Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by time_management 6529 days ago
I'm okay with paying higher taxes if I'm getting something for it-- cheap transportation, universal high-quality healthcare. It's paying high taxes to support Bush's war and tax cuts for the rich that I have a problem with.

The problem with the train system now is that it's dilapidated, expensive, and slow, which leads to low use, leading to disrepair... and so on. However, air travel is going that way right now, and something will fill the void. Trains at 80 mph are not competitive with airlines, but maglev trains are capable of 250+.
1 comments
mynameishere 6528 days ago
It's paying high taxes to support Bush's war and tax cuts for the rich

Paying high taxes to support tax cuts for the rich?

I'm okay with paying higher taxes if I'm getting something for it-- cheap transportation

You do realize that "paying for something to make it cheap" just changes who pays for something, yes? Like...I'm in favor of YOU buying ME a nice present, like cheap transportation. At gunpoint.

Basic stuff.

A train passes by my office occasionally. I don't think it is subsidized. It carries coal. Now...if it was practical for that train to carry people, it would do so, without subsidies. It's not like government is actually needed to make trains profitable.

link
Hexstream 6528 days ago
If the rich pay less taxes then the non-rich probably pay more...
link
anamax 6528 days ago
If by "pay more" you mean "pay less", then yes.

Apart from SS, the "rich" pay the vast majority of income taxes in the US. That's not to say that all of the rich people pay taxes - there's a lot of folks who buy Munis and the like for tax avoidance (supposedly reducing the costs of various govt projects) and then there are the folks who have managed their estates so they'll never be taxed (including Warren "the inheritance tax should be higher" Buffet).

Yes - it's reasonable to exclude SS. SS is essentially a bad forced savings account. However, SS is progressive in that the less you contributed, the better your return. For folks who pay the max, it's a horrible deal. Both "contributions" and benefits are capped so Perot doesn't get $1M/month.

The rich pay a lower fraction of their income in consumption taxes than the poor, but that's because they consume a smaller fraction of their income and they don't consume as much "sin". (Most consumption taxes exempt food, which is a larger fraction of poor people's income, but poor people also spend more of their money on tobacco and alcohol.)

link
Hexstream 6528 days ago
I think you may have misunderstood me...

time_management: "It's paying high taxes to support Bush's war and tax cuts for the rich that I have a problem with."

mynameishere: "Paying high taxes to support tax cuts for the rich?"

Hexstream: "If the rich pay less taxes then the non-rich probably pay more..."

I meant that if the rich get new tax cuts, thus paying less taxes, and the government wants the same amount of taxes overall, then the non-rich necessarily have to pay more to compensate the loss incurred.

link
william42 6528 days ago
That, and you'll have to pay off China.
link