War Tax

Actually, Cyclo, my dad thought that Erle P. Halliburton was one of the "good old boys".

However, all the original Halliburtons are pushing daisys and of course is no longer a family business. Erle sold out erly.

Bush has likened the "War on Terror" to the Second World War, yet he has never once asked the American people to make the kind of sacrifices that they made -- willingly -- in that conflict. Instead, he cut taxes for the wealthy according to the "have-your-cake-and-eat-it-too" economics of the discredited supply-siders. Now we're heavily in debt and living off the largesse of the Chinese. Given this disastrous situation, of course we should raise taxes. Indeed, not only should we raise taxes, we must raise them in order to pay for this cockamamie war.

But then, the Democrats will end Bush's war and raise taxes to pay for it, while the Republicans will complain that the Democrats are cowards and that their solution for everything is to raise taxes.

The National Debt has been with us for a while now, it never seems to get any smaller and casual observation of the annual "pie chart" of "where it goes..." (Tax dollars) indicates that "service to national debt" gets bigger also.

If, as some of you claim, are so concerned about the effect of the National debt on "the children", I suggest you cast an eye (a jaded one at that) on our spendthrift Congress and insist on holding them to more fiduciary responsibility. Next, we insist that they not only perform to a balanced budget, but they exceed that and use that money to pay off the debt. This will take a concentrated effort, for years. But that is the ONLY way it is ever going to go away. Anything else is dreaming.

Does this apply to BOTH parties? Yes! Does that mean that a lot of "feel good" programs are going to go unfunded? Yes! Does that mean the Dept of Defence is going to have to pass on their latest toy? Yes! Does that mean Congresspersons have to give up some of their cherished earmarks? Yes! Does that mean we have to ammend the tax code to stop giving "tax breaks" to favored business enterprises? Yes! Does that mean there will be a lot of Lobbists out of work? Most assuredly!! Does that mean we will have to actually do a benefit to cost analysis on virtually every line in the budget? Absolutely! Does that mean Congress will have to stop using tax dollars for programs that pander votes? You betcha! Does that mean a lot of Americans are actually going to have to take a little responsibility for their lives instead of asking the Government to give them money (for whatever reason)? Yep! That means Congress is going to have to practice a little delayed gratification.

Where will we find such Saints to fill the hallowed halls of Congress? Apparently not from the general American population. At this moment in time many financial analysts are greatly concerned about the level of debt carried by the average American family, that compared to the level of savings......, the record number of bankruptcies, the record level of home forclosures, the record level of credit card debt, gross as well as per capita.....all these things point to a financially irresponsible public.

Which came first, then? The financially irresponsible public or the financially irresponsible Congress. Either way, both factions seem to be taking lessons and advice from the other.

So the Dems think a tax surcharge is going to accomplish wonders, eh? I refute that claim. It certainly won't diminish the National Debt one iota. It may offset the budget deficit a little for the year, but what is one year in a generation? No, I see this as an attempt to rouse up a little more anti-war sentiment. Potentially to their benefit, election-wise.

We were treated to a war tax surcharge of 10%, I believe it was in '68 or '69 if memory serves me. At the time I was taking home about $500 a month on Sgt's pay and had to come up with over a month's pay in a big hurry to pay that surtax. (It had not been held out in advance.) Needless to say I was a bit ticked off. Perhaps the Dems should think through that aspect of the idea before they tick off a lot of middle class Americans, who, I might add, are the swing voters this coming election.

Halfback

Um, it will diminish the national debt from the larger number it would be, if we hadn't paid the taxes up front.

If we had had a war tax all along, then our national debt would be lower by at least 1/2 a trillion dollars - though you are correct in saying that likely we would not have had a war.

Effectively, the war has already raised taxes. Significantly. Just, on the future, the only group it's okay to screw over on a regular basis. I agree with you that spending restraint is needed; most of that can come from the DoD budget, which is far larger then any other non-SS or Medicaid program.

Cycloptichorn

JOEfmCHI:

Guy in pic obviously didn't follow own advice. I could have sworn it was spelled "MORON".

Cyclo:

FYI, just recently saw "where tax money goes" pie chart showing social programs exceeding DOD expenditures. Wish I could remember where. (This with a war going on? Kinda hard to believe.)

Halfback

No, really?