|
This is about taxes, and where your tax money goes! As it stands we have an elected official who is supposed to represent us. They don't please everyone. Why not take out the middle man. What if every tax paying citizen chose where their money went? Imagine that all tax payers have a right to allocate a portion of their taxes to any government entity they wished. The entity being a branch of the government that is funded by taxes like, Department of Defense, Department of Agriculture, Department of Transportation, Department of Education, etc. %25 of your tax would be the government's to spend as needed. The remaining %75 goes to wherever you choose. You shouldn't control the whole %100. There should be some entity filling in the gaps that the public missed, and at the very least because there are still the public goods we have to worry about. People shouldn't be allocating money for public parks, schools and roads. Not everyone uses them, but they should be available to everyone. At the beginning of every tax period the person filing for taxes is able to reconstruct where every portion of their tax goes, with %30 being the highest you can portion out to any one entity (so a minimum of 4 departments 30-30-30-10). It would not be "simple." People should be educated on every area they can finance, and that would take a lot of time. There are many areas in the government that need funding. We're not discussing other tax options that are better than our current layout either. Just the idea of people choosing where the government allots their money. The Pros: People would donate to areas of their life that they feel need improvement; better roads, better schools, better internet. We would also hold a higher standard to the departments receiving more money. The Cons: Some departments may not receive sufficient funding. Some construction, research, etc. may require funding for multiple years, and the funding may change from one year to the next. It's possible that we would say "you can only begin a project if you have the funds to complete it." However there are certain projects that would not even be considered if that were the case. Things like space travel, large buildings or schools, power plants, and new methods of transportation (High Speed Rail) could probably not be completed in 1 year and would need additional funding to continue to the next. Here is a link to the US Government's budget, which is around $3.3 trillion Link Budget of the US Government Keep in mind that just because one area of the government gets more funding it does not mean that it will function better. It is very possible that Education could receive a big boost of income, but teachers are still paid the same, student tuition stays the same and students drop outs are just as common. This thread is not about how to fix WHAT the money does in areas, such as education. Rather, it is about how tax payers choosing where taxes go would effect our economy. A big part of this to me is how fair it would be for everyone. Would people with higher taxes be able to exercise more power? Say people who are taxed $50,000 a year make enough money to not want to invest in Social Security, Medicare or Food Stamps. Whereas people only taxed at $10,000 a year will primarily put their money into such programs. These programs may suffer in the long run. After reading up on this online I have found there are a few sites with information about this already. Here are some links... Pragmatarianism "What is a pragmatarian? It's a person who believes that people should be free to choose where their taxes go." The link provided has many other sites linked to it. While the theory I described above is different than Pragmatarianism it is still similar. Pragmatarianism Disproved "While this may sound nice, there is a flaw: each individual is forced to pay into this system as Congress deems appropriate and at the rate they deem appropriate; and they are allowed to pay into a list determined by the voters in an idiosyncratic democratic process." Does the government spend our tax money better than the taxpayers would? If you chose where your taxes went, and could do only maximum %30 into any one department, what departments would you choose, what percentages would you choose and why? What do you think would result from this plan if it were enacted today? (We stop sending troops to the middle east? People start hating each other not based off of their political party, but off what their taxes go to?) I don't think the plan is perfect. I want to hear your thoughts on it.
