Why doesn't everybody hate taxes?

Most people = When something good happens to them, they wouldn’t care about what happens to others whether it’s good or bad. However, when something bad happens they’d be like ” Why only me? ” There is no period to that. Hate to break it down to you but most people ” will always be the government’s little punk ”..

Oliver Wendell Holmes once said: “I like to pay taxes. With them I buy civilization.”
I agree with Ollie.

Because I don’t (contrary to what I often say) hate other people around me, within society.

augustlan
My poli sci prof would have called that a slogan designed to resurrect the brain dead.

I don’t hate taxes either and I pay a lot. I realize that is the price we pay for services and to be part of society. And I agree with Oliver Wendell Homes too.

@saint Well, if by “brain dead” you mean “people who care about everyone’s well-being”, I’ll agree with your prof.

Lack of empathy, lack of insight, lack of sense!

@CaptainHarley How is not hating taxes related to having a lack of empathy? I see it in the reverse.

Not surprising. No empathy for those who have to pay taxes to support those who refuse to do so, or who refuse to work.

^^ Not surprising.

Thank you. : )

Because some people are smart and others aren’t.

Under the orange tree.

I don’t really hate taxes. I hate how the money is being spent recklessly. I agree that taxes is needed to make our society function. I don’t agree on how some of the money is managed.

@Pandora GA. That’s how I feel.

I know that taxes are a part of the functioning of the country, so they must be paid. But when I see billions wasted on politicians (of both stripes) supporting their party’s special interests then they turn around and ask for more of our money with scare tactics it pisses me off royally.

@cletrans2col Thanks. They keep doing it all wrong. I know at about every job I ever worked I always found a way they can save time or money by taking a short cut that wouldn’t hurt anyone and yet save money. Or stop spending money when they didn’t need too. If each agency told their workers to come up of ways of saving money and cutting waste, they probably could. Problem is the budget is being dictated for the big guys on top and don’t really ask the little guy. So they cut from parts that may need more money and continue to grant money to departments that just flush the money away.
I feel its like the guy who drives the Jaguar and decides to ditch the house before giving up the car. We can’t afford the toys right now. Lets just work on paying the rent.

Only people who don’t understand how the public benefits from their taxes hate them. Those people who don’t like to pay their taxes have no idea how our system works.

The worst part of A Democracy government of the People by the People is when The People neglect to do their part.

Taxes are a great thing when they’re going to something that will benefit us. The issue is not knowing whether they’re actually benefitting us.

“Cos I’m the taxman… yeah, the taxman not really

This would all be amusing if it wasn’t so devastating. The government spends (fed, state and local) about $6 trillion/yr. According to the IRS the total income of all personal tax returns (AGI) is $8.4 trillion/yr. It doesn’t leave much. We keep hearing that everyone needs to pay their fair share but it sure looks like everyone is paying far more than their fair share.

So now we want to raise taxes so that we can spend even more. Sure, just don’t raise mine, I’m tapped out.

@Jaxk

Exaxtly! Those running the government seem to view the electorate as a vast cash resivoir into which they can tap without consequences.

@Jaxk What is the relevance of personal tax returns? Why do you not mention corporate tax returns and all other income made by corporations and all other entities? How does GDP relate to government expenditures—the usual measure?

The total income of personal tax returns is also misleading because the actual tax rate on that amount is probably below 30% perhaps below 20%. The rest of government expenditures are made up from corporate taxes and other taxes and fees. The AGI of all personal tax returns is meaningless in this context.

@CaptainHarley What are you talking about? A majority of Congress refuses to raise taxes, even for the wealthiest, who could pay 50% taxes and still keep 100 times as much income as the poorest. Congress loves the rich. There is no evidence whatsoever that government sees the people as a cash reservoir. That is pure rhetoric. Shameless rhetoric. Typical of the kind of thinking that Republicans put into their policies. The world doesn’t run on wishes. It runs on reality. If conservatives could get their heads out of the clouds, they might see how their policies affect real people.

