The Case for Big Government & Higher Taxes

We Need to Raise Taxes

If we don't increase taxes now, we are just passing a larger burden on to our kids. We got ourselves in to this mess and now we need to pay for it. If we do not, then our kids will have to pay for it with interest.

Larger Government Could Mean Better Government

Larger government doesn't have to mean more agencies like Homeland Security and larger paychecks for our representatives. Maybe we have we forgotten who the government is. It's your kid's teachers, your local police and fireman, your postal workers, and many more good honest citizens. Government maintains your roads and builds the local and national infrastructure. Maybe we need to re-organize our government so we're spending our tax money in the right places. Maybe we need to re-think our priorities.

Imagine if our teachers and policeman were paid more? Imagine if all of our firefighters were paid? Imagine if our veterans were taken care of? Imagine...

A shift in government spending could do wonders for this country.

Too bad we have so much money owed to a debt from an unethical war and a focus on the well being of stock brokers instead of the people who support our country and our community.

Too bad we owe so much money for things that are not helping America. Because now, we need to increase taxes to pay for our mistakes not to pay for what should matter, our community.

America is off course and I hope that this election will be a major change in direction because the way we are going now is going to kill the American dream and rob our children of the future they have been promised. John McCain runs his campaign the way George Bush runs the Whitehouse. Four more years on this course will destroy America.

Taxes and government are only bad when they are squandered by unethical leaders. It's time to start paying taxes that make our country a better place for everyone. It is time for a change. I hope we're not too late.

You're not responsible anyway.

Party on!

Homeland security chokes on the giant-cock it sucks nightly.

I'll take care of myself, suck a shit, Nazi assfucks.

than even Obama is suggesting. Those people benefit from our system a thousand times more than "average" people do. How many of our laws have something to do with business or commerce? Our country has become something like an enormous shopping mall that also has integrated condos and apartments as part of the design. Imagine how ecstatic a mall store owner would be at the idea of a mall where all of his customers have to LIVE! One 24-7, Big Effing Shopping Experience, with new things to consume around every corner. Welcome to America. Check your bags at the door.

I think the least that we can expect is that these fat cats pay a hell of a lot more for keeping the place in shape and running smoothly. After all, for all intents and purposes, they own it. Why should we have to pay for the upkeep of a nation that was stolen from us mini-mall by mini-mall?

I came across an opinion piece by what appears to be a student who was able to sum it up much better than I could. Thought I would pass it along in keeping within the context of this.


Blue Dog Democrat... My Philosophy: Big, Benevolent Government

By Jong Eun Lee on 4/12/07


Page 1 of 2 next >

I support democracy and I support the treasured American principle for "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness." However, I also believe in the role of a benevolent big government to promote this principle in our society. I am aware that most Americans are individualistic and reluctant to trust the power of the government. While acknowledging a need for clear limits to governmental power, I strongly believe that an active government can be a great institution for promoting justice and compassion in our society.

Libertarians argue that the individual's pursuit of self-interest would naturally promote justice in our society. However, the human tendency for greed and competition has also encouraged people's willingness to trample the happiness of others for their own gains.

While the rugged individualism worshipped by many libertarians did promote general economic productivity, it also created an astounding number of economic losers victimized to a class status of poverty and social discrimination. To judge all the lower working class as people with insufficient personal motivation would be a terrible error. In a pure laissez-faire economy, the economic opportunity for prosperity is too often given only to people at the right area, at the right business and at the right moment of economic development. Those who are misfortunate enough to be caught in a downward economic cycle suffer the consequence regardless of any personal effort.

To achieve equal economic opportunity for everyone in society, personal liberty alone is not enough. The government has a moral responsibility to serve as a traffic light, monitoring the market economy and providing safety nets to protect the people from structural imprisonment in poverty. I understand libertarians' criticism of the welfare state, but I also question why it is not in the interest of the society as a whole to ensure every member of our society has access to good education, health care, retirement programs and a clean environment.


Continued...

http://media.www.theeagleonline.com/media/storage/paper666/news/2007/04/12/Opinions/Blue-Dog.Democrat.My.Philosophy.Big.Benevolent.Government-2836802-page2.shtml

Senator Obama's Four Tax Increases for People Earning Under $250k

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/10/senator_obamas_four_tax_increa.html

1. The first loophole was easy to find: Senator Obama doesn't "count" allowing the Bush tax cuts to lapse as a tax increase. Unless the cuts are re-enacted, rates will automatically return to the 2000 level. Senator Obama claims that letting a tax cut lapse -- allowing the rates to return to a higher levels -- is not actually a "tax increase." It's just the lapsing of a tax cut.

See the difference?

Neither do I.

When those cuts lapse, my taxes are going up -- a lot -- but by parsing words, Senator Obama justifies his claim that he won't actively raise taxes on 95 percent of working Americans, even while he's passively allowing tax rates to go up for 100% of Americans who actually pay Federal income taxes.

Making this personal, my Federal Income Tax will increase by $3,824 when those tax cuts lapse. That not-insignificant sum would cover a couple of house payments or help my two boys through another month or two of college.

2. The next loophole involves the payroll tax that you pay to support the Social Security system. Currently, there is an inflation-adjusted cap, and according to the non-profit Tax Foundation, in 2006 -- the most recent year for which tax data is available -- only the first $94,700 of an unmarried individual's earnings were subject to the 12.4 percent payroll tax. However, Senator Obama has proposed lifting that cap, adding an additional 12.4 percent tax on every dollar earned above that cap -- and in spite of his promise, impacting all those who earn between $94,700 and $249,999.

By doing this, he plans to raise an additional $1 trillion dollars (another $662.50 out of my pocket -- and how much out of yours?) to help fund Social Security. Half of this tax would be paid by employees and half by employers -- but employers will either cut the payroll or pass along this tax to their customers through higher prices. Either way, some individual will pay the price for the employer's share of the tax increase.

However, when challenged to explain how he could eliminate the cap AND not raise taxes on Americans earning under $250,000, Senator Obama suggested on his website that he "might" create a "donut" -- an exemption from this payroll tax for wages between $94,700 and $250,000. But that donut would mean he couldn't raise anywhere near that $1 trillion dollars for Social Security. When this was pointed out, Senator Obama's "donut plan" was quietly removed from his website.

3. Finally, Senator Obama has promised to raise taxes on businesses -- and to raise taxes a lot on oil companies. I still remember Econ-101 -- and I own a small business. From both theory and practice, I know what businesses do when taxes are raised. Corporations don't "pay" taxes -- they collect taxes from customers and pass them along to the government. When you buy a hot dog from a 7/11, you can see the clerk add the sales tax, but when a corporation's own taxes go up, you don't see it -- its automatic -- but they do the same thing. They build this tax into their product's price. Senator Obama knows this. He knows that even people who earn less than $250,000 will pay higher prices -- those pass-through taxes -- when corporate taxes go up.

4. There's not a politician alive who hasn't be caught telling some minor truth-bender. However, when it comes to raising taxes, there are no small lies. When George H.W. Bush's "Read my lips -- no new taxes" proved false, he lost the support of his base -- and ultimately lost his re-election bid.

This year, however, we don't have to wait for the proof: Senator Obama has already promised to raise taxes, and we can believe him. However, while making that promise, he's also lied, in at least four significant ways, about who will pay those taxes. If Senator Obama becomes President Obama, when the tax man comes calling, we will all pay the price. And that's the truth.

For #4: To see the tax tables click on the link to the article or just go to the IRS website and check for yourself.