Raise Taxes on Rich to Reward True Job Creators: Nick Hanauer

[HappySqurriel]

bannedagain said:

HappySqurriel said:

Salnax said:

Marks said:
America got on perfectly fine from 1776-1913 without any income tax at all (except during wars when they were temporarily introduced and then repealed). I don't get why people think more taxes are the answer to everything.

How about we stop trying to make everyone equal, and let everyone be free to do what they will with their money.

The government needs way more money now than it did 100 years ago. Between a superpower military, helping the sick, mantaining infrastructure, and investing in the 1%'s companies, they need all the cash they can get.

As a percentage of the economy, why would they need more money?

While you need to spend more money on infrastructure and the military the increase in productivity has resulted in massive increases in GDP should more than compensate for these increased needs.

Beyond that, in every measureable way the poor have been far worse off because of the war on poverty that was started in the 1960s and everyone should question whether the government should really be in the charity business; especially being how much more efficient and effective charities are.

wow you are full of it. This is complete bull. No need to call it all out. GREED BUDDY GREED> your facts hold no weight. Because you say charities are more effective hum. Yea right. You want a me society and not we society. LEave to a third world country.

http://mises.org/journals/jls/21_2/21_2_1.pdf

“[Government] income redistribution agencies are estimated to absorb about two-thirds of each dollar budgeted to them in overhead costs, and in some cases as much as three-quarters of each dollar. Using government data, Robert L. Woodson (1989, p. 63) calculated that, on average, 70 cents of each dollar budgeted for government assistance goes not to the poor, but to the members of the welfare bureaucracy and others serving the poor. Michael Tanner (1996, p. 136 n. 18) cites regional studies supporting this 70/30 split.

“In contrast, administrative and other operating costs in private charities absorb, on average, only one-third or less of each dollar donated, leaving the other two-thirds (or more) to be delivered to recipients. Charity Navigator, the newest of several private sector organizations that rate charities by various criteria and supply that information to the public on their web sites, found that, as of 2004, 70 percent of charities they rated spent at least 75 percent of their budgets on the programs and services they exist to provide, and 90 percent spent at least 65 percent. The median administrative expense among all charities in their sample was only 10.3 percent.”

On top of that, since private charities often help people by supplying them with goods/services that are donated or sold at near to cost and the government gives people cash to buy these goods from businesses at a profit, per dollar spent on these goods charities can (once again) be far more efficient and effective. Locally, the food bank claims that (due to their arrangement with food producers) for every $1 in donations they can buy the equivalent of $4 worth of food from a store. 

 

You really need to inform yourself and learn how to argue ...