args

Taxes should be Significantly Cut

C1: Taxation in General "Some taxes are justifiable and needed, but the current tax rates are terrible" So you and me agree that taxes are justifiable and needed. Plus, public services come from the nation as well, including regulatory protections with our environment, food, air, water, products that we buy, and other entities. The government provides many institutions we take for granted, such as our infrastructure and others I'll discuss in R4. The rich pay less than the middle class in taxes because of tax loopholes. Consider this Chart: Nation /Taxes as % of GDP/ [1]Special Mentions [2] Finland / 52.4% of GDP/Best education in world, Universal Health Care Australia / 32.3% of GDP/Strong economy, low unemployment, high ranking health care system Japan / 32.5% of GDP/Best Health Care system in world (universal), great education system Germany/43% of GDP/Strong infrastructure and competitiveness USA/14.7% of GDP/Most dynamic economy in world among large nations ---As you can tell, nations that have high enough taxation prosper, the contrary of your argument. Nations with sufficient tax levels can fund a strong system of universal health care, and can manage and have clean environments, and a better infrastructure. As you can see, lower taxes =/= stronger nation in all cases. [1, 2] America spends about 2% on infrastructure, while Europe spends 5%. This shows that higher spending here is needed. [3] So, your argument is not good economics. C2: Safety Net The safety net supports families that are poor compared to the national average. When we give the poor a full living, it is counter-productive. When we give them nothing, they are horribly in shape, and cannot get easily into the workforce and stay there because the poor usually live in a cycle of poverty, one where a person lacks the skills necessary to hold a well-paying job. The basic line: When generation after generation lives in various stages of poverty—it’s not because they have some undiscovered laziness gene. We have some serious systemic problems. [4] The current system needs to be reformed but kept. It has been concluded by several programs that when given intensive job training, supplemental earnings for a temporary time, and shifting workers into the workforce over time carefully has been successful. It is critical for prosperity. [6] C2: Wealthy have a moral obligation If society helps the wealthy become wealthy in the first place off what the taxpayers have paid for, the wealthy deserve to help the people that made that guy wealthy. Here is what Bill Gates Sr. (Bill Gates' father) said: There is no such thing as a self-made man, Bill Jr. didn't invent the internet. He just used to - to make billions. Every businessman has used vast American infrastructure, which the taxpayers paid for, to make his money. He didn't get rich alone. There is no such thing as a self-made man! Therefore, the wealthy, who've gotten rich off what the taxpayers paid for, owe the taxpayers of this country a great deal and should be paying it back. [5] If you disagree with a rich man whose son is the richest guy in the world, you currently are not looking into reality yet. C3: Money for the rich and Corporations "if the rich received tax cuts, they could either countribue to GDP by buying a big-ticket item or go invest in his or her business(s) which will help them by getting them more money, help the workers by having better working conditions, salaries, and a reduced risk of being laid off" As I showed, in R2, corporate profits are at record highs. However, people are still, more than usual, at a risk of being laid off. The rich received tax cuts in the early 2000s, but the economy declined. It is absurd to say this was the Clintonian policies taking affect. No evidence. The Clinton tax changes increased government revenues, eventually balancing the budget, which led to more confidence. Plus, because a business has more money, they will likely invest, but they WILL NOT INVEST IN THEIR OWN PROPERTY. This is the number one thing. Businesses never hire with more money. Businesses hire and expand with more demand. So, we need more demand to improve worker's salaries, working conditions, and make businesses truly expand, instead of just "investing" in Wall Street, which doesn't help Main Street by much at all. Social Safety Net Constitutionality: If you look, the Constitution was set up to allow the federal government to: Provide common national defense Establish a Justice System Insure domestic tranquility Promote the general welfare Secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, and to form a more perfect union As I have discussed, a social safety net improves the general welfare of a nation as well as makes a more perfect union. Thus, a safety net is Constitutional. Social Security The true solutions to fix this program: Lockbox Raise Cap on limits taxed If you allow workers to opt out whom are middle or lower classes, when retirement comes, they will likely need more money again, and thus you would have a crisis. Plus, if people can opt out, the wealthiest will opt out because this program is designed for the middle and lower classes. Then, with few people to support the program, the program will collapse, and hurting millions of seniors. This is a slippery slope, you allow people to opt out, then the system crashes. Inheritance Tax This tax is administered on the state level. Therefore, it depends on what the state's situation is. Property Tax: America enjoys a system of quality, Universal Public Schools, that when utilized effectively, can serve as a "great equalizer". The school system is considered a cornerstone in American society. Therefore, this tax is needed to fund schools. Excise Tax: I showed you how excise taxes are Constitutional in R2. Plus, excise taxes reduce the chance that people use these dangerous substances. This is different from prohabition. It increases and broadens the tax base and revenue too. Corporate Taxes: Tax Cuts don't create more jobs our anything of the sort when applied to businesses either. I just think that it would increase competitiveness, and with no loopholes, more money would possibly be collected because some businesses pay no income tax. Renewable Energy We should not be in a rush to move to renewable energy sources because it will cause a crushing recession and will slow travel down by over 95%, thus making the economy even worse. And the rich already pay more than their fair share in taxes, and the poor pay less than their fair share in taxes. Renewable enery sources would create millions of jobs, reduce greenhouse gases, clean up environments and habitats, make us no longer dependent on foreign oils, clean up air and water in this nation, prevent much childhool asthma, save thousands of lives a year, and help other third world countries if we help them develop faster and prevent them from hurting their ecosystems and environments. For every dollar we invest in them, it has a multiplier of 6. [5] So, your energy argument has no merit, and Cap and Trade actually creates new markets for trading Capped emission "blocks", improving the economy. Government Spending The government needs to cut spending in some areas, but has to be careful on how much they cut, and when, because the economy cannot plunge into another recession. Taxation rates, only at 14.7% of GDP, is much lower than many other nations, which are more similar to 30-50%. So, we need some tax increases as well. Sources: The World Factbook. Application on App Store (verified) http://www.thedailybeast.com... http://www.reuters.com... http://notemily.tumblr.com... Don't Think Like an Elephant! By George Lakoff http://evidencebasedprograms.org...