@wundayatta

Specious argument. When taxes and federal regulation require small business owners to avoid hiring people, they are too intrusive. And, since most new jobs in our society are created by small business, and since job growth is totally stagnant right now… draw your own conclusions.

How do income taxes relate to small business taxes? Are you saying employees are too expensive? All the employers have to do is reduce their offers and their employees will become affordable. If they can’t find people at low wages, then reducing taxes won’t help because the competition will snap up the the employees, especially since the employees will get to keep more of the salary. The employers won’t see any savings.

If you think that reducing the minimum wage will help, I doubt it. As far as I know most wages are significantly higher than minimum wage, again, due to competition. You’ve got your own specious argument there, methinks.

Job grown is stagnant because people are buying things. They stopped buying things due to a lack of confidence in the economy. As a result, demand dropped and employers started laying people off. In the meantime, the cost of production has gone up, due to rising costs in energy and raw materials.

We need to stimulate the economy. People need to feel safer spending money, instead of hunkering down to wait it out. Once people start spending, demand will rise and employers will hire more folks. Reducing taxes will not help. Business do not raise production until demand rises. If they take in more income they will make more money, but they will not produce more. Big businesses are already sitting on huge pools of cash.

If you reduce taxes, all that will happen is that businesses will make even more money, but this won’t help the economy nor any individuals. If we raise taxes, especially on businesses that sitting on all that cash, the government can spend it, increasing demand and creating jobs and stimulating the economy.

This is why we need to raise the capital gains tax. It will cause businesses to invest their cash instead of sitting on it. Maybe they’ll spend some of it buying products from the small businesses that create new jobs. I’m not sure, though, that small businesses create the most new jobs. From what I understand, the largest employers create far more new jobs. I could be wrong. But that’s a fact we can check.

Right now, counter intuitive as it may sound, raising taxes on the wealthy is the right way to go.

It is a stagnant economy that is causing small businesses not to grow; it is not taxes or over-regulation. My husband is the owner of a small business and has never complained of taxes or regulation preventing hiring. He does not believe in starving the beast.

@CaptainHarley I really tried to let this go, but I’ve got to respond to your post way up there. You said “No empathy for those who have to pay taxes to support those who refuse to do so, or who refuse to work.” You know, I pay income taxes, just like you. So, are you actually suggesting that I have no concern for… myself? That is just flat out ridiculous.

Beyond that, does it not occur to you that we are all taxpayers? Even people on welfare pay taxes on something. Your ‘lack of empathy for those poor little taxpayers’ just has no basis in reality.

@augustlan

Exactly. The statement stands on its own, or rather with my earlier post on this topic.

@wundayatta

I’m not sure you’re seeing the problem. Persoanl income pays for everything. Corporate taxes are reflected in higher prices for goods, the consumer pays for that. Excise taxes are paid by the consumer. Property taxes, again by the consumer. I don’t care where you think the tax is coming from, it’s paid for by the consumer.

And you’re take on capital gains is way out in left feild. As you raise the capital gains tax you get less capital investment, not more. Why would you believe that a higher capital gains tax would increase investment? It doesn’t make any sense.

@CaptainHarley What does that mean, exactly? I’m trying to wrap my head around this.

Right now, @Jaxk, businesses can make capital gains and just sit on the cash and wait for the economy to turn around. If they will be facing a greater tax on capital gains, they will be more likely to reinvest that money in building business. That way it becomes an offset to capital gains, I think. Thus their cost of sitting on money is higher and they are more likely to use it.

You are right about the connection between all taxes. In the end, individuals pay them. Of course, corporations are individuals in US law, for what that’s worth.

However, the point is that the market is what the market is. So no matter what your tax rate is, business still has to pay the prevailing rate for employees. Tax rates don’t affect that. Businesses hire the employees they need to produce the product they make at a rate that is profitable.

