Political: New "War Tax" added to income tax code

[sgreger1]

Lawmakers have announced their plan to make Americans pay an additional war tax that will be taken directly from their income, never mind the fact that around 36 per cent of federal taxes already go to paying for national defense.

“Regardless of whether one favors the war or not, if it is to be fought, it ought to be paid for,” the lawmakers, all prominent Democratic allies of Obama, said in a joint statement on the “Share The Sacrifice Act of 2010

Influential US lawmakers on Thursday called for levying a new income tax to pay for the war in Afghanistan, warning its costs pose a mortal threat to efforts like a sweeping health care overhaul.

The tax would apply to anyone earning as little as $22,600 per year in 2011


Share The Sacrifice Act of 2010






-----------------------------------------------------


Additional Details:

The group included House Appropriations Committee Chairman Dave Obey; Representative John Murtha, who chair that panel's defense subcommittee; and House Financial Services Committee Chairman Barney Frank.

The proposal would impose a war surtax on income beginning in 2011 -- though it would allow the president to delay implementation by one year upon deciding the US economy is too weak to sustain such a tax shift.



If the war is not paid for, its costs "will devour money that could be used to rebuild our economy by fixing our broken health care system, expanding educational opportunities and job training possibilities, attacking our long term energy problems and building stronger communities," they said.


^---- Instead of levying a new tax. Why not just end the war to save the money?







Anyone have any thoughts on this? I doubt it could become law giving the current political climate, but it has been introduced none the less.

Would you be willing to pay an additional "War Tax" on top of the 36% of your taxes that already go towards defense spending?

[sagedil]

All I know is the previous administration decided to not even include the costs of fighting two wars in the budget at all. That was obscene to me. So yeah, I think it makes clear just how much these wars cost. make Americans take a 2nd look at if it is really worthwhile for them to have to pay for them.


I just know from reading history, from talking to my own family and their friends, ALL the sacrifices folks had to make during WWII. what sacrifices have Americans been asked to make now fighting the longest wars in our nations history.

[sgreger1]

All I know is the previous administration decided to not even include the costs of fighting two wars in the budget at all. That was obscene to me. So yeah, I think it makes clear just how much these wars cost. make Americans take a 2nd look at if it is really worthwhile for them to have to pay for them.


I just know from reading history, from talking to my own family and their friends, ALL the sacrifices folks had to make during WWII. what sacrifices have Americans been asked to make now fighting the longest wars in our nations history.

The plan from the beginning has always been the "business as usual" policy: I.e. deficit spending.


This is just another example of how expensive this shit is and why we need to leave. The economy is collapsing regardless of what the media wants to say about how it's already recovering. We need the money here. No tax, no war, there's no way to "win" and therefore has no return on investment.


How many more years will we continue deficit spending and increasing how much tax we put towards defense spending. Where is the Obama circa 2008 election campaign where he said we would fix all of this. Bush was a crook, that is already established, but what is the current administration doign to fix it?

Instead of significantly reducing our bills by ending the wars, they just decide to raise taxes to pay for it. WWII was fought out of real honest self defense. It had to happen or germany would have taken over. Not the case today.



What happened to the promise of no tax raise of any kind on the middle class?

This applies to anyone making $22k or more a year. Last time I checked, that was the middle/lower class.

[sagedil]

I think we agree, we should just leave. I opposed the iraq war from day one. I supported the war in Afghanistan as long as it was focused on getting Bin Ladden and dumping the Taliban, but that changed 7+ years ago.

But if folks insist they want to stay, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, get the hell out. But the way it has been done for the last 8 years, "hiding" the cost of the war is just obscene again to me.

So I like this idea as it sharpens folks minds on what is at stake. it goes through, then trust me, we WILL be leaving both places fast.

[sgreger1]

I think we agree, we should just leave. I opposed the iraq war from day one. I supported the war in Afghanistan as long as it was focused on getting Bin Ladden and dumping the Taliban, but that changed 7+ years ago.

But if folks insist they want to stay, then make them pay for it. Otherwise, get the hell out. But the way it has been done for the last 8 years, "hiding" the cost of the war is just obscene again to me.

