Survey on income tax and the government budget, and things related to them?

1. Should income tax be


a) Progressive B) Flat rate C) Eliminated





2. If we have to keep income tax, what should be the average tax percentage on be?


A) 40% or less B) about 50% C) 60% or higher





3. How should the money be spent? (currently 37% is spent on Retirement and entitalements, 20% on defense/war, 18% on social programs, 8% on physical human community development, and 2% on law enforcement) (I got this budget from school, from my Democratic Citizenship class.)





4. Should the president be able to use a line-item-veto when making the budget? (Too help eliminate wasteful spending and create a balanced budget.)

Survey on income tax and the government budget, and things related to them?
B


A


Let Congress decide


Yes
Reply:1. Flat Tax





2. 25 % for ALL earned income. 0 % for intrest income.





3. There is way too much "entitalments" and social programs. Welfare, food stamps and the such is out of control. Unless your in very old or have no arms, legs or even body (your just a head in a jar) you should be required to work.





4. Yes.
Reply:1)B


2)15%


3)percentages are limiting.Say war costs are $100.00 and budget allows only $70.00.Do you declare defeat because you can't afford to fight?


4)yes
Reply:1) A


2) That can't be answered unless you know the level of expenditures. The budget should be balanced with taxes.


3) Less on war and more on reducing the debt. 40% of tax revenues is spend on our military.


We go 1.49 billion dollars in debt every day. The budget must be balanced.


4) A line item veto is unconstitutional. I like the idea, but our representatives in congress are supposed to be responsible and I believe in the Constitution. Too much power for a President and he becomes a King.
Reply:1. C - It should be eliminated altogether because government having access to your personal financial matters is just about the worst invasion of privacy there is.





2. A - Excessively high rates on high earners only serves to cause significantly more $ to go into tax avoidance and tax shelters, and also causes growth to slow.





3. It should be spent Constitutionally. There is currently no authorization for the federal government to be spending ANY money on entitlements or retirement, on social programs or on physical human community development.





Oh, and let's not forget earmarks! They are simply corruption - they are used to either buy votes or to pay off campaign supporters. IMO, they are criminal.





4. No, I disagree with the line-item veto. I'd rather the president reject every budget submitted to him than give him another tool that would likely just raise partisan acrimony. I'd rather see the Administration work with Congress than simply engaging in partisan hackery.





I'd rather see misuse of the peoples' money, such as earmarks, become a criminal offense.
Reply:1. income tax should progresssive but less (federal fees and licenses increased and sales tax implemented)





2. tax much less than 40...it's about 20-25% for me , so I'd say 15% for me





3. retirements and your so-called "entitlements" were a promise and negotiated in good faith, how can you throw out social security when someone paid into it for 40 years believeing he was to get something out of it.... entitlements are not some freebee given out to undeserving...Its a Bill O'Reilly term that just doesn't mean much.





3. the ratio is about right, but the pork needs to be out in the open. THere will always be pork, but it can be controlled so that more needing things get the money first...require a balanced budget, make it a law





4. no line item veto
Reply:It should be a flat rate supplemented with a national sales tax.





It should not exceed 25%





Your percentages and catagories are made of wholecloth. Currently 75% is not spent on any of the catagories you list.





A line-item veto is absolutely wrong. Where used it has invariably been a political hammer.
Reply:1. a.


2. a.


3. Only as authorized under Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution. Read it and you'll find no justification for retirement programs, Medicare, social programs, etc.


4. As much as I like the idea of a line-item veto, there is no provision for it in the Constitution.
Reply:Progressive, nobody pays 40% or more, how it is spent is up to Congress (that's why we elect them), and the line item veto is unconstitutional, so you need to amend the Constitution to consider it (and the US Supreme Court backs me up on that).
Reply:I would like to have no income tax ideologically, but would settle for a flat tax. It doesn't make sense to me to punish people for being successful or working harder.





Less than 30%.





National defense, law enforcement, education, infrastructure.





I would like to see the president with a line-item veto, but not the Frankenstein one that allows you to cross of individual letters and link words together. It's favored to spend more money and virtually impossible to spend less.
Reply:1 A)


2 - question not well-defined for a progressive tax, but I'll say (A) (the top marginal rate should be about 45% but the average is well below that)





3. lower defense/war by about 5% and put that into a health plan.





4. I don't know enough about what that entails...

Makeup Question