| Subject: Re: Lifestyles |
Author:
QUITTNER
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 02/22/05 2:28pm
In reply to:
Charlie
's message, "Lifestyles" on 02/15/05 4:37pm
There are 2 fundamentally different philosophies regarding lifestyles and the resulting taxation levels:
1) Look at what needs to be done to bring up to a "reasonable" standard the lifestyles of the underprivileged, the poor, the needy, the unemployable, the disabled, etc. That costs a lot of money, and that extra money will be collected in the form of raised taxation mainly from those who can afford to pay, even if their lifestyles will have to be reduced as a result.
and
2) Look at what is the current amount of taxes payable per year, and keep that level steady, even if inflation keeps reducing the value of the currency all the time, and even if very many people, and other members of their families are hurting because they "can't make ends meet". These are told far too often to "get a job" (they aren't qualified for any of the available jobs, nobody will give them a job). But the costs of running a government keep going up and up and up, and therefore the borrowing and the total debt also keep going up and up and up, and therefore the interest charges to service the debt keep going up and up and up too; they have to be paid out of the quite insufficiemt revenue collected by the government. But the lifestyles of the "rich" are not reduced; they can continue to donate some of their (inflated?) income to political parties of their choice (guess which philosophy they prefer?).
..... I repeat: It's up to the voters, and it's their responsibility, to choose which of these 2 philosophies they prefer, and therefore which bunch of legislators and presidents and governors they will vote into office.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 