So I like this idea as it sharpens folks minds on what is at stake. it goes through, then trust me, we WILL be leaving both places fast.

Well your right in that it will bring more attention to the issue. And if the average joe starts feeling it on his wallet than perhaps there will be more pressure on the admin to start winding it down in the middle east.


Osama Bin Laden? You want to know what I think, even given my particularly right of center view on almost everything? I think that he's got some tie to the gov through the CIA or some other agency. We've caught the guy 2-3 times and let him go every time.

If you ask people who have been deployed once or twice they will tell you that every once in a while you run across a high value individual and after detaining him the word comes down from higher to release him, despite all the expensive equipment etc he was caught with. I think the CIA or someone has some of these guys on their payroll for some devious purpose. If we wanted Osama Bin Laden we would have got him by now.
He used to be an operative for the CIA and him and his family have gotten good treatment from the US in the past. I think he will never be found, regardless of how much taxes we pay or troops we send. I don't believe that he is the mission any longer.


That's just the conspiracy side of me talking, but I believe it to be true. No other explanation why they would have let him get away so many times.

[BillW]

I think sharing the cost through an additional tax is just fine. An additional 10% off the top for everyone except politicians and corporate executives. They get to pay an 85% tax on all of their income, foreign and domestic. If they get caught hiding their income they get executed and their families get sent the bill for the execution. Maybe then they'll look before they leap.

[VBSnus]

Osama Bin Laden? You want to know what I think, even given my particularly right of center view on almost everything? I think that he's got some tie to the gov through the CIA or some other agency. We've caught the guy 2-3 times and let him go every time.

I actually was working on a book a while back on this very idea. It was going to be about a group of American specialists called the "Guardian Angels" who were paid not to assassinate key figures, but to keep them alive at all costs.

As for the war tax, I think it's a great idea. Right now everyone's clamoring over a healthcare bill only because it has been brought to light how much it will cost the taxpayers if we don't put it in the deficit. Had it been approached like we handle our military costs, it could have been rammed through without anyone raising a peep because it would never have shown up in the right books.

I don't think it will pass, it will just open a debate to show the country how frivolous government spending is overall and take some of the pressure off domestic programs like healthcare. If it does pass, it will help keep us out of wars, hopefully.

Which would I rather, a war tax for the poor/middle class or a draft? I'll pick the tax any day.

[sgreger1]

I think sharing the cost through an additional tax is just fine. An additional 10% off the top for everyone except politicians and corporate executives. They get to pay an 85% tax on all of their income, foreign and domestic. If they get caught hiding their income they get executed and their families get sent the bill for the execution. Maybe then they'll look before they leap.

Hey bill. what BCT and battalion were you in in the 82nd? I just got back from 1-505 PIR in 3rd BCT.

[sgreger1]

I actually was working on a book a while back on this very idea. It was going to be about a group of American specialists called the "Guardian Angels" who were paid not to assassinate key figures, but to keep them alive at all costs.

As for the war tax, I think it's a great idea. Right now everyone's clamoring over a healthcare bill only because it has been brought to light how much it will cost the taxpayers if we don't put it in the deficit. Had it been approached like we handle our military costs, it could have been rammed through without anyone raising a peep because it would never have shown up in the right books.

I don't think it will pass, it will just open a debate to show the country how frivolous government spending is overall and take some of the pressure off domestic programs like healthcare. If it does pass, it will help keep us out of wars, hopefully.

Which would I rather, a war tax for the poor/middle class or a draft? I'll pick the tax any day.

I can see both sides to this. I think on one hand its bad because we pay enough in taxes already, and they need to stick to the budget better, i.e. not get into prolonged wars you cannot afford. But on the other hand in theory it will make people more upset about the wars and hopefully bring them to a close earlier.


Personnally I think congress is using this as another way to collect money, and no matter what they charge us, or how mad anyone gets, the war will continue on until the politicians decide to end it. I don't think this tax will make it end any sooner, just bear a higher burden on the middle class.

And it can't be compared with a draft because the draft failed in Nam, and we have more than enough people wanting to join the military for that not to be a problem.


It amazes me that they think the best way to get out of a recession is to spend like theres no tomorrow, print money, & raise taxes on the middle class.


