1775 cries for “No Taxation Without Representation” led to a revolution.?
If rich donors contribute to candidate’s campaign in exchange for political favors to create ways to not pay taxes, and average tax payers cannot afford to make leverage contributions so they end up having taxes raised to support government spending, who is currently representing tax payers?
Answer:
Just one of the weaknesses that has evolved in our political system. Unfortunately change will be impossible as long as the people empowered to make or change the laws are benefiting from this corrupted system.
Good question. Nobody.
The politicians that put money back in your pockets are the ones that represent the tax payer.
nobody is, which I think is your point, right?
There is only one way to get elected - get the most votes. No amount of money can change that. If you don't like your representative, vote them out. If voters keep choosing the ones who (allegedly) take campaign contributions and lower taxes, that's democracy. They are represented, and they get what they deserve.
P.S. God what a bunch of whiners. You're fully represented - as long as you vote. No amount of money can take away the fact that voters pick these people.
The rich are taxed too much already. Why should someone have 35 percent of their earned income taken by the Federal government? No government should need such a high percentage of someone's income.
Not any more, but it used to be the lawyer that went hunting with Dick Chaney
Not everybody can afford to buy themselves a legislator. Them that got, get.
LOL, I have been screaming for years that we are right back in the "taxation without representation" place of our forefathers. No one is really representing us. The question is really will it lead to a revolution again. I think it needs to.
Ryan: It was only in 1982 that the top tax bracket was 70%. Before 1960, it was 90%. Imagine THAT while thinking about that 35% tax bracket. Truthfully, with the capital gains tax dropping to 15%, and with a high percentage of the income of the wealthy being on investments, not salary, most of the wealthy pay a lower percentage of tax than the middle class. Even Warren Buffet last year requested the government to please raise his taxes, since he was paying a lower percentage of tax than his secretary.
I will vote for any candidate who will advocate a 25% no-deduction flat tax. You get personal exemptions for family members, and that's all.
NOTE TO PV ON BRITISH PARLIAMENT: If you look at the Constitution, nowhere does it mention direct election of the President. The way it was set up, state governments would select a number of Electors to go to the Electoral College, and the EC would choose the President from among whoever they thought would do a good job. The closer we got to direct election of Presidents, the more money played into the system. of course, in the EC system, big-money power-brokers probably chose the electors, so the system probably still works the same, it just cost a lot less back then.
Right on. And unfortunately the Supreme Court has just stuck down the 2003 bill that blocked those privately-financed, highly negative, so-called "issue-oriented" ads from swamping TV in the 2 weeks prior to an election.
It is the reason we have Bush's drug bill that allows Pharmaceutical companies to charge the government & the elderly any amount for their product. Heavy campaign contributions paid congressmen for their votes. In Cuba people pay 5 cents for a drug that costs $200 in the US.
Campaigns are too lengthy & expensive. Its hard to blame Congressmen for being so beholden to campaign money. I hate to admit, but the British & Canadian governmental system of a Prime Minister selected by a quickly elected Parliment has a lot of attractiveness. Especially the feature of a PM that can be unseated by a "vote of no confidence".
Got any tea boats in mind?
First of all I dont know what you consider rich to be, so here goes. I work my butt off, I went into debt, sold personal belongings etc. I know make about 300 thousand per yr. In federal, state and local, social security and disability I pay over 100k each yr in taxes.I pay more than enough. "average" taxpayers live in this country and should pay taxes. It kills me, you tell me because I make more, I should have no problem paying an increasingly larger amount of what I make, but when it comes time to vote, you tell me I am no better than anyone else.
Here's the real problem, this used to be a country of opportunity if you were willing to work, now it's become what will the government give me.
Believe me, I had nothing, but by relying on the one person that could change my lot in life, me, I changed my life, and so could you. If you wait on the government or someone else to make your life better, keep waiting. Remember this, the world was here first, it doesn't owe you anything.
Question is, couldn't we eliminate the middle man and mail the money directly to Halliburton
The answers post by the user, for information only, FreeLawAnswer.com does not guarantee the right.
Answer question:
More Questions and Answers: