US Politics

Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:

No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.

If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

**Co'tor Shas**

whembly wrote:
@Co'tor... I should've clarified that the states are semi-sovereign in the sense that state laws can differ between in other.

You know... the concept of 50 laboratories trying different things?

They are semi-autonomous (compared to most provinces). They are not sovereign.

And the "50 laboratory" thing can still operate freely without the EC.

**Pouncey**

Peregrine wrote:
Own it, Pouncey. "My solution for infrastructure repairs is to tax the poor to pay for it." Stop trying to dodge this by demanding that the rest of us come up with a solution.

Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline. I had no idea it was anything that was harsh on the poor at all, because all I knew about it was:

-that the gas tax was created to fund the maintenance of infrastructure
-it hasn't been adjusted for inflation for over 2 decades
-the US government spent over 10 years trying to find a way to fund routine maintenance without raising the gas tax without finding a way to do it, including closing corporate loopholes to raise the funds from companies that are stashing funds overseas, which didn't work
-American citizens are unwilling to approve an increase to the gas tax

I had assumed that Americans were just unaware of the problem with infrastructure. I didn't know you knew about the problem already and specifically objected to the gas tax.

Because Americans have a reputation in Canada for being heavily resistant to paying taxes in general, which seems weird to us because our tax rates in Canada are way higher than yours in America, so it's weird paying 15% sales taxes on everything I buy for my entire life and not even thinking that's weird, then hear Americans on the Internet complaining about their state's huge sales tax rate of 5%.

**Peregrine**

Pouncey wrote:
Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline.

Which is a tax on the poor.

I had no idea it was anything that was harsh on the poor at all

Then you don't understand basic concepts of how taxation works. Perhaps you should refrain from arguing the merits of tax proposals until you study the subject a little more?

**Asherian Command**

Frazzled wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
whembly wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
kronk wrote:
Pouncey wrote:

Actually, that's not the solution I'm proposing

It is. A gas tax punishes the poor. You don't get to post in this thread until you repeat and accept those words.

You could've at least read the full sentence.

Where's this "Your entire government agrees on this"?

Citation is needed.

Okay.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Wpzvaqypav8

Youtube is not an acceptable cite except for cat videos.

pro-tip Youtube, Twitter, Reddit, Snapchat, and FB are not acceptable sources to support any argument. Quoting me, of course, is.

Frazzled what is your career again?

Just wondering.

I mean personally unless the youtube video has citations on it and is by a credited source then yes you can share youtube sources!

Like CCP grey, Great War Channel, and a few others.

But they are not meant to be argumentive points. They are meant for education.

Automatically Appended Next Post:

Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline.

Which is a tax on the poor.

I had no idea it was anything that was harsh on the poor at all

Then you don't understand basic concepts of how taxation works. Perhaps you should refrain from arguing the merits of tax proposals until you study the subject a little more?

I think we all agree. Taxing the poor is probably the least best thing to do.

Taxing the rich and making them pay for a bit more than a poorer person of the country seems far more equitable and far better for this country than taxing the hell out of the poor..

**Frazzled**

Because Americans have a reputation in Canada for being heavily resistant to paying taxes in general, which seems weird to us because our tax rates in Canada are way higher than yours in America, so it's weird paying 15% sales taxes on everything I buy for my entire life and not even thinking that's weird, then hear Americans on the Internet complaining about their state's huge sales tax rate of 5%.

WE we did start a successful war over a tax on tea. So you can understand we get uppity about it. No taxation without baconation!!!

Frazzled what is your career again?

Prophet to the Herald of the Great Wienie, former packmule for small children*
(evil banker and last of the neanderthals)

*Found out one nickname her friends have of Connie is "cussin Connie." I am sure her Marine Corps DI grandpa is smiling ear to ear at that. Yes!

**Pouncey**

Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline.

Which is a tax on the poor.

Also on middle-class people like myself who drive around in cars which are fueled by gasoline.

I had no idea it was anything that was harsh on the poor at all

Then you don't understand basic concepts of how taxation works. Perhaps you should refrain from arguing the merits of tax proposals until you study the subject a little more?

Apparently not, because you seem to be saying that a tax that is paid by literally anyone who drives a motor vehicle is a tax for poor people only.

**kronk**

Pouncey wrote:

Because Americans have a reputation in Canada for being heavily resistant to paying taxes in general, which seems weird to us because our tax rates in Canada are way higher than yours in America, so it's weird paying 15% sales taxes on everything I buy for my entire life and not even thinking that's weird, then hear Americans on the Internet complaining about their state's huge sales tax rate of 5%.

