Should there be options for tax? (attend, America, mission, theist)

[GeneCosta]

Yet another topic that was brought up in a different post:

What I mean is allowing the tax payer to chose where his tax money goes to. For example, being a liberal non-theist, I want my X amount of money to pay for the Peace Corps., public schools, national parks, roads, and for the heck of it the bridge to nowhere. My neighbor, a conservative Christian, could pay for religious schools, the Iraq War, and roads.

Proportions would be divided up to accomodate the government's need. If something is underfunded, it is a sign that the tax payers don't want it.

[MaddLlama]

It's a fantastic idea, and I would totally be all for it, but I think it's sadly un-implimentable (yay, I made up a word). If we did that, there would be a ton of things that nobody, or few people would give money to.

I do think that we should have more say as to how our tax money gets spent, even if that means making budget decisions a more public matter. How exactly that would work, I have no clue.

[Bishka]

What the llama said.

You should be able to put it where you would like it.

[ch'ang]

Taxes are nothing but robbery on a massive scale, in no way do I support any kind of mandatory taxing.

[gnomon]

Originally Posted by GeneCosta

Yet another topic that was brought up in a different post:

What I mean is allowing the tax payer to chose where his tax money goes to. For example, being a liberal non-theist, I want my X amount of money to pay for the Peace Corps., public schools, national parks, roads, and for the heck of it the bridge to nowhere. My neighbor, a conservative Christian, could pay for religious schools, the Iraq War, and roads.

Proportions would be divided up to accomodate the government's need. If something is underfunded, it is a sign that the tax payers don't want it.

Honestly, I think that anyone worried about inequitable economic distribution would see an even greater disparity between the social classes if such a system was introduced.

[madcap]

This reminds me of an issue that came up when I was in college. A portion of our "general fee" went toward providing complimentary admission for students to all athletic events. As theatre majors, we and other arts students lobbied the administration to allow students to choose how they could allocation that money so that they could put it toward theatre or music tickets (or something else). I believe we were encouraged to broaden our horizons and attend some football games. Nothing else ever came of it.

I feel that Americans, at least, do have a say over how their taxes are spent: they elect people to the Congress and state legislatures. If you don't like how they spend the money, you vote for someone else.

If you want more money to go toward, say, environmental causes, you can make a donation to a nonpartisan environmental group. It lowers your tax burden, which has a similar impact to choosing where the tax money goes.

[Engyo]

Originally Posted by ch'ang

Taxes are nothing but robbery on a massive scale, in no way do I support any kind of mandatory taxing.

I am guessing then that you also expect NO services from your government?

No police when someone is kicking in your door? No firemen when your home is burning? No emergency room when you are in a car accident? No one responsible for keeping up public roadways? No one to regulate the other people on the road with you (how well they drive, whether their vehicles are safe, etc.)? No one to manage and control air traffic when you are flying?

I can go on, if you like.

[YmirGF]

Originally Posted by GeneCosta

Yet another topic that was brought up in a different post:

What I mean is allowing the tax payer to chose where his tax money goes to. For example, being a liberal non-theist, I want my X amount of money to pay for the Peace Corps., public schools, national parks, roads, and for the heck of it the bridge to nowhere. My neighbor, a conservative Christian, could pay for religious schools, the Iraq War, and roads.

Proportions would be divided up to accomodate the government's need. If something is underfunded, it is a sign that the tax payers don't want it.

It's a bit naive an approach Gene. Although I am no fan of taxing, what if your forget the odd critical thing as Engyo brought up? Would you be willing to tick off a list larger than a phone book every year? I wouldn't, that's for sure.

[Mike182]

i would not support such an idea, the government should decide where the money goes for 2 main reasons.

1) protection. if enough people decided not to pay for something, that service would cease.
2) foresight. the government can predict how much tax money they will collect, and can start to budget spending in advance so that the money can go where it is needed as soon as they have it - if individual people are allowed to decide where their tax goes, the government can make no real budget plans.

Edit:

actually, what would happen if loads of people turned round and said "my religion is opposed to homosexuality, so i don't want any of my tax money to be spent on homosexuals in any way, shape of form - be that health care, benefit supports, disability living allowance and other things that so many people's lives depend on?

although i'm not american, i thought the constitution was supposed to protect the minorities - and allowing people to choose their own tax distribution will allow the majority to walk all over the minority.