Small govt vs. large govt

[Tracey in TX]

Hope it's okay to post this, but several posts caught my attention.

What do you personally consider "small" government? If you believe in small govt, then what services should be offered?

For those who opt for a larger government, what are advantages? What do you believe should be standard services for all citizens?

Lastly, for everyone: what total tax rate should be paid (fed, state, Medicare, etc)? How do you feel about a flat tax?

 

I hope this will be a philosophical discussion. Please forgive me if this is outside of acceptable topics. I'm going through a personal change of opinion and wondering if an ideal is somewhere in between.

Looking forward to hearing responses this evening!

[Jill- OK]

They don't work harder than the average person necessarily.

 

You could say the absolute same thing about many low income folks. Believe me.

 

ETA: I really should clarify, although I'm beginning to wish I hadn't posted at all. All I know is that I know folks from a wide range of income levels, and I wouldn't want to make any judgements about who deserves to be taxed more than someone else (or at all) just by income level. Again...probably shouldn't have responded, and I'm sorry if I seem flippant. There are folks working their hineys off, sixty/seventy hours a week, and yes, making good money for it...but some of them came from nothing, and are trying to build college funds or somesuch for their kids, in hopes of giving their families a legacy that looks dramatically different from where they came from.

 

And there are low income folks who really don't care to work very much...or at all. Believe me...I know.

 

Sure, there are some stereotypical 'rich fat cats', and poor folks who simply cannot get out of their soul-breaking cycle...but those images aren't givens.

 

I'm all for taxing the American public to help those less fortunate. I believe in strong public schools and government services.

 

But I don't believe in a mindset of punishing those whose success is reflected in their income. And if you're looking to do that to 'fat cats'...you're going to catch some of those types of folks in the mix, too, and that just seems so vastly different than the America that many of our forebears sought out.

 

Sorry if this seems terse, I really don't want to be, I just wanted to further explain myself. As I said...I probably shouldn't have responded, lol.

[Alenee]

I'll take my chances with this one. I believe in Constitutional government. Our government was not designed to give people what they can earn on their own. I don't believe in any federal tax. If we can't go that far, then flat tax after a certain income has been reached. But our federal government has been illegally taking our money for nearly a century and it needs to stop. Raising taxes is not dealing with the larger issues...just as someone here said drilling for oil on our own land isn't dealing with the issues. The government is doing a bad job as it is taking care of what they should, why would I want to give them more responsibility with the things that are not their job?

 

I believe our government is designed to keep it's people safe and our economy secure. Not to provide it's people with healthcare, food, or any basic need that people can earn on their own. Therein lies the rest of my beliefs. People should be taking care of their own, not being forced to pay taxes to a group of people who think they know better how to take care of someone. Most people don't but that's not the time for government to jump in.

 

Basically put, all people have the basic right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness...what you do with that pursuit is up to you but beyond that, no one "deserves" anything more. Not me and no one else. We each make our choices and we have no one else to blame if what we did didn't get us where we wanted to be. We do not have a "right" to healthcare, we have a choice to pay for it in how it's offered or not. We do not have a "right" to own a home, we do not have a "right" to have a good job, it's no one's fault if you haven't saved for retirement....

 

I'm sure you see where I'm going here so I'll stop now.

[Mamagistra]

What do you personally consider "small" government?

 

A bit like this example perhaps?

 

 

:lol::lol::lol:

(Sorry! I just had to.) :D

[Mrs Mungo]

I don't believe in any federal tax.

 

<snip>

I believe our government is designed to keep it's people safe and our economy secure. Not to provide it's people with healthcare, food, or any basic need that people can earn on their own.

 

I actually don't see where you are going.

 

What services DO you think the federal government should provide?

 

Roads? The military? Federal police (CIA, NSA, FBI, Secret Service)? The post office? Are you in favor of paying members of Congress or the President, how about federal judges? Are you in favor of providing medical care to Veterans? Do you want to do away with National Parks? How about the FDA-should it stay or go? NASA? Federal prisons?

 

Without a federal income tax how do you pay for any of those things?

