Reid was right when he said Americans are willing to pay more taxes.......IF

page: 1
3

log in

join

posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 10:25 PM
link   
I laughed loud and long at Harry's comment about the willingness to pay more taxes.

Today, after a discussion at a bar, I realized he may, unwittingly, have been right!

The blood and monies spent willingly by Americans, willingly, over the years cannot be argued, at least with intelligence.

If it was perceived to be a good cause, then America tends to rise to the occasion. They would willingly, no, with enthusiasm, do the same for their own country...IF

IF they knew the Feds were actively and effectively taking action to fix the mess. Forget blame and accusations, just fix it.

IF they felt the gov't was working with them instead of the same old, same old.

IF there was real budget cuts, sensible decrease in gov't size, we'd be on board. Reagan balanced California's budget with, among other things, hiring freezes. Allowing state employees to retire, quit, etc. and not replacing them. A gradual thinning of the ranks.

Not only would we, some grudgingly, pay more taxes, we'd probably help at a state level, a little volunteer time, more donations to charities to help pick up the slack.

"Hope" is a powerful motivator.

None have risen to give the people that level of hope.

Harry, you turkey, you don't know how right you almost were....




posted on Nov, 8 2013 @ 11:46 PM
link   
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


With real budget cuts and sensible decrease in the size of government, why would you need a tax increase ?

Old Harry hasn't gotten to you has he ?
edit on 8-11-2013 by Battleline because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 12:12 AM
link   
reply to post by Battleline
 


Why would we need a tax increase? Good question...hadn't thought I through fully.

Here's a scenario.. Remembering we're dealing with 50 state level crooks, over 3300 county/parrish/borough crooks as well as the feds and massive amounts of federal funds are cut from these little crooks we might need local increases to cover the shortfalls from those cuts.

Here's an eg. I live 30 miles north of that collapsed bridge on I-5 that happened earlier this year. Being a trucker, I used the alternate routes with minor inconvenience. Two close county bridges. In perfect shape! Modern and safe. yet the federally subsidized I-5 bridge was a piece of junk.

Answer? Washington St. was using those federal highway funds for general funding purposes instead of putting where it was intended/mandated by the feds. This was in the hopes that the feds would cough up with more money as the political mantra was "fix the infrastructure".

The truth is it's the states that haven't used their gas tax revenue/federal highway funds where they were supposed to. Instead putting the money either to private corporation buddies or feeding gov't union contracts, depending on which party is in power.

In other words, the mess is freeking deeper than the "national" debt.

I'd have to be convinced it was necessary , be it federal or sate tax increases before agreeing, but it could be necessary to avoid a total meltdown of the system.

Of course, we could just borrow it back from china....



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 12:56 AM
link   
We've already gotten the biggest tax increase in history, but it was subversive; it's called 'obama care'.

Nugget



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 09:00 AM
link   
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


I see your point and understand your idea...the only problem is this country is so full of corruption and incompetence we would have to out everyone in most every state and the fed's.

If that were possible one could only imagine what this country could be like, something I doubt you or I or anyone who thinks this way will ever see.



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 10:26 AM
link   
reply to post by nugget1
 


I agree ObamaCare is a huge increase. I'm assuming that one would be cancelled. It would have to be before I'd agree to some other tax increase...



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 10:38 AM
link   
reply to post by Battleline
 


I guess this more theoretical than practical. There are, perhaps, millions that would sacrifice their lives for this country. That's undeniable.

Those same millions and probably more would sacrifice, yes, even more personal wealth, if they truly believed that there were leaders that they trusted and saw the value of what those leaders were trying to accomplish.

In other words, it isn't personal greed that motivates the right, it's the perception of that corruption that says "NO MORE".

It makes me wonder how the heck the founding fathers ever got that document together. How that concept filtered down to an indifferent populace and understood by those poorly to zero educated average citizens of the day.

It's miraculous. We need another miracle...



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 10:53 AM
link   

Battleline
reply to post by nwtrucker
 


With real budget cuts and sensible decrease in the size of government, why would you need a tax increase ?

Old Harry hasn't gotten to you has he ?
edit on 8-11-2013 by Battleline because: (no reason given)

To cover for the pensions of the federal workers who otherwise would feign total self destruction for lack of certainty of their place in our private sector. Without taxpayer coverage of Americans working in the government, these workers will oppose the downsizing with every bone in their body, in the tanking socio-economic fabric the federal govenment will be the last to fall and that's where it's easier to deny the realities Americans in the private sector face day by day.
edit on 9-11-2013 by BlubberyConspiracy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 9 2013 @ 02:04 PM
link   
reply to post by BlubberyConspiracy
 


Good points.

If we went about this downsizing "compassionately". that would be required....assuming we have the time/wiggle room to go that route.

At the least, massive economic stimulus, real ones, coupled with hiring incentives to move those gov't employees into the private sector would help the transition.

I'm assuming that having a committed administration to that end would buy us the time for a kinder, gentler option.

If it's too late for a slower downsizing, outright closing the doors of whole departments- using the tenth as a guideline?- may be needed. Draconian? Yep.





new topics

top topics



 
3

log in

join