There are a lot of differences between the US and Canada tax systems and what they pay for. Far to much to go into here.

We pay income taxes to the federal government, and state taxes through a number of ways.

Some states have property taxes. The bigger or more valuable your property, the more you pay.

Some states have sales taxes. City and Counties will put a percent or 3 on top of that.

Some states have their own income tax, but at a much lower rate than the federal income tax.

Some states have a mixture of some/all of the above.

I have lived in Louisiana, Texas, and Illinois.

Louisiana: low income tax, low-to-median property tax, median sales tax.

Texas: No income tax, median-to-high property tax, median sales tax.

Illinois: low-to-median income tax, median-to-high property tax, median sales taw.

**Pouncey**

Frazzled wrote:
Because Americans have a reputation in Canada for being heavily resistant to paying taxes in general, which seems weird to us because our tax rates in Canada are way higher than yours in America, so it's weird paying 15% sales taxes on everything I buy for my entire life and not even thinking that's weird, then hear Americans on the Internet complaining about their state's huge sales tax rate of 5%.

WE we did start a successful war over a tax on tea. So you can understand we get uppity about it. No taxation without baconation!!!

Didn't that entire war happen over three hundred years before you were born?

Automatically Appended Next Post:

kronk wrote:
Pouncey wrote:

Because Americans have a reputation in Canada for being heavily resistant to paying taxes in general, which seems weird to us because our tax rates in Canada are way higher than yours in America, so it's weird paying 15% sales taxes on everything I buy for my entire life and not even thinking that's weird, then hear Americans on the Internet complaining about their state's huge sales tax rate of 5%.

There are a lot of differences between the US and Canada tax systems and what they pay for. Far to much to go into here.

We pay income taxes to the federal government, and state taxes through a number of ways.

Some states have property taxes. The bigger or more valuable your property, the more you pay.

Some states have sales taxes. City and Counties will put a percent or 3 on top of that.

Some states have their own income tax, but at a much lower rate than the federal income tax.

Some states have a mixture of some/all of the above.

I have lived in Louisiana, Texas, and Illinois.

Louisiana: low income tax, low-to-median property tax, median sales tax.

Texas: No income tax, median-to-high property tax, median sales tax.

Illinois: low-to-median income tax, median-to-high property tax, median sales taw.

Income taxes, property taxes and sales taxes are all things I've heard of in Canada before.

**Co'tor Shas**

I'm with Kronk on this. Pay for it with a tax increase on the super-wealthy, and try to stomp out some loopholes at the same time (If you lose a billion dollars, you should have to own it, not get to take it off your taxes, coughdonaldtrumpcoughcough). And it;s businesses and the wealthy who will benefit the most (the rest of us will benefit indirectly), so why not? Gas tax is unnecessary, and would be bitch to through congress, even if it's 100% D or something.

**feeder**

Brutal Scottish comedian Frankie Boyle hosts American Election Autopsy with three Yanks, two Brits and a Canuck. It's pretty good.

**Pouncey**

Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm with Kronk on this. Pay for it with a tax increase on the super-wealthy, and try to stomp out some loopholes at the same time (If you lose a billion dollars, you should have to own it, not get to take it off your taxes, coughdonaldtrumpcoughcough). And it;s businesses and the wealthy who will benefit the most (the rest of us will benefit indirectly), so why not? Gas tax is unnecessary, and would be bitch to through congress, even if it's 100% D or something.

Well, yeah, of course. If they can find another way than raising the gas tax they should do it. But they've been looking for that other way for over ten years and haven't found it yet.

**Frazzled**

Didn't that entire war happen over three hundred years before you were born?

"Senator, I knew Ramses II, and you're no Ramses II"
-Frazzled the really old guy (who's going to drive an M4 Easy Eight Sherman with 105mm assault gun for 90 minutes in April. yea baby yea! )

Pouncey check you PM in a minute.

**Zywus**

Pouncey wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline.

Which is a tax on the poor.

Also on middle-class people like myself who drive around in cars which are fueled by gasoline.

Peregrine wrote:
Sales taxes, especially sales taxes on essential goods and services (like gas), disproportionately hurt poor people because poor people spend a much greater percentage of their income on those things.

(emphasis mine)

Peregrine wrote:
you don't understand basic concepts of how taxation works.

QED

**Pouncey**

Zywus wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline.