 

eta: interesting chart on where your money goes

 

article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2007

[lighthouseacademy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Carli

I don't believe in any federal tax.

 

<snip>

I believe our government is designed to keep it's people safe and our economy secure. Not to provide it's people with healthcare, food, or any basic need that people can earn on their own.

 

 

 

I am with Carli on this. As far as I am concerned, the job of the federal government is to protect the boarders, maintain roads, and see that the mail gets delivered. Beyond that, the constitution does not grant much power. It is the state's job to regulate education, health care, and all the nonsense that the federal government has gotten involved in like studying the flowrate of ketchup (pork barrel spending at its best).

 

So to answer the questions about how to pay etc, I think the problem lies in that we have a country with a trickledown government. We pay the feds who then divy it up to the states who then divy up to the cities and localities. It should go the other way in my opinion. Let the most money be spent locally for those that live there, or in otherwords the policies made should be made by those that live the closest to the people (DC is the furthest from the people). I am all for helping those in need- and I give quite generously. What I am not in favor of is having my hard earned money TAKEN from me to GIVE to those who can do for themselves. I am in favor of HELPING people get going though, and that is NOT something that the federal government or even the state can do efficiently.

If the government were run differently, then those in DC would not need to be paid NEARLY as much as they are paid now. I think the salaries should be paid by the states- pay your own representatives. The salaries that the congress, senate, and judges make are ridiculous. There are far too many people on the federal payroll. As far as veterans, yes in deed, pay for their care but the states should pay into a fund to pay for that care.

[LizzyBee]

Without a federal income tax how do you pay for any of those things? /QUOTE]

 

There was not a permanent income tax until 1913. Before that, most federal revenue came from tariffs, taxes on liquor and such, and a per capita taxes. When the income tax was implemented in 1913, the rate ranged from 1% on income over $3,000 up to a maximum of 7% on income over $500,000.

[Mrs Mungo]

Without a federal income tax how do you pay for any of those things?

 

There was not a permanent income tax until 1913. Before that, most federal revenue came from tariffs, taxes on liquor and such, and a per capita taxes. When the income tax was implemented in 1913, the rate ranged from 1% on income over $3,000 up to a maximum of 7% on income over $500,000.

 

There wasn't really a standing military to speak of before that time, either. Defense makes up half of the discretionary budget. Does the military stay or go? eta: the gap between the poorest and richest in our nation has grown in an extreme way since that time as well, changes in the tax code should reflect that.

[justme]

I also believe in constitutional government. If people really want the big government we have, there should be a flat tax- that way everybody feels the 'pain' and has to ask themselves if those things they want from government are really worth it. The way it is now, we have a large portion of people who people who pay nothing yet expect everything, and every time a new 'something' is proposed they are all for it knowing full well that they will benefit and not have to pay. This breeds apathy and dependency and leads to all kinds of problems in society. I think this 'entitlement' mentality has destroyed what was once our proud 'American' culture- cherishing freedom, taking pride in your work, taking care of your own and working toward a better life. The 'pioneer spirit' if you will.

[Jenny in Atl]

I also believe in constitutional government. If people really want the big government we have, there should be a flat tax-

 

Fair Tax!!! Much better and would not hurt the middle/lower middle class and poor. Plus those who go out of their way to evade taxes or make their $ in the black market, would finally pay taxes. It would take the power away from Washington and give it back to the people. It would do wonders for the US.

[PineFarmMom]

I also believe in constitutional government. If people really want the big government we have, there should be a flat tax- that way everybody feels the 'pain' and has to ask themselves if those things they want from government are really worth it. The way it is now, we have a large portion of people who people who pay nothing yet expect everything, and every time a new 'something' is proposed they are all for it knowing full well that they will benefit and not have to pay. This breeds apathy and dependency and leads to all kinds of problems in society. I think this 'entitlement' mentality has destroyed what was once our proud 'American' culture- cherishing freedom, taking pride in your work, taking care of your own and working toward a better life. The 'pioneer spirit' if you will.

