Show of HandsShow of Hands

Show Of Hands July 9th, 2011 12:00am

Would you be willing to pay slightly higher taxes if doing so entitled you to direct which programs most of your own tax dollars went to support?

1 Liked

Comments: Add Comment

Scotat Missouri
07/19/11 9:31 pm

I would rather pay less taxes but still be able to choose where it goes.


07/18/11 12:54 am

This'd be great. Government agencies that people didn't like would get no funding! Bye bye, FTC!


07/18/11 12:52 am

What? Sorry it's almost one in the morning and my brain is fried... A logical answer is non-existent within my head at the moment.

KrazyPanda Missouri
07/16/11 3:00 pm

If the list contained:
1. Medcare
2. Police /Fire department
3. Education
4.Transportation
5. Hospitals
6. Monuments and parks
7. Protection
8.(and up) things not invented yet or I have not thought of.

mdrhc49 Louisiana
07/15/11 1:14 am

Why can't we vote on everything we are taxed for and filter out the other stuff? Better yet the democrats could pay for their stuff and the republicans could do the same. Just a quick thought...


07/12/11 11:23 pm

I would like for my money to go to something I believe in.


07/11/11 8:14 pm

Actually, I change my mind. No we shouldn't.


07/11/11 6:58 pm

If we had a 15% flat tax, all Americans would pay their fair share and the government would have more money than imaginable. All other taxes would have no further use, there by easing the burdens on employers, middle and lower income families, lower gas prices, and fund all these crazy entitlements.

FreeBird1
07/11/11 11:38 am

@rach

No shit rach. How do you suppose we prevent the most capable and productive of us from avoiding high taxes?

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/11/11 10:13 am

You could make it to where you have a list to choose from. That list could be limited to medicare, Medicaid, ss, defense, etc. Make all the programs be ones that are more or less entitlement. The fed would still take a general amount to spend on whatever.


07/11/11 9:17 am

I think that most of the wealthy would only choose programs that are likely to make them wealthier which would only hurt the whole in the long run.


07/11/11 1:22 am

I think this would solve a number of problems... Or at least quiet several complaints!


07/10/11 5:50 pm

Smoking mirrors. "No One" pays the volume of taxes to impact their choice on a National scale or level. Choice of where taxes go would be a Shell Game.

HatHZ
07/10/11 5:35 pm

hmmm, so I get to choose how my tax dollars are spent? and I wouldn't want this why?

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 2:57 pm

Or are you saying we should be able to do that now without raising taxes?

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 2:08 pm

What? The question is saying YOU tell them where YOUR tax dollars go.


07/10/11 1:58 pm

We shouldn't have to pay to have our taxes go to a certain program

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 1:23 pm

Or we could just have it at the state level. That'd be better. Then the people could make more localized decisions and choose what they see as most important to them and their state/community.

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 1:22 pm

I think it would be good. The people could choose what programs they want to support. That means less earmarks and all kind of sneaking in new programs. It wouldn't solve everything, but it sounds great.

fish North Carolina
07/10/11 1:13 pm

it would cost more for the government to manage and we would end up paying even more .

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 11:13 am

Cuz you might wanna take a gander at the map again. It's pretty even. Texas receives less than Cali. Why is it that Texas is doing so much better?

smart1
07/10/11 10:39 am

California nets 74% of Federal tax dollars. Louisiana approximately 1.22%. How "broke" would Louisiana be without California and the blue states?

NYevo NY
07/10/11 10:25 am

In dollar amounts they are, but I'm not sure if they are in relation to their overall size/population.

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 10:14 am

I'd rather california take care of itself. You have enough problems. Let us take care of ourselves. Cali is like the fed, spending money it doesn't have in large amounts. Aren't you guys the brokest state ever?

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 10:11 am

An smart1, how would everyone paying extra taxes with the chance to send that extra money to their chosen programs hurt red states? According to the question, you'd be paying MORE in taxes for the chance at aiding what you wish with the extra. That sounds like the same funding as now except more...

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 10:09 am

Obviously your generous donations aren't enough to keep the fed outta debt.

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 10:05 am

I think we could manage just fine without your debt

smart1
07/10/11 9:51 am

Yes. let's see how long the red states last without the blue states supporting them.

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 6:33 am

I think being able to choose what an extra percentage if your tax dollars would go to would be a good indicator of what the american people really feel most strongly about. I say, if you're taxed 15% from Feds, take 3% of that and key the people decide where it goes. After all, tis your money.

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 5:42 am

Eco, this question doesn't say you could or would give your extra tax money to private. It says you could choose which programs, not businesses, your extra taxes went to. That's totally different than saying you can send it to private businesses.

burnsey89 Louisiana
07/10/11 5:41 am

Lutang, YOU would be the one deciding where some of your tax money went. Not the KKK, Bible thumpers, black panthers, etc.

RJ1969 SoCal
07/10/11 1:13 am

this just in, North Dakota has 5 votes in.

RJ1969 SoCal
07/10/11 1:02 am

and Wyoming has a definitive lead with 5 out of 9.

RJ1969 SoCal
07/10/11 1:00 am

are you kidding me? right now, we have a 50-50 split in Montana. seriously, look at the number of voters.

RJ1969 SoCal
07/10/11 12:54 am

wow! so far the best posts on this thread have been from Arkansas!


07/10/11 12:42 am

they can buy their wars, I can buy education. we both pay a little more and eventually the GOP will realize that wars and prisons are expensive.

Lutang
07/10/11 12:35 am

No because I don't want some klansman or bible thumper telling people where funds should be allocated.

ken Tulsa,ok
07/09/11 11:17 pm

Rj 1969 maybe I do , but I think maybe you sure too . It was fun , but I got to go to bed good nite rj

veritas1 Panda
07/09/11 11:14 pm

@ECO AWESOME POINT!! Please read my comment about privatizing security agencies like the TSA In that questions forum.... It summarizes my belief on that.

RJ1969 SoCal
07/09/11 11:08 pm

businesses are in business to make money. not to do what's right. not to sacrifice. not for the common good. it's a very important part of our lives but it's not an absolute answer to address our everyday needs.

RJ1969 SoCal
07/09/11 11:06 pm

Eco, uh, yeah! I have no idea why people think that businesses, set out to make profit,are going to anything for the publics's benefit. where did that warped concept come from? oh yeah. rich people who know marketing.