Why are Americans so opposed to tax increases?

[erislover]

@Testy

OTOH, not funding NPR is no big loss. I like it well enough but it isn’t worth much to me on a practical basis.

The reality of “no big loss to cut” is “no big gain to cut.”

I am less convinced that the people incurring the debt understand what they are expecting to get as an ROI and whether the investment will eventually pay for itself.

Perhaps. This is why investment is risky. Do you want people’s health and education fundamentally governed by their understanding risk? Apparently the entire right feels it is better. The government isn’t trying to actively profit and exploit these folks like private firms would. I love the market, don’t get me wrong, it definitely has its place. But is this it?

I think there is a difference here. If I buy a company or a car or a cat, and incur debt by doing so, I know that I will have to repay that loan eventually.

When I buy a bond, I eventually cash it in.

I cannot borrow more money to repay the first debt and then continue to do this.

It’s like a degenerate solution, it’s perverse, but yeah, it’s possible.

That is where I think the disconnect is. You and I may incur debt for a specific purpose but you and I will also have to repay that debt.

The government also pays its debt. Anyway, in 2009 the government’s budget included payments on the interest of debt of about 9%. Me? 22% of my gross income goes toward my debt payments, of which about 7% is interest. And I’m apparently a good enough risk that my credit rating is high and my limits steadily grow. I don’t even own property, though there are those in my income level certainly do, in which case I’d estimate my interest payments would approach… (whips out calculator)… 10%. Now, I did just ask my boss for a raise, and got it, so these numbers will shrink next month.

Wait, isn’t the government asking its bosses for a raise? Isn’t that this whole thread? Seems like the right wants the government to be run like a household, except it actually is, and they hate it. The government is lower middle class. Of course, it is common knowledge on the left that the right has been waging war against the middle class for some time, so maybe this is all very obvious and unsurprising to some that “starving the beast” is just the same war on a metaphorical level.

Well, it would certainly make ME unhappy. Seriously, avoiding pissing-off the voters is no bad thing.

It’s a fine line you’re not crossing there. I find it hard to see.

[gonzomax]

@magellan01

And you still haven’t answered this:

Here, let me make it easier for you:

1. what percent do you think corporations should pay?
2. Let’s say you’re happy with a real 35%, how would you handle the fact that other countries have a rate under half that?
3. Did you watch 60 Minutes last night? Look at Switzerland, Ireland, Canada. How would you handle that?

Feel free to group #s 2 and 3 if you’d like. and this time, how about having what you type resemble an answer to the questions.

There is no 35 percent. That is why it does not need to be defended. It is a statutory rate that is not being collected.

[magellan01]

@gonzomax

There is no 35 percent. That is why it does not need to be defended. It is a statutory rate that is not being collected.

Sure it does. When a company is looking to its tax liabilities, it needs to look at the tax laws where the company is. If they feel they can use lawyers to lower their tax liabilities they will do so, but that costs money and adds a degree of complexity to their businesses that they rather not have.While I agree with you that I think few corporations, if any, are paying the full 35%, they must be paying more than they’d pay elsewhere. If not, all these company’s wouldn’t be moving their companies, or a good chunk of their operations, elsewhere.

Again, did you see the 60 Minutes piece? U.S. companies have moved their business out of the country to the tune of 2 or 3 trillion dollars. They’ve gone to places like Ireland and Switzerland specifically due to the lower taxes there. So, how would you stop companies leaving? How would you attract those that have left back?

If you were a CEO, with a fiduciary responsibility to your shareholders, would you keep everything i the U.S.? Or would you think about moving a chunk of your business to countries like Ireland, Switzerland or Canada, where the tax rate is about half?

[Rekd]

I’m sure it’s been said many times already, but I’ll re-state it. I don’t mind more taxes if they are used for what they were originally intended.

What’s going on in government these days is criminal and they’re using my tax money to do it.

[Naxos]

@Dr.Drake

It seems like Americans’ attitudes towards tax, particularly income tax, are dramatically different from those in other Western nations. If that’s so, how long has it been like that? Was there a time when Americans were more willing to consider tax increases, and if so, when did it change and why?

In modern political history of the past 25 years, one of the fundamental reasons against tax increases, even when they’re mostly for the wealthy of the population, started with the Reagan-era vilification of lower income and minority groups – that it was the poor and social programs that were stealing the bread off the table of middle class whites, therefore they were evil, and taxes should be slashed and the Government dismantled because it was there only to cater to the needs of the poor and the minorities.

In any and all conservative political arguments against taxes in the past 25-30 years there’s never a mention of the Republican administrations’ blowing the deficit and the debt of the US to astronomical levels. All that activity was eagerly justified for random reasons that appeased the hate of the majority white population against the minorities and the poor, while most of the country’s wealth has been consistently funneled to the richest 5% of the population.

So now we’re at a point where taxes are still an anathema, one example being that there’s a specific intent to to let anyone who’s sick without a health plan to die instead of having access to health care, because most people in such circumstances are poor and minorities, so this is a justified outcome for them.

At the same time, repeated attempts to increase financial benefits to the richest and keep multi-decade tax credits to mega-corps intact, are continuing at a feverish tempo, and the latest such effort by the conservatives is in last week’s news.