President Biden's Plans on the Deficit and Taxes

[medi]

Calling for raising taxes during an election year? Really dumb.

Might depend upon how it is done.

This case, that focus on asking rich companies and individuals to pay more taxes could please some voters.

Then, as somebody opined in this thread, after you are elected quietly drop the whole thing and don't follow through.

BUT I am still in wonderment about getting 130 nations to do something like legislating a tax law, when getting 130 legislators in your own nation to do something like that is almost impossible.

AND pledging you'll do something is a fair bit different than actually doing it.

But I remember from yesterday that one of our community members is an accountant and wrote a long post (much appreciated, by the way.) - - - wrote a long post about how to handle tax laws in other nations. I've got to go back and study that post again.

By the way, my memory may be faulty on this one, but wasn't it Bush Senior that got in a bind because he did something with taxes that a whole bunch of folks didn't like?

 

[volitleaire]

Might depend upon how it is done.

This case, that focus on asking rich companies and individuals to pay more taxes could please some voters.

Then, as somebody opined in this thread, after you are elected quietly drop the whole thing and don't follow through.

BUT I am still in wonderment about getting 130 nations to do something like legislating a tax law, when getting 130 legislators in your own nation to do something like that is almost impossible.

AND pledging you'll do something is a fair bit different than actually doing it.

But I remember from yesterday that one of our community members is an accountant and wrote a long post (much appreciated, by the way.) - - - wrote a long post about how to handle tax laws in other nations. I've got to go back and study that post again.

By the way, my memory may be faulty on this one, but wasn't it Bush Senior that got in a bind because he did something with taxes that a whole bunch of folks didn't like?

Generally speaking, I believe foreign policy is mostly done by executive branches. This is how Biden could re-join the Paris climate agreement.

 

[medi]

Generally speaking, I believe foreign policy is mostly done by executive branches. This is how Biden could re-join the Paris climate agreement.

Might we be able to keep from shifting to other topics? Please.

 

[volitleaire]

Might we be able to keep from shifting to other topics? Please.

Sorry, just trying to offer an explanation of how 130 governments agreed other than bewilderment.

 

[medi]

Sorry, just trying to offer an explanation of how 130 governments agreed other than bewilderment.

Okay, I can now see the connection.

Just that I see so many threads in this community go way off down different roads and I suppose it is way too difficult for our Forum Patrol Officers to hand out so many tickets to so many that travel down those side roads.

 

[jonny5]

There are state taxes AND federal taxes, and both are used in a myriad of ways. Public schools are generally funded through local property taxes, state funding, and some federal funding. You argue this is the individual’s responsibility, yet we clearly see individuals have decided to fund public education through taxes (my own city regularly passes a levy to continue funding public schools). At what level does education funding transfer from individual decision to “the government’s” (which I would point out is elected by individuals).

In article 1, section 8 of the US constitution, you’ll find the "necessary and proper” clause. This has long been the bane of anti-federalists. New-deal federalism extended the powers of the feds to encompass pretty much anything they wanted (which played no small role in reviving the American economy after the great depression).

My two questions for you are as follow:
1) What is public education, if not individuals taking responsibility for the collective benefit of an educated nation?
2) How can the federal government possible provide for “the general welfare” by doing what is “necessary and proper” if they can’t use taxes?

1. If individuals choose to pay to educate their children, thats up to them. It is their responsibility to not do harm to me by not raising their children (collective harm).
2. It says they can provide for the general welfare through the list of powers that follow. Education, food, healthcare, are not listed.

Certainly, the govt can pass laws necessary and proper regarding their powers. But again, all of that social spending is not their power.

 

[jonny5]

I know there are other threads around here that cover some of the ideas on the federal budget, but I first saw a post this morning on NHK about what seems to them to be new stuff and then went looking on U.S. sites and finally decided to use the NYT article just published:

Biden Calls for Higher Taxes on Corporations and the Wealthy

The budget, which would cut the deficit by $3 trillion over the next decade, reinforces Biden’s efforts to counter Republican tax proposals that Democrats deride as giveaways to the wealthy.

www.nytimes.com

And after reading that article twice I have to honestly state there are some really weird ideas being proposed.

And let me start with this paragraph you'll find a bit down that NYT's page:



130 countries pledged to do WHAT!?

Here is Bidens request

-even more healthcare spending
-more housing subsidies
-more education subsidies
-'pay for it' by soaking the rich
-still have record deficits and borrow another 16 trillion, pay 5 trillion in interest
-oh, and hope GDP nearly doubles

Luckily its DOA as always since its not serious.

https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2024/03/budget_fy2025.pdf

 

[Roadvirus]

By the way, my memory may be faulty on this one, but wasn't it Bush Senior that got in a bind because he did something with taxes that a whole bunch of folks didn't like?

"Read My Lips, No New Taxes"

Then he...raised taxes.

 

[PIPEWRENCH]

Why raise taxes on the wealthy? Why not start taxing the 50% that pay no taxes?

The solution is to bring in more people who don't make enough to pay taxes. They can drive down wages and put more people in a position where they don't pay taxes. Problem solved. Nobody has money to pay taxes so we just stop taxing everyone.

 

[nvflash]

Nope, just standard vote buying. There is plenty class motility and plenty middle class. And neither of those things are the purpose of taxes or govt. Govt collects taxes to pay for security and justice. And everyone should share in that cost. Taxes should not be used for political games or social change.

You act as if income tax is the only tax, it is not. Everyone pays taxes, even if you just come to the US to visit.

Passing a higher income tax on the bottom 50% won't net the Federal Government any more money. It would cost more to enforce than any money they would take in.

Tax them where they aint doesn't work.

Anyway the federal government does not have a revenue problem, they have a spending problem.

 

[dmpi]

You act as if income tax is the only tax, it is not. Everyone pays taxes, even if you just come to the US to visit.

Passing a higher income tax on the bottom 50% won't net the Federal Government any more money. It would cost more to enforce than any money they would take in.

Tax them where they aint doesn't work.

Anyway the federal government does not have a revenue problem, they have a spending problem.

Moving the tax brackets around won't cost anything to enforce. Matter of fact many of these people already file tax returns in which they get back all the money they withheld. The real key here is all people who benefit from the goverment should help pay for it's operation. And when we're all paying for it then we will all be more cognizant of goverment spending. Right now many people don't care because they're not paying anything. All take and no give. That's no way to live. Its time we start requiring something from everyone.