Kakki wrote:
> I don't see how having my money tied up with the government is going to help
> our economy. If I get to keep more of my money, I can put more of it back
> directly into the economy. There's more refunds to come. The IRS tells us
> they have a surplus and that we've been overcharged.
The extra money available now could pay down the debt or could shore up Social
Security or could make sure that when the economy slows down (as it's already
doing, resulting in less tax being collected because fewer people are working),
then there will still be money available for government programs, and I'm not
talking about welfare or art funding either. I'm talking about roads, and
police, and education loans and whatever else even conservatives would agree we
need.
> I don't find that hard
> to believe. What I make now as very average pay was a high income class
> salary 30 years ago. I am still pretty much taxed as if I am in the upper
> percent, when I am far below that in reality. It's not fair and it's
> stupid, really. Something should have been done about it long ago.
I compare the tax rates here with other countries and the top federal rate of
around 30% doesn't seem so bad to me. I can understand that other people might
not agree and feel like that's way too much to be paying.
Anyway, and I'm certainly no expert on taxes or government spending, etc.... As
I understand it the reason the government has extra money now is not because
the tax rate has gone up greatly in the last eight years, but because
government spending was so drastically reduced in the Republican-led charge to
balance the budget. The surplus is because of that, and if it's depleted now
means either higher taxes in the future or cutting government programs again
(and, for example, the military is one such "government program"; as an aside
it was galling to hear Dubya complaining during his campaign about the current
reduced state of the military when the Republicans had a lot to do with that).
The tax refunds are based on the assumption that the economy will continue to
grow at the same rate it has for the last 8 years, and that's not happening!
The refunds are spending money with the assumption of earning more and it will
be a problem when that "making more" doesn't happen... a problem that probably
won't be felt until after Dubya's out of office.
None of this is certain, of course. Maybe it will all work out fine and we'll
all get extra money in our paychecks soon, no one else will be laid off from
work, and four years from now we won't feel any crunch (i.e., drastically
higher taxes) at all. Signs are, though, that that's not how it will work out,
but we can all hope for the best, and express our concerns to our
representatives and when we vote next time.
> Oh come on. I don't think people with strong beliefs, ideological or
> otherwise, can be bought off for a few hundred dollars. If they can then I
> guess it may prove there is not much real difference between the parties.
Not everyone has strong political beliefs, and if someone doesn't then it
really doesn't matter what any political party does or whether there's any
difference between the parties.
Most people CAN be bought with tax rebates, or the promise of lower taxes,
because it's something so immediate and tangible. That's why taxation is talked
about so much during campaigns.
Wait until the 2002 election campaigns. I'm sure we'll be overwhelmed with talk
about this tax refund and how the Republicans are responsible for it, and oh,
we don't want those bad big-spending Democrats in office again do we? Those
"big-spending" Democrats were the ones that actually balanced the budget (yes,
with a push by the Republicans) after spending went completely out of control
during the Reagan/Bush years, so who, exactly, are the big spenders?
Anyway, anyway, life goes on... taxes or not. Oh, wait, taxes are one of those
inevitable things, so there's not any not where taxes are concerned.
Debra Shea