 

:iagree: to all that you said!! Govt. dependency is at an all-time high. I think my eyes were really opened to it when Hurricane Katrina happened. I'd have to really sit and think about the details of it to go further, but the need for EVERYONE to feel the pinch is a necessity for intelligent decision-making in this matter, that I agree with wholeheartedly.

 

T

[Amy loves Bud]

I believe in Constitutional government. .

 

Ayup.

[Amy loves Bud]

I'm in favor of taxing the rich into the middle class. I know I may get jumped on for that, but how much does one person need? They don't work harder than the average person necessarily. (does that make me a communist? LOL).

:D

 

I wonder how many of the innovators in this country would be motivated to keep doing what they are doing if they knew they had NO chance to get ahead. I'm guessing Microsoft, for example, would probably have a very different line of products if that were the case.

[Josie]

I wonder how many of the innovators in this country would be motivated to keep doing what they are doing if they knew they had NO chance to get ahead. I'm guessing Microsoft, for example, would probably have a very different line of products if that were the case.

 

:iagree: I SOOOOO agree!

[PineFarmMom]

I wonder how many of the innovators in this country would be motivated to keep doing what they are doing if they knew they had NO chance to get ahead. I'm guessing Microsoft, for example, would probably have a very different line of products if that were the case.

 

:iagree:Absolutely!!!

[Ahwahnee]

 

eta: interesting chart on where your money goes http://mibi.deviantart.com/art/Death-and-Taxes-9410862

 

article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_federal_budget,_2007

 

Great links!

 

Looks like more than 50% could be taken from both dod and non-dod. In the case of the federal government less is more. We could start by getting rid of the Department of Education and allow states to determine what should be done.

[lighthouseacademy]

But you know, I find it insanely bizarre that people can make millions of dollars playing baseball. I know people love baseball, but come on. On the flip side people who raise children and teach them make next to nothing in comparison. Where is the incentive to do jobs for the common good? Those are the people that deserve the big bucks in my mind. Some students get out of college and can't live on their salaries as social workers or teachers because they are riddled with student loan debt. Or because those jobs don't pay well.

 

You are completely right that our priorities of what an important job is a bit screwed up. In Korea teachers are one of the most respected positions and highly paid. However in this country, that isn't the case. But then again, what does it say when a professor pulls aside one of the top students in a teaching profession major and tells her not to waste her brain on teaching elementary school but to go and get a higher degree to teach teachers how to teach!? Hmmmm (btw that person was me).

[Parrothead]

I'm another in favor of a constitutional government.

[Melinda in VT]

I think I was one of the ones who mentioned not being a fan of small government in an earlier thread. In my case, I wasn't necessarily thinking of just the federal government.

 

For example, my area is in desperate need of sidewalks and bike paths. There is growing community cry for this as gas prices go up and people look for alternate modes of transportation. There is a private group that is working to put together hiking trails on private lands for recreational use, but when it comes to adding bike lanes to roads, no one but the government has the authority to do that. (And since one of the main roads is a state highway, we have to get the state government on board for that part.)

 

Other local projects I'm in favor of: lightrail, bus systems (this could maybe be privatized), libraries, parks, strict zoning ordinances, road maintenance, schools. (This is not necessarily a complete list. These are just the ones that came to mind in the moment.)

 

On the national level, I'm in favor of the post office, highway maintenance, military (although at a lower level than we currently have and with a different deployment strategy), national parks and monuments. I'd also like to see investment in alternative energy and mass transit. And I am in favor of national health care.

 

I am not rigidly locked into these positions, but this is where I stand right now. I would like to see tax reform, and I'm curious to learn more about Fair Tax. In general, though, I'm not opposed to the "to whom much is given, much is required" method of taxation. ;)

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

There wasn't really a standing military to speak of before that time, either. Defense makes up half of the discretionary budget. Does the military stay or go? .

 

I see this as a major problem. We do not need hundreds of the bases that we have in foreign countries. Then there is the expense of Iraq, which is a whole 'nother topic.

 

Get rid of the military? Of course not. Scale back to a military based on defense alone, yes. I also think the National Guard and the Coast Guard should be built up and kept at home to deal with border problems and times of national disaster and crisis.

