructure" I include a broad swath of services and structures that include, education, healthcare, Internet connectivity, research and development, NOAA, airports, roads, bridges, all kinds of common carrier services, a legal system to assure everything from small claims court to royalties...

The more you earn, the more you should pay. I'm happy to participate in this, too.

It seems amazingly obvious as a necessity and, potentially, an enormous benefit to business of all sizes.

I'm happy you like to pay higher taxes. Maybe you should pay mine. Its patriotic.....right? I'm curious why Democrats don't tax corporations instead of a person's income?

Originally Posted by Sparta

Taxes go to pay for things like road improvements, the FAA, the EPA, and corporate bailouts.

Seems to me that people with more money benifit the most from these sorts of government agencies. Poor people can't afford to fly, I'd assume most poor people don't even own cars. Those who are functional and poor surely don't do much traveling between NYC and Boston, so it would stand to reason that those who do have money use the roads the most. So if wealthy people use these services more often than poor people, why shouldn't they have to pay more for them? How many low income people are going to benifit from a corporate bailout?

Then shouldn't we have our taxes raised at a state and local level since those taxes are most relevant to the end consumer? At least the ones you are describing. And I am not thinking the uber wealthy spent 60% more time using these things than the lower class. And the only thing I would say about the corporate bailout since I am opposed to it, if it spiraled us into a depression because they could not recover on their own, the first people on the unemployment list wouldn't be the wealthy that are paying the taxes on it.

Originally Posted by freckles

Then shouldn't we have our taxes raised at a state and local level since those taxes are most relevant to the end consumer? At least the ones you are describing. And I am not thinking the uber wealthy spent 60% more time using these things than the lower class. And the only thing I would say about the corporate bailout since I am opposed to it, if it spiraled us into a depression because they could not recover on their own, the first people on the unemployment list wouldn't be the wealthy that are paying the taxes on it.

Roads, bridges, healthcare, military, education all cut across state lines and there is a national responsibility.

Why not privitize everything, roads, bridges, healthcare, military, education, etc. and all those shared things and eliminate all taxes including the federal government or state governments for that matter. We all just pay for the services we want and there'd be no government regulations driving up costs? How's that for a good idea?

Originally Posted by 2lane

Roads, bridges, healthcare, military, education all cut across state lines and there is a national responsibility.

Why not privitize everything, roads, bridges, healthcare, military, education, etc. and all those shared things and eliminate all taxes including the federal government or state governments for that matter. We all just pay for the services we want and there'd be no government regulations driving up costs? How's that for a good idea?

thats actually what people like FFA want. anything else they consider "socialism".

They're going to have to raise taxes and cut alot of spending to pay down the defecits and debt or the inevitable hyper inflation will plunge the entire middle class into poverty and we'll all become debt slaves. The current economic course cannot be sustained.

Originally Posted by Sparta

Taxes go to pay for things like road improvements, the FAA, the EPA, and corporate bailouts.

Seems to me that people with more money benifit the most from these sorts of government agencies.

Really how? And since they already pay a disporportinally amount more now how much more should they pay?

Poor people can't afford to fly,

And private planes pay a tariff and commerical airlines already collect a tax.

I'd assume most poor people don't even own cars.

You assume wrong.

Those who are functional and poor surely don't do much traveling between NYC and Boston,

Then they aren't paying the gasoline and fuel taxes which pay for roads.

so it would stand to reason that those who do have money use the roads the most.

Not necessarily.

So if wealthy people use these services more often than poor people, why shouldn't they have to pay more for them?

They are paid based on how much you use them through excise taxes.

How many low income people are going to benifit from a corporate bailout?

Everyone who works for one or for a company that depends on doing business with one I guess.

Let me guess, you aren't rich and don't want to pay taxes and think the rich should foot the bill on your behalf.