What do u think of Corzine's proposal to raise taxes?
97170
Nobody likes a tax increase. However, people also want their governments to operate. I think citizens have to get informed, first. Second, try and not approach it from either ideological pole, and see if the government has explored all its options for bringing the budget into line.\n\nIf the governor looks to be stuck, with no other way out, than perhaps people should rally behind him and let it happen - deficits will only add up and make for a bigger bill later.\n\nOn the other hand, if the governor is just relying on the tax increase because he has not been creative enough to come up with any other solution, then he should not get a pass from the people.
288683
The heart of your thinking I think would be best applied through strengthening the workers in this country (and thus the broad tax base) A strong family that is secure in it's health and it's retirement will turn their thoughts away from a day to day struggle that pursists today, and toward their surroundings. This would greatly help us to address other issues such as the environment and poverty right here at home. There should be a worker's rights amendment. The right to cheap health coverage. The right to job saftey. The right to a living wage. I think the fastest way to get this sort of broad based reform done is through organisation. Not like a classical union. More like an association that would draw together to leverage certain trhings from our government. Like a group that is millions strong would be able to negotiate better health coverage than even a large corporation could. Starting there and with similar issues that could be achieved through a voter soliderity almost like that of a union, but a little bit more effective, and with a different mission. It wouldn't be done through the work place, but at home so there couldn't be any kind of adverse reactions from corporates and the like. As long as you work and pay taxes, you would be eligable for membership. And with success, taking bigger bites at the apple. AAnd who knows, maybe something like that would end up putting a fire into our 2 party system of government. Or perhaps replace it altogether.
827347
The fairtax would not only improve my life, but the life of everyone.\n\nUnder this plan, I would not be punished for saving money or selling stocks for a profit.\n\nI am not sure why Steve thinks this would increase taxes on the poor, and give huge tax breaks to the rich.  This is simply not true.\n\nThis plan, like many national sales tax plans I have seen has a tax refund for all money spent up to the poverty level, which means the poor would pay nearly no taxes at all.  This plan would give an automatic $10,000 refund for a single person household, which increases for each additional person, meaning the poor would have at least an extra $10,000 a year of income.  If you are poor than you will not buy enough goods and services to surpass the $10,000+ yearly refund, so the net effect is more money in the pockets of the poor.  Remember a sales tax is a percentage of money spent on goods.  If the national sales tax is 23% and the refund is $10,000, a single person who pays $20,000 a year on goods and services, would have paid $4,600 in taxes.  However, under this plan he would receive a $10,000 refund yielding a net gain of $5,400 each year to either spend or save, and if he were to save it, he would not be taxed on the interest earned on the $5,400 savings.\n \nThe rich are the ones spending the most money, so they will pay the most under this tax plan. \n\nThis plan is the most fair, since if you do not want to pay any taxes then all you have to do is not buy anything and you won't pay any taxes!\n\nGreat Question!
1126086
Thoughtful questions. I don't argue the idea that increased taxes on gasoline could be used to subsidize public transportation and infrastructure. The problem with taxes and their respective burden to buyer and seller is that there are federal, state and local taxing bodies, each levying taxes on gasoline. Each of those bodies earmarks gasoline taxes for something different...not always transportation related. So, unless those taxing bodies agree (that'll be the day!) on how much, when and for what, you won't have an effective proposal.\n\nThat said, the price of gasoline in the US has been held artificially low for decades to encourage Americans to buy cars and use them for more than basic transportation. There are all kinds of political reasons for this, and probably billions in political contributions involved. The upshot is that most of us feel entitled to low gasoline prices and get honked off when supply and demand don't work our way. We're mad when we have to pay $3 per gallon. In Europe they were paying the equivalent of $3 per LITER, 10 years ago!
111332
Here we go again.\n\nFunny how the top 10% of all the income earners in the US still pay 90% of the taxes. But we, once again, hear the typical spew from the lib answerers about taking money from the poor or the middle class. Hell, if ANYTHING it should be the middle class and the wealthy to complain that we are in a punnishment tax system, where the wealthy pay more of a percentage than everyone else. (As you can tell I am a proponent of the flat tax system, with no loopholes or deductions, everyone paying the same percentage)\n\nBut as for what this administration/party has helped do. The economy is in a slow growth cycle, enabling workers to find new jobs, companies to prosper more (providing more chances at advancement), and small businesses to take a chance and thrive again with the increased power of spending. Thank GOD this is not another sudden boom movement like in the 90's, resulting in the inevitable market and economic correction.\n\nReduction in tax rates to have more $$$ in the pockets for those that earn it (notice I did not say more money given to those who feel the government OWES them a living)\n\nIncreased defense efforts to help secure this country more than what it was before. Still much more to be done, but this is better than cutting defense like some other President that can easily be named.\n\nTried to put more control over retirement funds back to the individual, instead of being controled by an outdated and failing Social Security system. I still have hope that this will happen in some form in the future. Again, the government is not responsible, and should not be responsible for the monetary well being of any individual that is not employed by that government.\n\nThe list can go on. But many of the uber-libs will continue to have it go in one ear and out the other, per usual.
