Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and beginning April 20th, 2021 (Eastern Time) the Yahoo Answers website will be in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.
Trending News
who should pay for tax increases?
Since Obama has been on a spending spree, he wants to raise taxes. Republicans want to lower taxes. With that in mind...why can't we just make all the people that voted for him get a tax hike, and the republicans get a tax break?
I mean, if you support Obama fine...pay for him. If you don't, that's ok too...and get a tax deduction so that we're not paying for things we don't agree with.
14 Answers
- Anonymous9 years agoFavorite Answer
This is a good idea. Actually, we should register for where we want our tax dollars spent. 50% goes to match the politician you voted for, whatever programs he wants your dollars will go there. And 50% directed towards what you want. For example, if you want military, or schools, or national park preservation.
This is a great idea, then I don't have to hate the government for spending on things i don't agree with.
- Smarter Then YouLv 69 years ago
Good idea...Everybody could declare who they voted for and be taxed accordingly. While we're at it, let's all just decide where our individual taxes go. I don't want to pay for any part of Congress' salaries, no money to defense, no aid to states other then my own....I'll get back to you with a longer more comprehensive list. And people say Conservatives are stupid!
- ?Lv 79 years ago
When Bush left, the 2009 fiscal year had about a trillion bucks less spending in it.
Obama/Democrats ADDED MORE and now claim that's the "last Bush budget."
Note that Bush/GOP deficits were FALLING, with the last one being $0.16 trillion - around 1/10th what they are now.
Source(s): I can read - wtincLv 79 years ago
Liberals do not care what the tax rates are because like Tim, and other cabinet members of this administration they don't and are not going to pay there taxes. Plus your never going to get them to admit they supported Obama i can not find anyone in my neighborhood who say they even voted for him good thing were going to requiring ID to vote.
- How do you think about the answers? You can sign in to vote the answer.
- Anonymous9 years ago
Mr Wolf -
The 2009 budget was passed by Democrats and signed by Obama in March 2009.
How is that Bush's responsibility?
- Anonymous9 years ago
The 54 percent that don't pay squat now. That would be nice for a change.
- Anonymous9 years ago
EVERY ONE SHOULD pay something.....no freeloaders
@ mr wolf....one big fallacy with your response is that there have been no budgets during obama's term.....the last budget was from Bush
- Anonymous9 years ago
the same libs who vote for them but oh wait libs dont work so they dont even pay taxes silly me i forgot
- Mr. WolfLv 79 years ago
In the 2009 fiscal year — the last of George W. Bush’s presidency — federal spending rose by 17.9% from $2.98 trillion to $3.52 trillion.
In fiscal 2010 — the first budget under Obama — spending fell 1.8% to $3.46 trillion.
In fiscal 2011, spending rose 4.3% to $3.60 trillion.
In fiscal 2012, spending is set to rise 0.7% to $3.63 trillion, according to the Congressional Budget Office’s estimate of the budget that was agreed to last August.
Finally in fiscal 2013 — the final budget of Obama’s term — spending is scheduled to fall 1.3% to $3.58 trillion.
Over Obama’s four budget years, federal spending is on track to rise from $3.52 trillion to $3.58 trillion, an annualized increase of just 0.4%.
Even with the stimulus bill under Obama, federal spending is rising at the slowest pace since Dwight Eisenhower brought the Korean War to an end in the 1950s.
FYI
Mandatory spending which no President has control of has increased big time but discretionary spending has not.
Source(s): http://articles.marketwatch.com/2012-05-22/comment... This is when you tell me Rupert Murdock’s Wall Street Journal/Market Watch is a liberal source.