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:20
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
This plan is undemocratic. It gives people with more money more power over the government than people with less. Democracy is good. Your plan is bad.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:28
|
|
|
Individual departments raise debt to finance their operations while others experience large overages that cannot be spent without massive waste. Efficient.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:34
|
|
|
Serously, read this and reconsider this idea completely For as much as we spend on defense, only 18% of the federal budget goes to military spending. For as much as one political party obsesses over the debt (at least when they don't control the whitehouse) we only spend 7% of the federal budget on paying interest on the debt. The majority of the budget (58% to be exact) goes towards only two things, the first being social security and the second being medicare. Only 17% of the federal budget actually runs the entire US government.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:38
|
|
|
I would allocate 100% of my taxes to kill white people
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:39
|
|
|
Most of the conversations I have with people about where their taxes go usually ends with "I'm sick of paying for niggers so they can buy cadillacs and lobster". Nobody's ever like "oh, well I don't like having money taken out of my pocket but I appreciate being able to pay for society". The average taxpayer thinks all their money is bagged up by Obama and dumped out of a helicopter into the Chicago projects, and even fewer people have any understanding of the social contract. So, I imagine a ton of the money will go to shiny toys for the military, and the non-sexy options like agricultural subsidies or infrastructure will be ignored as much as the system will allow. Not to mention all the rich defense contractors that will put the maximum percentage of their tax money back into the military-industrial complex that feeds them. Always gotta look out for perverse incentives. Also, pragmatarianism is a terrible name.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:46
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:I would allocate 100% of my taxes to kill white people As a white person, agreed
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 06:47
|
|
|
This sounds like a sneaky backdoor way to end various actually important social programs like food stamps and the like, since I imagine most recipients of those programs do not pay net federal taxes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:03
|
|
|
FatassBrian69 posted:I don't think the plan is perfect. I want to hear your thoughts on it. It's dumb as hell. Pretty much everybody has a very limited view and understanding of the real problems and necessities that a nation has. This is natural, the scope of our day-to-day life is small. Thus, in order for people to make good decisions about where to allocate the taxes they would have to spend lots of time educating themselves about what the country truly needs (right now the professionals that make a living out of that still have to specialize in specific areas anyways, in order to be able to make informed decisions). That just ain't happening, for many different reasons. You cannot expect that from any population, that's not how we work. trucutru fucked around with this message at 07:09 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:05
|
|
|
Peven Stan posted:I would allocate 100% of my taxes to kill white people I vote we exterminate short people. It's fun to mock short people's inputs in a business setting, but I only have so many short jokes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:10
|
|
|
I'm going to get very rich and then dictate that 100% of my tax dollars go to subsidies toward the company I own.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:16
|
|
|
The system you've just described is almost purely plutocratic, just with an unnecessary layer of obfuscation constructed around some hamfisted tax system.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:23
|
|
|
[quote="A Winner is Jew" post="432084311"] Serously, read this and reconsider this idea completely Thanks for the information. I think it's interesting that the Military is, in effect taking away funds from other important areas that can possibly boost the economy like Transportation, Energy and Environment, and Education. Everyone. I did not come up with the term Pragmatarianism. I also thought that name was a bad choice. I do not agree with it. I saw a lot of problems with this idea, and the one I posted. There are already issues with wealthy people influencing the government with money and I don't like how it is. So I would not like to further encourage it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 07:52
|
|
|
FatassBrian69 posted:[quote="A Winner is Jew" post="432084311"] What if we come up with a way to calculate the diminishing returns that probably exists on programs that provide positive economic results (foodstamps for example) and increase their funding til they net even?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:02
|
|
|
quote:Most Americans think public broadcasting receives a much larger share of the federal budget than it actually does, according to a new poll from CNN/Opinion Research. Most people are stupid and should shut up.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:35
|
|
|
My taxes should go to a huge war machine that brings democracy to the Vatican.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:41
|
|
|
FatassBrian69 posted:Thanks for the information. I think it's interesting that the Military is, in effect taking away funds from other important areas that can possibly boost the economy like Transportation, Energy and Environment, and Education. A lot of military spending already boosts the economy. A huge chunk of that money every year is spent on acquisitions, logistics, base infrastructure, housing, research, etc. So its money going straight back into the economy. Its still bad, because having an economy with a large military supply sector changes politician's decision processes. Suddenly, not only is the military lobbying to be able to actually use their toys, but multi-billion dollar companies that give people jobs in your district are asking for their toys to be used more (and thus, need to be rebuilt & supplied- more business for them). So politicians are basing the decision to go to war more on their election campaign than on actually looking at the pros and cons of it.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:43
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Most people are stupid and should shut up. If you ask someone what some random thing that receives a trivial percentage of the federal budget is, people are always going to guess high, on the not unreasonable grounds of "why would they be asking about it if it weren't important." Asking people about something that receives a .000whatever share of the federal budget is not really that relevant.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 08:58
|
|
|
It would be easier to have a televised talent show decide 25% of the budget. Citizens could SMS their votes and each department could put on a performance to garner votes. The grand finale between the DOD b-boys and the SEC barbershop quartet would rate really well and probably net the administration of the day a good 2-3 points on the next poll (closer to 3-6 points in the Midwest).