850803
First, let me editorialize my comments.\n\nI am not a wealthy person, financially. I was born and raised in Chicago, a heavily democratic city. I hate the Republican party, but, hate the Democratic party more. \n\nThat said and done, here's my response to your statement:\n\n1. Make laws to help people acheive their goals.\nThat's the republican idea. But, you cant make people make goals. Instead, this has to be taught. \n\n2. Create a stronger middle class. (Dont be afraid to tax the rich).\nThat's what democrats claim as their idea.\nProblem is, they want to tax everyone. They have what i call the "Poor people" tax: its called "Smog". Upper middle class to rich people are pretty much unaffected by smog penalties. They tend to (stereotypically) buy a new car every year. \nMy idea: Do as WE have to do: live within your means. I dont wish ANYONE'S taxes to be raised. Just because I am unaffected by it, doesn't make it ok. In fact, it then becomes a potentially illegal tax, as it discriminates against a certain group. \nI'm in favor of a 2-5% flat rate tax, on everyone. Until they want to raise it.\nThe fact is, there is much too much waste in governmental spending, and I should not have to pay for it. \n3. Seperate the church and state, without infringing on the Church's rights.\nInteresting. It seems as if the Church is being persecuted by the state. It seems the Church is persecuting the State. \nFact is, Just because someone is a christian, and runs for office, does not make a conflict. When their religion dictates what everyone else does, it becomes a problem.\n\n4. Always support your community at large and not just party affilliates. \nI so agree. I get tired of this "Bush' war, bring home the troops" nonsense, and the moral indignancy from the Republican party. \nI get tired of the Democrats degrading what the republicans have done, knowing full well, if it were their idea, they'd be praising their candidate. I get tired of the Republicans blaming the Democrats for what they do. Its nauseating. \n\n5. You owe lobbyists nothing... you owe your community everything.\nI totally agree. \nIdea for a new bill: Accepting ANY money from anyone is illegal for politicians, and public servants. \n\n6. Single, childless, young people and elderly have family and friends too.\nNot sure what this is about.\n\n7. What can we do to reduce our depenance on fossil fuels?\nIts what we apparently want. hybrid and electric cars dont seem to sell a lot.\n\nI'd like our leaders to know they are supposed to serve US, not their own interests. Easy-in, easier out. \n\nOh, and, yes, keep the troops in. No matter what party wins, we have to keep the fight going.\n\nAnd, leave my damn money alone. You make more than youre worth as it is.
806694
We don't need to raise taxes.   The government has more than enough money if it would reduce corruption and inefficiency.    The waste is staggering.
901494
They would rather raise all taxes, not just gas taxes!\n\n\n\n\nThey are for themselves, not the "little people"!
943513
1.  Income tax increases.\n2.  Increase in the capital gains tax.\n3.  Activist judges will be appointed to the bench, and constructivist judges will be Borked.\n4.  Possible impeachment of the President in the House, without conviction in the Senate.\n5.  Heavy regulations on trade will spur higher prices.\n6.  Monetary policy will spike inflation.\n7.  Increased regulations on energy will raise prices, discourage competition, and forestall innovation.\n8.  The Fairness Doctrine could be re-established, and curtail free-speech rights.\n9.  Federal limitations on Municipal bonds would be reduced, lowering the availability of smaller counties and cities to get money from places other that the Fed, and hurting the available capital for infrastructure development.\n10.  Democrats proposed two bills to re-instate the draft in the last decade.  The shift from a volunteer military to a conscription military will erode moral in both the civilian and military sectors.\n\nHonest, Intelligent, and no hatred.  Hope this satifies.
261084
What do you propose as an alternative?  You babble on about "FAIR TAX" and yet you don't define what you think if fair.  Please explain.
840581
I think it would be a FINE idea... have seen it at work in other countries such as Switzerland and The Netherlands.\n\nThe trouble in the USA is rather simple... business (Contractors) wouldn't permit it.  Imagine all that (relatively) cheap labor in the hands of the government !!  Building our infrastructure: roads, bridges, cleaning our parks, etc... they'd all be on a pay-structure that would drive the UNIONS that get those government contracts batty !!\n\nBut also... THINK of the money the tax-payers could SAVE !!  Projects done for half (or less) of the cost we pay today.  We'd have virtually ZERO unemployment in the 18-21 yr range, and they would gather useful training during that period that might just reduce unemployment further down the road.\n\nApply some rules not unlike the military regarding behavior, fiscal responsibility, and pride.\n\nYes, I like the idea.
866808
It would probably be something like this. In conclusion i have no choice but to raise taxes.
705648
it shows you are thinking about a major issue. Who will pay to make their country into a good economy? I the average tax payer can't afford what is allready coming out of my check and if we took on your project they would have to increase my taxes.
202564
You have a good point there.  Yes, a flat tax would definitely be the best.  That way more people would be encouraged to start businesses, or expand their existing businesses, thus creating more jobs for everybody.\nThe current tax system is "supposed" to make the income more equal to everybody, when in fact it's the middle class that pays the most taxes - not the welfare people, 'cause they don't earn money, and not the business owners (which would be considered rich), 'cause of the write-offs allowed.  The people in favor of the progressive income tax are shooting themselves in the foot, and don't realize it.
1176408
I think we should pass the Fair Tax, Repeal the 16th Amendment, and then I don't think the Presidency would be out of the question.\n\nI think his platform should be:\n\nFair Tax (if not done before election)\n\nRepeal 16th Amendment (if not before)\n\nEarmark Reform\n\nBalanced Budget Amendment\n\nReform Social Security and Medicare (Eliminate would be better but I will take what I can get)\n\nCut Spending by at least 50% I would start with the Executive departments (HUD, Department of Education, Department of Energy, Department of Agriculture)  We can roll anything worth keeping under the Department of the Interior or Defense.\n\nAfter that he could build a border fence or just take the summer off!  He would go down in history as the best president of all times.
307319
I am very satisfied with the new proposal.It lets most of them stay.How would you transport 11 million ppl to their original country?And thats not even the tip of it what if they own homes or have children that were born here ,that makes them USA CITIZENS.I think it's great
297174
I think it would be a good idea.  It would certainly make it easier and quicker to lodge and it would catch all those tax cheats who cost the law-abiding citizens extra money.