Whether this is good or not, if it passes, it will just be another point added to the lie tally Obama is racking up in regards to not raising taxes. Don't think it would actually pass though.

[VBSnus]

Personnally I think congress is using this as another way to collect money, and no matter what they charge us, or how mad anyone gets, the war will continue on until the politicians decide to end it. I don't think this tax will make it end any sooner, just bear a higher burden on the middle class.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Federal...one_excise_tax

[Ainkor]

I debated with myself a bit before I posted in this thread, but here goes:

Every war has to be paid for. Here is a bit about income tax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxatio..._United_States


In 1909 Congress proposed the Sixteenth Amendment, which became part of the Constitution in 1913 when it was ratified by the required number of states. The Amendment modified the requirement for apportionment of direct taxes by exempting all income taxes—whether considered direct or indirect—from the apportionment requirement. Congress re-adopted the income tax that same year, levying a 1% tax on net personal incomes above $3,000, with a 6% surtax on incomes above $500,000. By 1918, the top rate of the income tax was increased to 77% (on income over $1,000,000) to finance World War I. The top marginal tax rate was reduced to 58% in 1922, to 25% in 1925, and finally to 24% in 1929. In 1932 the top marginal tax rate was increased to 63% during the Great Depression and steadily increased, reaching 94% (on all income over $200,000) in 1945. During World War II, Congress introduced payroll withholding and quarterly tax payments, Franklin D. Roosevelt tried to impose a 100% tax on all incomes over $25,000 to help with the war effort. Top marginal tax rates stayed near or above 90% until 1964 when the top marginal tax rate was lowered to 70%. The top marginal tax rate was lowered to 50% in 1982 and eventually to 28% in 1988. However, in the intervening years Congress subsequently increased the top marginal tax rate to 35% which is the tax rate currently in 2008.

Whether one agrees with taxation, it is essential to the operation of our government and to the prosecution of war abroad.

I really don't think it matters if one agrees or disagrees with the war, but that you support the position you take.

If you agree, pay up and support the politicians that support your point.

if you don't support the war, support politicians who have the balls to pull us out. Throw in a little civil disobedience and we get a new generation of anti-war rallies and (hopefully) love in's :P

As far as taxation is concerned, it can be argued that lower taxes get us out of a rec(depr)ession, but it can be argued that higher taxes can do the same thing, spent well.

One last point on lowering taxes:

While the income levels have skyrocketed in America over the last 25 years, at what expense though? This rec(depr)ession is here due to the rampant speculative investing along with new financial products that maximize earnings while encouraging risky behaviors.

Luckily, both parties own this one.

Now, how do I feel about a war tax? Specifically, I disagree with the war in Afganistan for a few simple reasons:

1. If the Russians can't win there, there is no way in hell we can. They have no issue with killing villagers, blowing up babies or just all around ****ing shit up. We don't have the intestinal fortitude to kick the shit out of them there.

2. The problem is there because of our own making. (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban.html)

We supported the mujahideen during the soviet conflict and left got the hell out and left them to their own devices.

3. Why are we there? (http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/oil.html)

As usual, it's all about oil, or in this case, natural gas, IMO.

I disagree with the war effort as it is now and I disagree with a tax on income to support the war. I feel that we should leave them to themselves.

[tom502]

I don't believe the Gov wants us to win. I think there may be an evil secret intention. I watched this show last night on CNN, and it was about these 3 Army guys that got charged with "war crimes" and murder, because they shot some Iraqi detainees, but what was interesting was what they are supposed to "do", in that, if they find any insurgents, they have to get a search warrant, get 3 Iraqi civilian witnesses, and gather crime scene info, and then take these prisoners, to an Iraqi civilian police station, and then these Army guys, was saying, they usually just let them go the next day, and they are fighting with the same people again. They are forced to fight this war, like an episode of "COPS". How can we win anything like that? I personally think joining the military in this day and age is stupid, because the masters that be don't care about you, or winning, it's like a game to them.

