Tax reform idea whose time has come?

Personally, I like what I see in this site. Hope you will, too. If you do, please pass it along as that's the only way to get it into the public dialogue and in front of politicians who might just decide to take it seriously:

http://fairsharetaxes.org/default.aspx

To ensure future economic prosperity, double the federal government's spending on research, the environment, and infrastructure.

Insane. Since when does racking up massive amounts of debt "ensure economic prosperity"?
15 Trillion in debt and we should spend more? One word,...Greece.

The Failed GOP Stimulus, tax breaks for the rich, cost many times more Obama's successful stimulus

Obama's successful stimulus?....Wow. That says it all.

OmniScience wrote:

To ensure future economic prosperity, double the federal government's spending on research, the environment, and infrastructure.

Insane. Since when does racking up massive amounts of debt "ensure economic prosperity"?
15 Trillion in debt and we should spend more? One word,...Greece.

The Failed GOP Stimulus, tax breaks for the rich, cost many times more Obama's successful stimulus

Obama's successful stimulus?....Wow. That says it all.

Spend some time on the site. Browse around. Take everything into consideration instead of just "parsing" one or two comments. That, IMHO, is at the root of most of our problems - we tend to take things out of context and run with them as if they are factual, written in stone truths that represent the whole, when, in fact, they do not.

zhawke wrote: [Spend some time on the site. Browse around. Take everything into consideration instead of just "parsing" one or two comments. That, IMHO, is at the root of most of our problems - we tend to take things out of context and run with them as if they are factual, written in stone truths that represent the whole, when, in fact, they do not.

Won't happen. If the site has "liberal" cooties on it, most conservatives will immediately start throwing up a little in their mouths. If the site has "conservative" cooties, most liberals will do the same thing.

I don't think there is much to be done about it at this point.

zhawke wrote:

OmniScience wrote:

To ensure future economic prosperity, double the federal government's spending on research, the environment, and infrastructure.

Insane. Since when does racking up massive amounts of debt "ensure economic prosperity"?
15 Trillion in debt and we should spend more? One word,...Greece.

The Failed GOP Stimulus, tax breaks for the rich, cost many times more Obama's successful stimulus

Obama's successful stimulus?....Wow. That says it all.

Spend some time on the site. Browse around. Take everything into consideration instead of just "parsing" one or two comments. That, IMHO, is at the root of most of our problems - we tend to take things out of context and run with them as if they are factual, written in stone truths that represent the whole, when, in fact, they do not.

Double federal spending? Sorry, but I didn't take anything out of context - that's directly from their home page. Spending is one of, if not the, biggest problem this country has. To even suggest doubling federal spending is beyond stupid.
I'll say it again, this country has a spending and tax code problem. The Federal government CANNOT continue to spend massive amounts of money that it does not have.

OmniScience wrote:

zhawke wrote:

OmniScience wrote:

To ensure future economic prosperity, double the federal government's spending on research, the environment, and infrastructure.

Insane. Since when does racking up massive amounts of debt "ensure economic prosperity"?
15 Trillion in debt and we should spend more? One word,...Greece.

The Failed GOP Stimulus, tax breaks for the rich, cost many times more Obama's successful stimulus

Obama's successful stimulus?....Wow. That says it all.

Spend some time on the site. Browse around. Take everything into consideration instead of just "parsing" one or two comments. That, IMHO, is at the root of most of our problems - we tend to take things out of context and run with them as if they are factual, written in stone truths that represent the whole, when, in fact, they do not.

Double federal spending? Sorry, but I didn't take anything out of context - that's directly from their home page. Spending is one of, if not the, biggest problem this country has. To even suggest doubling federal spending is beyond stupid.
I'll say it again, this country has a spending and tax code problem. The Federal government CANNOT continue to spend massive amounts of money that it does not have.

The bit you quoted did not suggest doubling federal spending, it suggested doubling spending on three specific items. Not ALL federal spending.

OmniScience wrote:

zhawke wrote:

OmniScience wrote:

To ensure future economic prosperity, double the federal government's spending on research, the environment, and infrastructure.

Insane. Since when does racking up massive amounts of debt "ensure economic prosperity"?
15 Trillion in debt and we should spend more? One word,...Greece.

The Failed GOP Stimulus, tax breaks for the rich, cost many times more Obama's successful stimulus

Obama's successful stimulus?....Wow. That says it all.

Spend some time on the site. Browse around. Take everything into consideration instead of just "parsing" one or two comments. That, IMHO, is at the root of most of our problems - we tend to take things out of context and run with them as if they are factual, written in stone truths that represent the whole, when, in fact, they do not.

Double federal spending? Sorry, but I didn't take anything out of context - that's directly from their home page. Spending is one of, if not the, biggest problem this country has. To even suggest doubling federal spending is beyond stupid.
I'll say it again, this country has a spending and tax code problem. The Federal government CANNOT continue to spend massive amounts of money that it does not have.

And I will say again, this web site addresses the tax code problem in a way I consider to be a refreshing change of pace from the same old tired rhetoric we keep hearing from politicians, both past and present. Double Federal spending in those key areas mentioned is not a bad thing, in my opinion. If you take the time on the website to do further research, you'll also see:

Under the proposed tax system, about 80% of taxpayers would have their total taxes reduced substantially. This essay’s hypothetical working, middle-class family’s total tax bill (federal, state, and municipal) would have been reduced from about $28,000 to about $16,000. The investing-class millionaire couple’s total taxes would have increased from about $32,000 to about $55,000. These tax reforms, combined with spending cuts that would rein in the current unrestrained transfer of taxpayer dollars to the medical and defense industries (see Spending and Debt pages at the website), would produce small federal, state and municipal budget surpluses by 2015 and eliminate the national debt in about 30 years. Under the plan, the economy would flourish, to the benefit of everyone: poor, middle-class, and wealthy alike.

and much, much more.

I guess it could be argued that we don't have a spending problem we have a revenue problem. I agree we shouldn't spend more than we have, so maybe the solution is to have more. This country did very well with high taxes did we not?

Now before you all start beating up on me I am just putting this out there for discussion. The idea that it takes money to make money has been true for the private sector...would it also be true for gov't?

AspenValley wrote:

zhawke wrote: [Spend some time on the site. Browse around. Take everything into consideration instead of just "parsing" one or two comments. That, IMHO, is at the root of most of our problems - we tend to take things out of context and run with them as if they are factual, written in stone truths that represent the whole, when, in fact, they do not.

Won't happen. If the site has "liberal" cooties on it, most conservatives will immediately start throwing up a little in their mouths. If the site has "conservative" cooties, most liberals will do the same thing.

I don't think there is much to be done about it at this point.

Thanks AV. No harm in trying, though. Right?

AspenValley wrote: Won't happen. If the site has "liberal" cooties on it, most conservatives will immediately start throwing up a little in their mouths. If the site has "conservative" cooties, most liberals will do the same thing.

I don't think there is much to be done about it at this point.

Just FYI, AV. I'm, an independant, but I agree with your comment - illustrates why I don't post on here much anymore.