[Guest Virginia Dawn]

I agree. Goodness even if we cut back government services to where they were a decade ago, It would be a vast improvement. Big government just doesn't work well. By the time money goes through all the channels it needs to go through to get to someone who really needs it, there is very little left.

 

I am not against local government making provision for its poor, but the federal government is to far removed from the actual person on the street to be able to decide what is best for him.

[mbeaser]

I think the government should be about 1/3 of what it is now. Military-yes, but much smaller. Get rid of our overseas bases, basically the only ones that should be out of CONUS are some folks on exchange programs. Concentrate on national defense (including from illegal immigration), and quit building aircraft carriers and much of what we're working on now. We need to stop being the world's police.

The State Department is still needed for its constitutional role in diplomacy (and for passport services) but should also be cut way down and all the extras gotten rid of. I also think the UN needs to be cut way down.

 

 

The Treasury should print money and collect tariffs (which should be the major source of governmental income), not mess with all the other stuff. Congresscritters should only get retirement after 20 years of service, like in the military.

 

NASA should go on ice until we pay off the federal debt. Most everything else should go to the states, who will collect and administer their own taxes. If income taxes must be collected by the federal government then the states should collect them and send them on. Even the post office could go away now, private commerce (think UPS and Fedex) has given a readily available alternative.

 

 

The biggest problem with all of this is that about 13% of the workforce is directly employed by the federal government (between fed employees, post office and military) and millions more are employed supporting the federal government (defense contractors, suppliers and so on). Cutting the government is going to leave lots of people unemployed, and that is going to be hard to stomach. Honestly, though, I think if we cut all the pork and went down to what is really necessary, we could cut 10% per year from the budget and get down to where we need to be (and by 10% I mean from the years current level, so the 1st year it'd be 90% of current, next year take 10% of the 90, so 81% of current and so on). I think at that point, corporate taxes and tariffs should be able to cover things, and the corporate taxes should be collected at the state level.

[Jugglin'5]

I agree with what others have said about taking us back to a more constitutional, budget-balancing level of government. I also agree as a former military wife that the military needs to be scaled back to defensive limits. Even the middle class works until May or June before the money they make goes to themselves rather than taxes.

 

If you tax the wealthy heavily, you will not cause the middle class to grow, rather it will shrink as they lose jobs provided by the wealthy. Why go to the trouble to hire more people to produce more, when the money will only go to the government? It is a lot of trouble and expense to hire people due to all the regulations and lawsuit possibilities. Why take that risk if there is not a big reward possible at the end of it?

[Josie]

If you tax the wealthy heavily' date=' you will not cause the middle class to grow, rather it will shrink as they lose jobs provided by the wealthy. Why go to the trouble to hire more people to produce more, when the money will only go to the government? It is a lot of trouble and expense to hire people due to all the regulations and lawsuit possibilities. Why take that risk if there is not a big reward possible at the end of it?[/quote']

 

 

:iagree: It is kind of like cutting off the hand that feeds you.

[Margaret in GA]

If you tax the wealthy heavily' date=' you will not cause the middle class to grow, rather it will shrink as they lose jobs provided by the wealthy. Why go to the trouble to hire more people to produce more, when the money will only go to the government? It is a lot of trouble and expense to hire people due to all the regulations and lawsuit possibilities. Why take that risk if there is not a big reward possible at the end of it?[/quote']

 

I have to say that many of our greatest modern innovations -- the internet or the human genome project, just two off the top of my head--- these were government funded programs. For some reason, we've become convinced that all government is bad and all private innovation is good. Truth is, we need them both. We need a government that fosters and funds scientific research. Sometimes it just doesn't make "good financial sense" for companies to pursue research.

 

Margaret

[Ahwahnee]

I have to say that many of our greatest modern innovations -- the internet or the human genome project, just two off the top of my head--- these were government funded programs. For some reason, we've become convinced that all government is bad and all private innovation is good. Truth is, we need them both. We need a government that fosters and funds scientific research. Sometimes it just doesn't make "good financial sense" for companies to pursue research.