[sgreger1]

I don't believe the Gov wants us to win. I think there may be an evil secret intention. I watched this show last night on CNN, and it was about these 3 Army guys that got charged with "war crimes" and murder, because they shot some Iraqi detainees, but what was interesting was what they are supposed to "do", in that, if they find any insurgents, they have to get a search warrant, get 3 Iraqi civilian witnesses, and gather crime scene info, and then take these prisoners, to an Iraqi civilian police station, and then these Army guys, was saying, they usually just let them go the next day, and they are fighting with the same people again. They are forced to fight this war, like an episode of "COPS". How can we win anything like that? I personally think joining the military in this day and age is stupid, because the masters that be don't care about you, or winning, it's like a game to them.

Agree 100%. That's why this guy doesn't re-enlist. This war is pointless, they tie our hands and dont let us win. I was trying to explain this to Judge Faust in another thread but he insists we are over there just mowing down civilians for the fun of it. The rediculous Rules Of Engagement and escalation of force procedures make it nearly impossible to win a war, since our ROA are sticter than those of the Los Angeles Police Department. Can't win that way. If not fighting to win, than why fighting at all?

[sgreger1]

Every war has to be paid for. Here is a bit about income tax: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taxatio..._United_States

Agreed, every war needs to be paid for, we have been going about it by keeping the numbers off the books and basicly borowing money for a long time. This is obviously not a sustainable practice.

Whether one agrees with taxation, it is essential to the operation of our government and to the prosecution of war abroad.

Taxes are necesary, while I support lower taxes I am not of the kind that believes all taxes are bad. My issue is how they spend the money, and perhaps that has been tainted by my having lived most of my life in CA where the taxes keep going up but the state keeps going down.

I really don't think it matters if one agrees or disagrees with the war, but that you support the position you take.

If you agree, pay up and support the politicians that support your point.

Unfortunately it's not that easy. If there is to be a tax, everyone has to pay it.

if you don't support the war, support politicians who have the balls to pull us out. Throw in a little civil disobedience and we get a new generation of anti-war rallies and (hopefully) love in's :P

As far as taxation is concerned, it can be argued that lower taxes get us out of a rec(depr)ession, but it can be argued that higher taxes can do the same thing, spent well.

But the problem is that no politicians are able/willing to end the war. People thought the republicans were pro-war so they voted in the most liberal president and congress/supreme court we've had in a while, and look at what happened, the war effort just grows. I don't mind paying higher taxes if I get a return on investment, like in norway or sweden where there are higher taxes but more social programs.

The reason I oppose the socialist policies that may work in other countries is because our government has a habit of collecting taxes but in return doing nothing of value with it. Most of the go vfunded programs I see, from the public schools to social security to medicare, seem to just be giant money pits that are not well managed.

One last point on lowering taxes:

Now, how do I feel about a war tax? Specifically, I disagree with the war in Afganistan for a few simple reasons:

1. If the Russians can't win there, there is no way in hell we can. They have no issue with killing villagers, blowing up babies or just all around ****ing shit up. We don't have the intestinal fortitude to kick the shit out of them there.

We COULD win, it's just we are not being allowed to because we are being forced to play nice = don't win wars that way.

2. The problem is there because of our own making. (http://www.infoplease.com/spot/taliban.html)

Yup. This is my issue with thinking short term and funding these groups when it benefits us, just to have to go in and fight them in the future except now they have our weapons and training.

We supported the mujahideen during the soviet conflict and left got the hell out and left them to their own devices.

This is a bad habit which we need to break. Keeps biting us in the ass in the long run.

3. Why are we there? (http://whatreallyhappened.com/WRHARTICLES/oil.html)

As usual, it's all about oil, or in this case, natural gas, IMO.

In my experience I have decided I don't buy into the "we're there for oil" theory, seeing as it's not like we're tkaing free oil or something. I wish we were but it's no the case. I think this whole thing is part of a long run plan to establish larger bases of operation in the middle east as part of our attempt to posture for a war with Iran.

I disagree with the war effort as it is now and I disagree with a tax on income to support the war. I feel that we should leave them to themselves.

Seems to simple doens't it? We need the money here.

[tom502]

If we went there to conquer the nation, impose our rule of law, and take the oil, I would more so support the "war", and I think more people would too. But as it is, no one seems to know what heck we are doing there, and how/if we'll ever leave.