Which is a tax on the poor.

Also on middle-class people like myself who drive around in cars which are fueled by gasoline.

Peregrine wrote:
Sales taxes, especially sales taxes on essential goods and services (like gas), disproportionately hurt poor people because poor people spend a much greater percentage of their income on those things.

(emphasis mine)

Peregrine wrote:
you don't understand basic concepts of how taxation works.

QED

Okay. So the gas tax isn't a solution that's viable. Dropping it entirely.

Now we need a solution to the problem of aging infrastructure that doesn't involve raising the gas tax.

And that's what's no one in your government has been able to find yet

Meanwhile, as the years go on and options keep being explored, that infrastructure keeps deteriorating.

So... how long are you going to let the problem continue to get worse until you're willing to accept the possibility of imposing morally questionable taxes to literally save lives?

What if you never find an alternative to the gas tax? Are you willing to let everything made of concrete crumble to dust around you?

**Peregrine**

Pouncey wrote:
Apparently not, because you seem to be saying that a tax that is paid by literally anyone who drives a motor vehicle is a tax for poor people only.

No, it's a tax that disproportionately hurts poor people. This is not a controversial thing, it's a basic principle of economics and taxation. Sales taxes, especially sales taxes on essential goods and services, disproportionately hurt poorer people because a much higher percentage of their income goes to buying basic needs.

**Pouncey**

Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Apparently not, because you seem to be saying that a tax that is paid by literally anyone who drives a motor vehicle is a tax for poor people only.

No, it's a tax that disproportionately hurts poor people. This is not a controversial thing, it's a basic principle of economics and taxation. Sales taxes, especially sales taxes on essential goods and services, disproportionately hurt poorer people because a much higher percentage of their income goes to buying basic needs.

Okay, that makes sense.

But that's not what I was hearing when you tell me it's a "tax on poor people."

**Prestor Jon**

Pouncey wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm with Kronk on this. Pay for it with a tax increase on the super-wealthy, and try to stomp out some loopholes at the same time (If you lose a billion dollars, you should have to own it, not get to take it off your taxes, coughdonaldtrumpcoughcough). And it;s businesses and the wealthy who will benefit the most (the rest of us will benefit indirectly), so why not? Gas tax is unnecessary, and would be bitch to through congress, even if it's 100% D or something.

Well, yeah, of course. If they can find another way than raising the gas tax they should do it. But they've been looking for that other way for over ten years and haven't found it yet.

Congress spent $3,700,000,000,000 in 2015 it wasn't all spent on vitally important stuff. All they have to do is decide how much money to put in the HTF in addition to the expected gas tax revenue and then move that amount of money from programs less important than bridges and roads over to the HTF. The problem that is insolvable is that the current revenue stream (and projected trend) of the gas tax is insufficient to cover the annual outlays of the Highway Trust Fund to maintain federal roads and bridges. That problem is only insolvable if Congress decides that only federal gas tax revenue can fund the HTF and that is a totally arbitrary limitation.

**Stevefamine**

I just read through five pages of Pouncey posting, and I can't take your view seriously with the avatar.

Deep hatred for poor people confirmed

**Lord of Deeds**

Pouncey wrote:
Actually, when I suggested it, I assumed it was a tax on gasoline. I had no idea it was anything that was harsh on the poor at all, because all I knew about it was:

-that the gas tax was created to fund the maintenance of infrastructure
-it hasn't been adjusted for inflation for over 2 decades
-the US government spent over 10 years trying to find a way to fund routine maintenance without raising the gas tax without finding a way to do it, including closing corporate loopholes to raise the funds from companies that are stashing funds overseas, which didn't work
-American citizens are unwilling to approve an increase to the gas tax

I had assumed that Americans were just unaware of the problem with infrastructure. I didn't know you knew about the problem already and specifically objected to the gas tax.

Because Americans have a reputation in Canada for being heavily resistant to paying taxes in general, which seems weird to us because our tax rates in Canada are way higher than yours in America, so it's weird paying 15% sales taxes on everything I buy for my entire life and not even thinking that's weird, then hear Americans on the Internet complaining about their state's huge sales tax rate of 5%.

Effective tax rates I think are the crux issue and where the average American bristles when increased taxes are mentioned. The average tax burden for the typical American citizen can vary significantly due to where they live, type of assets owned, gross income, etc. For example in Texas I estimate that my overall tax burden is ~36% of my income. This is the combination of federal income tax, state property taxes which vary significantly in Texas from county to county, city to city, school district to school district, sales taxes (which in Texas is a minimum of 7.25%, but typically 8.25% in metro areas), and various excise taxes and state fees which by most accounts is lower than many other states such as California and New York. However, this is offset by a lower average median income.

