In recent years, credits for low- and middle-income families have grown so much that a family of four making as much as $50,000 will owe no federal income tax for 2009, as long as there are two children younger than 17, according to a separate analysis by the consulting firm Deloitte Tax.
Tax cuts enacted in the past decade have been generous to wealthy taxpayers, too, making them a target for President Barack Obama and Democrats in Congress. Less noticed were tax cuts for low- and middle-income families, which were expanded when Obama signed the massive economic recovery package last year.
The result is a tax system that exempts almost half the country from paying for programs that benefit everyone, including national defense, public safety, infrastructure and education. It is a system in which the top 10 percent of earners — households making an average of $366,400 in 2006 — paid about 73 percent of the income taxes collected by the federal government.
I used to teach a language class. I offered the class at no charge. The students were enthusiastic, at first, but individual attendance was spotty for a number of students so that I was always reviewing previously presented material and it was difficult to make progress. This discouraged the committed students who attended class regularly.
Then a person with ‘real world wisdom,’ is there any other kind of wisdom(?), suggested that I charge a fee for the class. I did just that and suddenly the irregular attendance problem diminished dramatically and the class progress in learning the language also increased dramatically
Lesson learned: If you give away something for free, people tend to lose respect for it or never develop respect for it.
Americans can alsdo lose respect for the Consitiution and their rights under the Constitution if their participation as a citizen is/becomes ‘a free ride.’
Therefore, if we are to have an income tax, I believe that every single citizen should be required to personally fill out an income tax form and to pay a tax. Even if the tax paid only covers the administrative cost of processing his/her income tax form.
I also believe that if persons are to pay a minimal tax for filing their returns and then recieve subsidies from the government, because their income falls below a certain level, that that income should be labeled as “Assistance from Other Taxpayers.” They should realoize that by accepting those subsidies it means that they are ‘living off of’ the hard wok and talents of other taxpayers.
As a Christian I always struggle with this kind of issue. Jesus was not just counter-cultural, he was radically so. He came to save all – and interacted with all – but spoke lovingly about and healed most amongst the poor and downtrodden. Yet he did not say that civil government should do these things – rather, Christians and the Church should do these things. So while I try to maintain my heart for the poor and downtrodden, I don’t believe setting our country into such an unsustainable situation is what we are called to do. Maybe I was too influenced by “Atlas Shrugged” in my school days….
I have no problem with personally helping the poor and the downtrodden.
When a Chistian does this, it is an act of his/her soul and heart and based upon a Christian theology. It is particularly so, if the Christian who helps others makes a real personal sacrifice in order to help others.
I do have a problem with a Christan surrendering his/her obligation to help others to the “government.” There is no heart or soul in government mandated taxation and reapportionment of wealth. Yes, there is a need for government to temporarily become involved in the lives of others when private assistance is not adequate, but to a Christian, government give-away-programs should never be a substitute for individual Christian efforts to assist the needy.
It even becomes worse, for a Christian, when the “government” becomes a substitute for God, “from whom all blessings flow,” and secular ideology becomes a substitute for a Christian theology.
Congress knows exactly what it is doing. Class warfare is exacerbated at their specific behest. When people understand that they can vote to take money away from others who actually pay taxes and give it to themselves courtesy of their congress person, they will vote for that scoundrel in perpetuity. All the time, these same congressional representatives are also courting special interests such as unions, advocacy groups, and businesses, giving them special breaks tax breaks to buy their silence. The only group that gets repeatedly “screwed” (I’m sorry, I couldn’t think of a better word), is the taxpayer paying his increasing level of income taxes, and small business owners drowning under a deluge of federal regulations, restrictions, and increasing taxes.
This would all come to a screeching halt if people got extra votes, beyond the base level of one, to cast in federal elections, based on how much income tax they paid. As Harry Hopkins, Franklin Roosevelt’s close adviser was reputed to have said, “we’ll tax and tax, and spend and spend, and elect and elect.”
Well, there’s always Romans 13:1-7
Fortunately, my taxes have been reduced under Obama.
#4 – you’d probably institute a plutocracy, which might be your intention. I admit, I share you’re sense that we’re living in a Winner Takes All society, but I admit some confusion. On one hand you seem to get angry at class warfare, but then you note that the government seems to be “screwing” the Taxpayer (how about “citizen”) at the behest of … the ruling class.