To stimulate the economy, you need more spending. It doesn’t matter who spends that money, although it does matter what they spend it on. Economists look at the multiplier effect of spending in various sectors of the economy. Spending on services has a much greater multiplier effect compared to spending on capital intensive sectors of the economy. I.e., hiring people keeps the money flowing. Buying shit doesn’t have nearly as strong a multiplier effect. Building infrastructure also has a better multiplier effect since it is an investment in stuff that can provide a return for decades, unlike military hardware which is often used only once and then is gone. Far too often it is gone before it is ever used. It has a short shelf-life (gets out of date fast) and no one really wants to have to use it.

Government spending goes for many things. Some of it labor intensive (medical and social services) and some of it capital intensive (the military). The government can buy more services and that will create jobs. They can spend on infrastructure and that creates jobs. They can spend in military, but that creates fewer jobs.

It is true that you can reduce taxes and let individuals have more money to spend. I don’t know if they will spend it though. In bad economies, people tend to save more. Saving is supposed to be good, but it doesn’t stimulate the economy as far as I can see.

However, if you reduce taxes, you have to cut government spending and lay off all kinds of government employees, unless you’re willing to increase the deficit. So there would be huge layoffs of government employees and that may well more than offset any stimulus of lower taxes.

The issue is confidence. If people have confidence, they will spend and stimulate the economy. Does deficit spending create confidence? Not when people are so scared of the debt. That rules out government stimulus.

Will tax cuts stimulate the economy? Not if people lack confidence. Will tax cuts to businesses allow them to spend more on employees? I don’t know. I’d like to think so, but I’m not sure. I have argued in the past that if health insurance costs are cut, then employees will get paid more in salary. Not sure if that’s the case. I suppose they could hire more people or they could just sit on the cash.

The problem is that no one has confidence and I don’t think tax cuts or govt spending of a limited amount will stimulate anything enough. We need to turn around confidence and that is as much a psychological issue as anything else. If people believe in politicians, it could turn around and a change of administration could help that, or it might not. That’s a crap shoot.

Increased regulations might help because one of the things that gives people a lack of confidence is a sense that the financial behemoths have a huge advantage and no one can keep them in check. The playing field is tilted their way, to use the popular metaphor.

I don’t think limiting government will help because government is the only thing between people and business behaving fairly. Limiting government would kill government oversight and probably lead to a worse economy.

So I don’t see fiscal policy being very effective, whether tax cuts, stimulus spending, or anything the Fed can do. Confidence is what needs changing, and we may have to tinker and tinker until we find something that seems to leverage confidence somehow.

@wundayatta

A couple of points of disagreement. Capital investment is a risk/reward analysis. Currently the risk is higher than normal since we don’t know if a capital investment will be successful. If the economy continues to stagnate or worse declines further, the risk increases. Capital gains tax reduces the reward. The higher the tax the less reward. So if you raise the tax at a time when risk is higher, you will get less capital investment, not more. Parking the money in savings or bonds, is very low risk but still has reward even though low. I can’t see how you feel raising the capital gains tax would result in more investment. It just doesn’t work.

I would also take issue with the idea that service has the best multiplier effect. Capital expenditures in fact creates more jobs and that money cycles through the economy more times than service jobs. Equipment needs to be built and sold and creates many subassemblies that also need to be built and sold. Manufacturing will in fact cycle money through the economy faster and more times. Government on the other hand produces nothing. There is no product. That is not to say we don’t need it, just that it has a limited impact. There is a very interesting article here that discusses the impact of government spending. It’s a little long but even if you disagree, you should be aware of the counter arguments.

Where I think we have agreement is on the confidence. Currently business and consumers alike have no confidence. There is way too much uncertainty in what may be coming down the road. We need some stability. Neither raise nor lower taxes. Give us a predictable regulatory environment. Put spending back to the level it was before Obama took office. This economy will recover but while there is so much turbulence, we are unable to catch our breath. This is a great time to invest in our business. Labor is plentiful and money is cheap. If we knew what the playing field was going to look like, it would be much easier to take a chance.

You say that government is the only thing between the people and business behaving badly. What is between the people and government behaving badly?