 

Margaret

 

The Internet was a defense project. I think research would have been done there anyway. The commercialization of the Internet was not a government project, and that is what makes it so successful.

 

The Human Genome Project may be good, but since there is the ability to patent DNA sequences; my guess the biotechnology companies probably would have done most of this on their own. Without a government help.

 

The only program I can think of might be NASA, where the scale is impractical. Since the DOD funded much of the Space Shuttle maybe that would have happened anyway too. Soon space flight may be commercialized too.

[Alenee]

I actually don't see where you are going.

 

What services DO you think the federal government should provide?

 

Roads? The military? Federal police (CIA, NSA, FBI, Secret Service)? The post office? Are you in favor of paying members of Congress or the President, how about federal judges? Are you in favor of providing medical care to Veterans? Do you want to do away with National Parks? How about the FDA-should it stay or go? NASA? Federal prisons?

 

Without a federal income tax how do you pay for any of those things?

 

 

 

I should've put a little more detail in there. Sorry!

 

You'll have to watch this video to see my exact point of view. http://www.freedomtofacism.com/

 

I think you have to buy it though.

 

All of the things you asked about are definitely things the Feds should take care of however, it's a simple fact that a Federal Income Tax is unconstitutional. Corporate taxes are what are supposed to pay for these things but in reality, the feds were remiss in doing their jobs so instead, our taxes are being used to pay down a debt to the Federal Reserve (which is privately owned, not a Federal bank). Again, simply put, if the government only dealt with that which is constitutional, we would not have the problems we do now. Jumping into what should be state's issues has the feds over-stepping and leaving everyone shaking their heads.

 

Mrs. Mungo, you and I are obviously coming from two different ends and that's okay, I totally respect that, having said that though, it would be pointless to debate our beliefs.

[Julie in CA]

I don't agree with a flat tax unless there is no tax under a certain amount. I don't believe someone who makes 10K a year should have to pay taxes (unless they are a high school student with a good paying after school job). I'm in favor of taxing the rich into the middle class. I know I may get jumped on for that, but how much does one person need? They don't work harder than the average person necessarily. (does that make me a communist? LOL).

 

That is my overly simplistic and poorly thought out answer. :D

 

Have you seen communism/socialism work well in practice or theory?

Why would anyone work to better their lives if they could either be a.)given things without working very hard or b.)taxed such that there's no point in growing their business?

-just askin'....

ETA: Oh, and one more thing, sometimes it's not the working harder that produces the income, but the willingness to take on a risk in business to earn more.

ETA: Really, this is the last thing I'll add, lol! If everyone is taxed so that they all end up with the same middle-income, who will be rich enough to hire other people to work? Only the government? Will we then all end up working for the government like a queen bee?

[HSMom2One]

This is a great thread with many thought provoking comments. I'm not very educated on the history of our federal taxes and appreciate the points that have been made. This makes me want to dig in and learn more about it.

 

Like some of you, I have been going through a change of opinion on how our country should operate. I used to be very much in favor of socialized medicine and numerous other social reforms. A few years ago I was challenged to consider the role of families and churches in the community, especially in the area of reaching out to the poor and caring for the elderly. Since that time I've come to the conclusion that local government and the community itself should be stepping in to do more while state government oversees and regulates health, education and welfare, roads and employment, etc. So more emphasis on state and local government than we have now, for sure.

 

The main job of the federal governement should be to provide us with a covering of over-all security and the opportunity to pursue our basic rights (life, liberty and the persuit of happiness). This is quite a different paradigm than my original one. Basically, I don't want to be legislated on the quality of healthcare and education my family receives, nor do I want to be in a system where all children and elderly are boxed off into the same little pegs and cubbies. Military? Well, I agree with Virginia Dawn:

 

Get rid of the military? Of course not. Scale back to a military based on defense alone, yes. I also think the National Guard and the Coast Guard should be built up and kept at home to deal with border problems and times of national disaster and crisis.

 

So yes, I've flipped from big government to small government and I'm at peace with it. All of this has come from years of observation, contemplation and prayer.

 

Blessings,

Lucinda