Thomas Frank, the historian, noted that one thing the business class wanted is to ensure that only mediocre people ran government. They didn’t want government to run well. So when they elected people, it was with the deliberate intention to make people more angry at government.
Personally, as a patriot, I hope that the government of the USA can do better. I admit I’ve not been impressed by the business class (the recent miner tragedy, for example, seems to be an example of the business class choosing to ignore those terrible, awful, government regulations).
Hi John,
I guess I self-identify as a social conservative capitalist with libertarian tendencies. I am not a plutocrat, and I hope you are not seeking the dictatorship of the proletariat.
What I seek, more than anything else, is a level playing field where small businesses and individuals are as equal as possible to large businesses, and special interests like SEIU, wherever possible. I don’t want guaranteed results and victim status for whoever is designated as the “oppressed.” I want everyone to get an equal shot.
I want compensation for risking my capital, and I want to be free to provide any employees I have with the best work environment I can possible afford, free from government interference that needlessly raises my costs through taxes and byzantine regulations. I don’t want a bunch of socialists, yes socialists, forcing me to do what they think is best, and masking it under the banner of “social justice.” Look at the havoc wreaked by the Temperance movement with Prohibition. There’s a lesson to be learned from that.
Most of all I believe in the total depravity of man and I want my leaders to openly state that they realize the natural state of humanity is a fallen one, that they serve by the grace of God, and absent His influence in public life we are doomed to end up like Hitler’s Germany or Stalin’s Russia. I want them to acknowledge that they are no better than me or anyone else, have no right to eternal elected office, and will provide for my liberty and the common defense of my country. Everything else they do I view with skepticism and they need to prove to me that meddling in other things will make life better. So far, their track record is not very encouraging, Democrat and Republican alike.
One of the reasons why everyone should pay at least some taxes is that it gives them a stake in the system. If you pay taxes, the government isn’t spending government money; it is spending YOUR money. We seem something similar with investments. Multiple studies have shown that when an individual has a share in the stock market, even through an IRA, they become more knowledgeable about the way commerce and regulation work. Likewise about health care. Education really does matter, and keeping people involved benefits both individuals and society.
Originally what made this country was that we said all people are equal in the eyes of the law. No longer was the king given a privileged position. Unfortunately all are equal in the eyes of the law has been replaced by all are equal (unless you work for the government in which case you are a little more equal – ok maybe that’s a little sarcastic and off point)
It seems like we have decided that all people are created equal/the same – so if they are not in fact the same it is because some wrong has been done that must be corrected (I am not saying this is never the case just that we now act as if it is always the case). We pretend that the fact that some people are more capable, motivated, creative etc is just not true – even though we know it is. Just look at our kids – they are unique but not the same
I think what most people want from government is to be left alone. What they want next to that is to be protected from those that seek to harm them, foreign and domestic. They want a stable currency. Then finally, they want basic infrastructure like postal service, roads, and navigation aids, so that commerce can flourish.
They don’t want government involved intimately in their lives.
They don’t want the money they worked for taken from them by government and given to others that didn’t work.
They don’t want to nation build or play empire.
They don’t want their jobs farmed out overseas (NAFTA, GATT).
But, what do we actually have now?
#8, excellent points. Being equal under the law (equal vote, jury and military service, protection of rights and opportunities) has been re-interpreted, particularly by our most recent Congressional and Executive Branch leaderss, to mean our government must guarantee equal economic status under the law. This is nothing more than communism, and we all know it, which we also know is a failure world-wide. Why should a doctor, who studied hard, denied him/herself entertainment and recreation for a minimum of 20 years to practice in this honorable profession, have the financial reward for those long years of sacrifice taken from him/her in order for that money to be redistributed by our government to someone, who against all urging from those in authority over them, left school early (usually 8-9th grade), stood a street corner with buddies and did or sold drugs – or got pregnant and had a baby or multiple pregnancies and babies, simply because this latter group of people have less economic wealth or future than the hard-working and self-sacrificing doctor. What gives our government the right to do that to the doctor?
And, as for us Christians, we must give to Caesar …. But if Caesar takes most of it, what do we have left to give to the poor … our free will of being Christian givers is taken away by the government’s taking it first … and there is this little matter of how much Caesar syphons off before our money actually gets to the poor.
