Now This Could Open A Pandora's Box!

Discussion in 'Current Events' started by wkmac, Apr 25, 2006.

  1. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    Not only does the obvious problems for employers jump out at ya but notice in the article that "the employee" will pay a tax to fund this program. Now granted the tax is small but even the dreaded income tax started out at 1% of total income to the behemoth it is today. We also have politicians who use monies gathered on many fronts not for what they were intended but rather for pet projects that they in turn can turn into political support to keep them in office. Social Security is a good example of this. Lastly, how many of us are willing to have our pay taxed weekly under a plan similar to Mass. with the knowledge that we may never take advantage of the plan ourselves but would pay for others to do so? Personally, I'd be much more willing to pay into a private plan within our company that when situations like this come up that employees can hire professional help in the home while they can continue to work but just don't give it to Central States!

    Granted, you never know what life will throw at you but I'm just leary of gov't doing something like this. In other words, I just don't trust them based on past performance!

    You know if gov't really wanted to help us they'd reduce their size thus vastly reducing the burden on the tax paying public and therefore it's possible many (not all mind you) 2 income families now could cut back to one income and still maintain itself at it's current lifestyle. Now a sick family member would still a burden but it may not always come down to the aweful choice of care for the family or the job. With the importance of this year's elections and the 08' Presidential race coming into play, watch for these type of schemes to surface more and more in order to garner votes. On the surface it looks good and noble but I've got a feeling the devil's buried in the details!
  2. tieguy

    tieguy Banned

    how do you figure familes have two wage earners working to pay taxes?
  3. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member

    They don't specifically work to pay taxes but in some sense they in fact do. That comment is based that when you consider all forms of taxation whether direct such as the federal or state income taxes most of us pay and social security, medicare. Then add on various property taxes, state and local sales taxes and some state's charge taxes on cars annually when tags are purchased (mine does) and then on top of all of this you have embedded taxes in all products that you have no real knowledge of. For example, in my state we have a $.45 cent per gallon of tax on every gallon of gas sold. $.18 is the federal excise tax and the rest goes to the State. I saw this morning where a Senator from New Jersey is susggesting a 60 day suspension of the $.18 federal gas tax in order to help relieve the economic impact the high gas prices is having right now.

    When you begin to add up all these different taxes both seen and unseen, many quarters such on average the percentage of total income to pay all taxes is right at 40%. Now it's a given all taxes can't be cancelled because there are functions of gov't that are legit. You may see thses functions better served at the federal level whereas I happen to believe most of this is best served for the people at the State and local level. A couple of weeks ago I posted up the latest Pigbook from Citizen's Against Gov't Waste which documents all the unneeded porkbarrel that goes on in Washington. If you start cutting out this type of waste along with much of the other unneeded especially at the federal level and let's just say for example this happens and now the total % of income for taxes is down to say 25% so all American households just had their net income go up by 15%. Also 2nd incomes tend to throw people into higher tax brackets so there is also that factor.

    Now looking at some households, there is a cost with having 2 incomes. In many cases childcare which can be quite expensive is a needed expense. Add to that a 2nd vehicle that get's used more along with more fuel burned and with the higher gas prices the burden has really gone up. A 2nd income could also require more wardrobe to dress for the job and there'll also be costs like food for lunch and other associated job costs to earn the 2nd income.

    In the current climate as we have it now, when you take into account all these factors, all these embedded taxes along with the direct, etc. it's is possible some families could cut back to one income. Now whether they would choose to do so is another story because the lessen tax burden with 2 incomes would mean a nice economic windfall for the family. Mom of course would want to do something wise with that money and us guys would want to blow it on that bass boat we see every month in the Bass Pro Shop mailer!

    I say again, IMO I do believe it is possible that there are many families (not all mind you) out there that if the tax burden was reduced that some of these families would choose to fall back to a single income household when they factored in all the associated non tax costs of a 2nd income. I've already heard of people now, even with the current tax stucture, who decided the 2nd income really didn't add enough to really make it worth it so they've dropped back to a single income and do alright for themselves. In otehr words, take and reduce the tax burden and it possible the lifestyle the family lives could be done on a single income instead of the 2 incomes it now requires. Since for example, direct taxation comes out first before you even get your money it is somewhat valid to suggest a 2nd income is needed to pay taxes but I'm cool with the opposite point of view on that. The major point is for people to recognize the massive amount of waste by gov't and it's direct and indirect cost to you as a taxpayer.

    Consider this point. If UPS ran it's company like the gov't does how long would we remain in business? Now remember, UPS doesn't have the power to tax or create money so factor that out and consider how long UPS would last? This is an assumption on my part and I could be wrong but I'm thinking we're on the same page on that point and that UPS probably wouldn't last to long. If that's the case then when are we willing to sit back and let our gov't do it? The principles of proper accounting and good stewardship apply whether in the private or public sector and as I've said before, the political parties running the show have done a terrible disservice to the American people but in defense of these parties we continue to vote and send them back so in reality what message are we sending them in the first place?

    Hope that explained my thinking on this.

    C Ya!
  4. wkmac

    wkmac Well-Known Member


    Here's something else to consider and I'll contend it's oversimplied and that real life may not be entirely this simple but in some reality it is. I contend that at somepoint gov't ends up holding every dollar that is in circulation via our tax model we use in America.

    Simple game you can play with several friends to kinda see this point. Gather say 5 people into a group as this represents the consuming public at large. Now add in a single dollar bill which represents the economy of your small group. As our larger intrinstic value of our economy is finite, so is your small economic model. Now understanding that gov't taxes and that in general taxes are required when money transactions take place such as sales or wages paid. Now start making transactions among yourselves for goods, services or labor (you decide what and have fun with it, add in some adult beverages and it can get very comical) but with each transaction withdraw a single penny from the pool and place it into an isolated treasury that's you'll call gov't revenue or taxes. As the game continues you'll see your economic model grow smaller and smaller and smaller until maybe there's a single penny left and then someone will have to make that last step to where a transaction takes place but they will recieve no pay as the gov't gets the last penny.

    But wait a minute, in our true society we don't run out of money and you are absolutely correct. So this time play the game again but add a 6th person and this person you will call Uncle Sam and it's Uncle Sam's job to also be a player in the game. Uncle Sam's job is to take his collections and also buy goods and services in the market place and to also compete in the marketplace but there's a twist. Uncle Sam can also pass laws to regulate what transactions can take place and he can even raise the tax rate to more than a penny. He can also accumulate a large pot of the money to the point that he controls most of the dollar and then in order to keep the game continuing he can spend his money back into the game but with a twist. He can dictate what the price of goods and services will be because the players believe in order to conduct themselves for trade and labor they need that money and will accept anything in order to keep their economy going. Uncle Sam therefore can come into the game and on his will artifically inflate or deflate (purely his pleasure) your little economy and in essence control the market of your economy by deciding where to fuse money in and then regulate what he doesn't like to the point it's no longer a factor to contend with. Some people in the game may even go bankrupt as Uncle Sam via regulation killed their business that until this point people in the game were using and were happy with. By further law he can further control to the point that he can plan for a certain outcome that benefits him. This sometimes requires him to bankrupt persons and kill an industry within the group as it threatens his planned outcome for the economy he now controls.

    In the private sector we'd tar and feather a business interest that did that but in our game the rules are such that our Uncle Sam is completely free to go down that road and we have no power to stop it.

    It's a fun game to play and again it is very simplified, maybe even oversimplified but the scary part is it's not real far from the truth either!