TLDR;

I think most Americans would say they are already taxed enough and depending on where they live, the tax burden may represent a very high percentage of the total gross income and that they are generally aware, even if they cannot quantify, what they are paying in taxes already. So any suggestion that we need to pay higher taxes is often greeted with the almost ingrained derision and proposals to get the rich and businesses to pay their "fair" share.

**Pouncey**

Prestor Jon wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm with Kronk on this. Pay for it with a tax increase on the super-wealthy, and try to stomp out some loopholes at the same time (If you lose a billion dollars, you should have to own it, not get to take it off your taxes, coughdonaldtrumpcoughcough). And it;s businesses and the wealthy who will benefit the most (the rest of us will benefit indirectly), so why not? Gas tax is unnecessary, and would be bitch to through congress, even if it's 100% D or something.

Well, yeah, of course. If they can find another way than raising the gas tax they should do it. But they've been looking for that other way for over ten years and haven't found it yet.

Congress spent $3,700,000,000,000 in 2015 it wasn't all spent on vitally important stuff. All they have to do is decide how much money to put in the HTF in addition to the expected gas tax revenue and then move that amount of money from programs less important than bridges and roads over to the HTF. The problem that is insolvable is that the current revenue stream (and projected trend) of the gas tax is insufficient to cover the annual outlays of the Highway Trust Fund to maintain federal roads and bridges. That problem is only insolvable if Congress decides that only federal gas tax revenue can fund the HTF and that is a totally arbitrary limitation.

Okay. Sounds good.

You should probably e-mail that to any Congressman to let them know there is not only a solution, but this is what it is.

In fact, you've clearly thought about this before. Why haven't you told them already?

**Easy E**

Pouncey wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm with Kronk on this. Pay for it with a tax increase on the super-wealthy, and try to stomp out some loopholes at the same time (If you lose a billion dollars, you should have to own it, not get to take it off your taxes, coughdonaldtrumpcoughcough). And it;s businesses and the wealthy who will benefit the most (the rest of us will benefit indirectly), so why not? Gas tax is unnecessary, and would be bitch to through congress, even if it's 100% D or something.

Well, yeah, of course. If they can find another way than raising the gas tax they should do it. But they've been looking for that other way for over ten years and haven't found it yet.

I can tell you how they are going to do it, deficit spending and privatization. That is how the R's will do it. The G.W. Bush years are your guide!

**Peregrine**

Pouncey wrote:
Okay, that makes sense.

But that's not what I was hearing when you tell me it's a "tax on poor people."

What you heard is not my problem, my very first post on the gas tax issue said the exact same thing.

**Pouncey**

Stevefamine wrote:
I just read through five pages of Pouncey posting, and I can't take your view seriously with the avatar.

Deep hatred for poor people confirmed

I don't hate poor people.

I just think that literally stopping bridges from collapsing and stopping dams from bursting is important enough to start actually solving instead of just talking about finding ways to solve.

**Frazzled**

Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Okay, that makes sense.

But that's not what I was hearing when you tell me it's a "tax on poor people."

What you heard is not my problem, my very first post on the gas tax issue said the exact same thing.

Ok lets move on from that shall we?

**Pouncey**

Easy E wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Co'tor Shas wrote:
I'm with Kronk on this. Pay for it with a tax increase on the super-wealthy, and try to stomp out some loopholes at the same time (If you lose a billion dollars, you should have to own it, not get to take it off your taxes, coughdonaldtrumpcoughcough). And it;s businesses and the wealthy who will benefit the most (the rest of us will benefit indirectly), so why not? Gas tax is unnecessary, and would be bitch to through congress, even if it's 100% D or something.

Well, yeah, of course. If they can find another way than raising the gas tax they should do it. But they've been looking for that other way for over ten years and haven't found it yet.

I can tell you how they are going to do it, deficit spending and privatization. That is how the R's will do it. The G.W. Bush years are your guide!

If that's what it takes, so be it.