I think one of the problems in this discussion is that it usually gets reduced to two sides: conservative libertarianism / populism against socialist marxism. Since I’m not either, I usually get confused by the vitriol. I think that small business people, and low-level bureaucrats and big corporations and big government and big unions can put profit change or entitlements before their assigned task. And sometimes the task can be questionable – putting profit before worker’s safety for example.
People like myself who believe in a mixed economy precisely to ensure fairness; noting that the market can be rigged (we are depraved, after all) in favor of the powerful and wealthy (see Enron, Madoff, Goldman Sachs, etc). The government, run by its citizens, may decide to help people out due to majority vote.
I tend to believe in the existence of natural monopolies (as do most economists). I also think that people are irrational (and don’t always act in their own best interests). But I do believe that a commercial society is the best way to coordinate wants. I don’t think it does a very good job of distributing health or education.
I don’t oppose social security, workers benefits, unemployment. After all, plenty of corporations get all sorts of tax subsidies and benefits (it’s not a perfectly free-market. Government helps them all the time), so I don’t envy people who need some help and getting support from others.
Keynsianism, distributivism are ways of thinking about markets that are more practical and pragmatic than the harsh libertarian utopia commonly imagined.
Personally, I take a more generous view of government than Sick and Tired. I’m glad there are sewage systems; water filtration systems – even for people who don’t work. I hope that people who don’t work have some cash to spend so that others might be able to work. I happen to see government all around me, but all I see are human beings. Some really believe government can help. Others just want to crush it. I’d rather hire or elect the former than the latter.
I also don’t see the government taking money from me. It’s dues for living in a free country. And as long as it has a legal system that protects private property, it may be expensive. Sometimes, however, the actions of individuals have costs for everyone (should a corporation pollute drinking water? Should there be onerous regulations about companies that pollute the air? I also think that alleviating poverty and limiting the gap between the uberwealthy and the poor maintains the civic trust essential for a democracy. Otherwise a poor person has every right to critique why we believe wealthy babies should have everything while we blame the parents of poor ones, and why we choose to do nothing about it.
At the very least, with the amount of poverty in this country, we’re very bad Christians, with or without government.
re: APB’s reasoning why “…everyone should pay at least some taxes…”
Everyone DOES pay taxes. At the federal level, everyone pays the FICA and Medicare taxes from the first dollar of income. At the state and local level, everyone pays sales tax and property taxes. (If you rent, the property tax is of course included in your rent.)
The given examples of “public safety, infrastructure, and education” are in fact funded far more by local and state governments (using inescapable sales, gas, and property taxes) than by the federal income tax.
Reply to #12.
But not everbody pays income taxes and many who do not pay income taxes are given money taken from those who do pay income taxes.
13 – You know, I kind of fall into that category, although I did wind up paying $800 for 2009 (only $22K exempt last year – 2008 was tax free). OTOH, I also picked up $1800 tax free over and above W2 income, so I can’t complain too much.
Probably ought to include the extra $2K a month for food and housing that’s also tax free, and that all that money, along with salary and all-expense paid “vacations”, come straight out of all of your income taxes (last time I checked, my annual compensation less specials worked out to around $100K a year…) Hope you’re getting your money’s worth…
On the bright side, most years I do pay taxes on wages, and time and talent on the rest – and 24/7 time and talent when it’s tax free.
Given a choice, I’d rather pay taxes every year.
I realize I’m probably not one of the people your post was talking about, but that generalized shoe fit pretty well…
Reply to #14.
I did say, “Yes, there is a need for government to temporarily become involved in the lives of others when private assistance is not adequate, .”
[blockquote] Personally, I take a more generous view of government than Sick and Tired. I’m glad there are sewage systems; water filtration systems – even for people who don’t work.[/blockquote]
“Then finally, they want [b]basic infrastructure[/b] like postal service, roads, and navigation aids, so that commerce can flourish.”
John, I would file that under basic infrastructure.
Anglican First –
My bad – I read it out of context from your two previous posts. I really need to pay better attention to who wrote what…
I could not believe my ears when I learned what the government apparently “owed” our family in taxes this year. Now, we do pay lower taxes because I am a pastor, but I could not believe our tax system after getting our taxes prepared. Of course, we will gladly accept the direct deposit in a couple of weeks…
Utah Benjamin, the government didn’t “owe” your family – other taxpayers did. Which, I’ll say once again, is why we are looking to retire – one reason is to lower our tax burden since at this point, we feel (especially in California) that all of our state taxes are going to fund the pension machine that has no intention of reforming itself.