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:27
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:Serously, read this and reconsider this idea completely This is kind of a gross over simplification. FICA is it's own tax so Social Security and Medicare are their own expenditures, and many self employed people (The vast majority of those who I have to deal with on a professional basis) who pay federal taxes do NOT pay FICA. If you're talking about controlling where your FEDERAL INCOME TAX goes, Military is the largest expenditure. Also, how would this system work for disaster relief? "I want all disaster relief funds to go to my state. gently caress you Oklahoma"
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:36
|
|
|
dilbertschalter posted:If you ask someone what some random thing that receives a trivial percentage of the federal budget is, people are always going to guess high, on the not unreasonable grounds of "why would they be asking about it if it weren't important." Asking people about something that receives a .000whatever share of the federal budget is not really that relevant. If somebody asks you "how much does the government spend on PBS" and your answer is "more than 1%" you're officially real dumb and I hope you get lost on your way to the polling station.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:41
|
|
|
Seriously, ask anyone who works for a charity what designated donations are like. Everyone wants to pay for the food that goes to the starving child - no one wants to pay for the guy that does the paperwork for the guy that hires the guy that distributes the food to the starving child.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:42
|
|
|
mugrim posted:This is kind of a gross over simplification. FICA is it's own tax so Social Security and Medicare are their own expenditures, and many self employed people (The vast majority of those who I have to deal with on a professional basis) who pay federal taxes do NOT pay FICA.  Uh, what? If they're self employed and are filing using Schedule C on their Form 1040, they have to file Schedule SE which is the FICA withholding for both the employer and employee halves. The same is the case with S-Corps (unless you're claiming all of the income as a distribution, which the IRS will bludgeon the crap out of you for doing) and pretty much any other form of entity. They may be evading paying FICA taxes, but they're obligated to pay some taxes regardless of business form.Edit: Maybe if they're all limited partners they don't pay on their distributive shares, but even then it's dicey when it comes to LLCs (for LPs that's the case). Horseshoe theory fucked around with this message at 16:55 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:48
|
|
|
Azmet Jah posted:Seriously, ask anyone who works for a charity what designated donations are like. Everyone wants to pay for the food that goes to the starving child - no one wants to pay for the guy that does the paperwork for the guy that hires the guy that distributes the food to the starving child. Bureaucracy  *food rots from lack of inventory procedures*
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 16:57
|
|
|
ThirdPartyView posted:
The IRS really doesn't enforce FICA payments for the most part and many people just pay Federal. I've never seen anything academic on it and I can't seem to find anything, but the vast majority (edit) of people I deal with who are self employed/independent contractors(edit) (90+%) only pay federal. I look over 3-8 people's SSA payment histories a day reported by SSA and they'll be void for 20+ years because they just hand 1099's to a shady accountant. Those people are then unable to collect a multitude of benefits because of their failures to pay and I get the soul crushing job of telling them that they done hosed up. I'm usually far less concerned with just how they defined their self employment/independent contractor profession and more on just whether they paid FICA for LTD through their company or SSDI. Also, many professions have alternative FICA programs instead (401(a) I want to say...) and never contribute a dime to FICA as well. mugrim fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Bureaucracy Government by Live Aid seems like a pretty wicked idea we should all embrace.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:22
|
|
|
SedanChair posted:Bureaucracy And this is another issue, Americans hate money not going to flashy/dramatic things, but much of what is needed and important to the functioning of a modern country is extremely boring and not sexy. "Oooo, what was that? You want to talk about the dire need to completely redo New York's Sewer system because we're decades behind and the system was built antiquated from the beginning and doesn't accurately match it's population explosion? Afterwards you want to talk about the cost benefit of burying a few million miles of wire in populated areas and it's potential impact? And maybe then you want to talk about the possibility of alternative infrastructure projects including drastic changes in zoning standards as well as a complete revitalization of food examination and preparation? I love how passionate you are about politics" - Something no person has ever said. There are thousands of things that keep every day life running that are on a skeleton crew, critically underfunded, and completely loving boring.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:27
|
|
|
Heck I'm guilty of it sometimes, I look across the courtyard at the yuppies in admin and I think "what the gently caress are you for" even though I totally know what they are for! And it seems like about 70% of my job these days is sitting in the office typing things, and it does a lot more good than having some forced heart-to-heart with a kid or serving a meal or something. In fact it's laughable how much we hold volunteers' hands so they can feel good about themselves, then go back and fix the half-assed job they did. woke wedding drone fucked around with this message at 17:32 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:30
|
|
|