**ender502**

Lord of Deeds wrote:
Interesting discussion about funding for infrastructure. First off for the benefit of our Canadian friend, infrastructure which for the purspose of this discussion we will limit to transportation, i.e. roads, bridges, etc. are funded currently by several different entities that raise the funds for these projects through numerous methods. In Texas where I live the source of funds are;

1. Federal reimbursements (allegedly via the Federal gas tax, though sometimes through special appropriations)
2. State Highway funds (tax dollars/fees like vehicle registrations, perpetually earmarked for that purpose)
3. Bond proceeds (typically paid for by tolls collected on toll roads or through special taxing districts)
4. Concession fees
5. Texas Mobility fund (Essentially a special bond measure approved by voters)
6. General revenue, i.e. specific appropriations approved by the state legislature using tax money that is not already allocated to a specific purpose
7. Local funds from counties and municipalities which typically come from local property and sales taxes or Municipal Utility Districts or Improvement Districts.
8. Private developers, usually residential and real estate developers who must initially pay for neighborhood streets, traffic lights, turning lanes, or other improvements to integrate their development into the local road system

As you can see the funding mechanisms for roads and such at least in Texas is already quite diverse. Other things being considered or tried on a limited basis;
1. Hybrid private-public partnerships (lookup Texas State Highway 130)
2. Increased Motor Vehicle Sales Tax
3. Transportation Reinvestment Zones (special type of property tax)
4. Vehicle Miles Traveled tax (I believe a pilot program is already underway in other states)

The last one is very controversial but has been proposed as a way to make up for the fact that due to increase fuel efficiency, vehicles are using overall less fuel per mile which means less tax money per mile, especially hybrid and electric cars. Consequentially I think the VMT tax is probably where things are headed, but it is full of political and economic consequences that are hard to fully envision much less try to establish what the overall monetary impact would be.

Raising the federal gas tax is really DOA because no politician will vote for it given as others have already mentioned it is highly regressive and no politician wants to be blamed for raising taxes, especially taxes on the poor.

That's where you at wrong. Republicans LOVE to raise taxes and reduce services for the poor. The elderly and veterans too. They call it "making them pay their fair share."

**Pouncey**

Frazzled wrote:
Peregrine wrote:
Pouncey wrote:
Okay, that makes sense.

But that's not what I was hearing when you tell me it's a "tax on poor people."

What you heard is not my problem, my very first post on the gas tax issue said the exact same thing.

Ok lets move on from that shall we?

Yeah, I kinda wanna know why the country with 35,000 Syrian Refugees living in it thinks the problem with terrorists masquerading as refugees is so insignificant its citizens are spending their own money to bring more over here, while the country neighbouring that country with 0 Syrian Refugees in it is freaking out about the possibility.

Unfortunately, I already know why, and it's not a flattering image for a country that used to embrace the idea of freedom.

**Frazzled**

Pouncey wrote:
Stevefamine wrote:
I just read through five pages of Pouncey posting, and I can't take your view seriously with the avatar.

Deep hatred for poor people confirmed

I don't hate poor people.

I just think that literally stopping bridges from collapsing and stopping dams from bursting is important enough to start actually solving instead of just talking about finding ways to solve.

I think we can all get behind that. But not Peregrine. He's a falcon which means he flies above it.*

*A chickehawk went for TBone once. The big mountain dog was fortunately near by and snapped at him and then stood over T (Tliterally was standing under him-but not scared!). Wiener dogs are not fans of chicken hawks.

**A Town Called Malus**

ender502 wrote:

That's where you at wrong. Republicans LOVE to raise taxes and reduce services for the poor. The elderly and veterans too. They call it "making them pay their fair share."

Case in point, Kansas. Tax cuts resulted in people earning low incomes having to pay more due to cuts to welfare and increases in sales tax to try and cover the resulting huge shortfall in tax revenue, which it failed to do and now Kansas is facing flat tax revenue (rather than the initial projected increase, another strike against the idiotic Laffer curve) which is several hundred millions of dollars below projected costs each year for the foreseeable future.

The people who benefited the most? Those earning over $250k.

**Lord of Deeds**

Pouncey wrote:
Stevefamine wrote:
I just read through five pages of Pouncey posting, and I can't take your view seriously with the avatar.

Deep hatred for poor people confirmed

I don't hate poor people.

I just think that literally stopping bridges from collapsing and stopping dams from bursting is important enough to start actually solving instead of just talking about finding ways to solve.

What....you mean actually doing something before bad stuff happens that we were pretty sure was going to happen? That is totally un-American. We wait until the **it hits the fan because...well....you know 'Merica and stuff

It's like we are addicted to the adrenaline of being in constant crisis/complain mode about something, kind a like this thread at times....