mugrim posted:The IRS really doesn't enforce FICA payments for the most part and many people just pay Federal. I've never seen anything academic on it and I can't seem to find anything, but the vast majority (edit) of people I deal with who are self employed/independent contractors(edit) (90+%) only pay federal. I look over 3-8 people's SSA payment histories a day reported by SSA and they'll be void for 20+ years because they just hand 1099's to a shady accountant. Those people are then unable to collect a multitude of benefits because of their failures to pay and I get the soul crushing job of telling them that they done hosed up. I'm usually far less concerned with just how they defined their self employment/independent contractor profession and more on just whether they paid FICA for LTD through their company or SSDI. You can file Schedule C, ignore SE, and the IRS won't do anything? That's crazy.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:31
|
|
|
Realistically the actual death of the plan would be millions of people giving a seemingly worthless 2% of their taxes to foreign aid or public radio or an equally visible but unloved whatever and subsequently exploding their budgets.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:34
|
|
|
Kiwi Ghost Chips posted:You can file Schedule C, ignore SE, and the IRS won't do anything? That's crazy. I guess the thought is you screw yourself over by doing this. No SE taxes means the quarter doesn't count towards your social security pension. Do that enough and you lack the quarters required for a pension at all, at which point everyone else thanks you for being a tax cheat and being a positive contributor to Social Security (assuming you did some salary work for an employer at some point)
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
A Winner is Jew posted:The majority of the budget (58% to be exact) goes towards only two things, the first being social security and the second being medicare. I think you might have to including Medicaid(i.e. the full HHS department budget) in this to reach 58% because SS is around 20%, and I recall Medicares spending in dollars is still somewhat below the DoD budget.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:39
|
|
|
rkajdi posted:I guess the thought is you screw yourself over by doing this. No SE taxes means the quarter doesn't count towards your social security pension. Do that enough and you lack the quarters required for a pension at all, at which point everyone else thanks you for being a tax cheat and being a positive contributor to Social Security (assuming you did some salary work for an employer at some point) Also for SSDI, which on a per person basis is WAY more expensive than any amount of money you could have possibly paid in. Being ineligible for it because of insufficient quarters and an expired DLI makes the government VERY happy. "Oh what? We don't have to pay you 20+k a year plus Medicare for the next 40 years, and we instead can string you on Medicaid and 8.6k (BEFORE resource adjustments) a year? Oh shucks what an unfortunate and all too wonderful accident" Also, accountants are the worst. When they emphasize "Lowest federal income tax rate for self employed workers GUARENTEED!" often it's because they're shady and not paying into FICA. "Wow, somehow this accountant guy lowered my taxes by like 14 percent!?"
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:51
|
|
|
Where I'm from, if we actually did the plan you described, all the public schools and public transport would literally die out since a huge chunk of adults whinge about how those drat unionized public sector employees are "overpaid" and "Why should they make as much money as a fresh-out-of-college software engineer", with maybe something milquetoast like "let's just give them charity dollars We already have issues with some of the local tech giants like Apple storing corporate cash offshore in Ireland, too. Jerry Manderbilt fucked around with this message at 17:59 on Jul 12, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:52
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:I think you might have to including Medicaid(i.e. the full HHS department budget) in this to reach 58% because SS is around 20%, and I recall Medicares spending in dollars is still somewhat below the DoD budget. And even then, Medicare/SSA is not on the table under the OP's program because they're a separate tax from your Federal Income Tax.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 17:59
|
|
|
mugrim posted:And even then, Medicare/SSA is not on the table under the OP's program because they're a separate tax from your Federal Income Tax. Partially, a large part of Medicare's budget does come from general funds. I think Part A is only funded through the FICA tax.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 18:06
|
|
|
Amused to Death posted:Partially, a large part of Medicare's budget does come from general funds. I think Part A is only funded through the FICA tax. I'm now seeing that on Medicare's site, but it won't give me any numbers. I've googled it and still found no answer. How much is funded by FICA vs Congressional authorization? Do you know?
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 18:18
|
|
|
mugrim posted:I'm now seeing that on Medicare's site, but it won't give me any numbers. I've googled it and still found no answer. How much is funded by FICA vs Congressional authorization? Do you know? No, but I'd imagine if you can find out how much the FICA tax is bringing in, just subtracting that from total Medicare spending would give a reasonable accurate number(although money coming out of the trust fund has to be counted as well).
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 18:27
|
|
|
I want all my taxes going to rounding up and gassing bankers.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 19:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 26, 2024 05:18 |
|
|
FatassBrian69 posted:People shouldn't be allocating money for (...) roads. Not everyone uses them, but they should be available to everyone. gently caress that. Road infrastructure projects are some of the biggest pork barrel boondoggles in the entire country. Milwaukee protestors try to halt double decker freeway quote:Monday night, as the Wisconsin DOT went through the motions of a Power Point presentation about the latest highway expansion it wants to gouge through Milwaukee, a groups of protesters outside the meeting shouted their frustration with an agency that has spent lavishly on roads to the exclusion of all other modes.
|
|
#
?
Jul 12, 2014 21:51
|
|
