What do you think about a surtax to pay for the war?

I think it’s a great idea. In fact, I favor a constitutional amendment that requires that any vote to fund a war must include a tax to provide the money. I also think that tax should be heavily progressive. The poor pay for war with their blood, while the rich reap the benefits of military contracts.

@Snarp I agree the poor are more likely to pay for war with their blood, but I would favor more of a flat tax for war, so slightly different than what you are saying, maybe an extra 1% to 2% on total gross income outside of any allowed loop holes or deductions. Although, thinking about what you said I would not tax people in the armed services maybe.

No, let’s just keep hoping the money magically appears.

Of course we should, how else is the country going to make money?

Wish it was optional. That those people who have been shown to have opposed the war in some way prior to the discussion could be exempt and the people who want us there can pay for it.

@avvooooooo Yeah right, if given the option to not pay it everyone would say they oppose the war.

@J0E Which would be why I said in my previous comment “those people who have been shown to have opposed the war in some way prior to the discussion could be exempt”. “Proof” would consist of having a picture taken at a protest, internet posts, what have you that dated before the discussion of the surtax.

Please read before “refuting.”

@avvooooooo Woohoo! I have protest photos and internet posts from way before the discussion. No tax for me!

But seriously, I’d be willing to pay it if it everyone else had to and if it helped people to see the cost of war. The tax would also have to cover future health and rehabilitative services and disability payments to veterans, as well as death benefits to family members.

@avvooooooo I kind of think of it like we are married to our government. If your spouse charged up your credit card you might be pissed, but you still owe the bill.

@avvooooooo I read every word, and that would be ridiculously difficult (not to mention easily faked) to decide.

I wonder why the loudest voices calling for it now are all of those who created the largest deficit the fastest in the history of this country not paying for Bush’s wars.

Yet if the vast majority of people then appeared to be opposed to the war… I don’t see that as a bad thing.

@avvooooooo And that is kind of the point of the whole thing, isn’t it? How much do you support the war when you actually have to pay for it? How much do our representatives support the war if it means raising taxes to pay for it?

@Snarp Yeah, somebody got smart. :)

Anything to make this war less popular.

Flat taxes hurt the poor. Sure. Those who want the war can pay for it. Use my taxes for education and social program, please.

@tinyfaery I would be willing to tax only people making over $50K. Flat from $50K up.

Why should people pay a surtax for a war they do not want?

@tinyfaery Exactly.

@tinyfaery But under the current system we are already paying taxes for wars we don’t want. Furthermore, due to the fact that tax revenues are not enough to pay for the wars and the rest of the federal budget, our children who may or may not approve of the war, but didn’t get to vote for the people who started/continued it will be paying taxes to pay for the wars.

With the surtax at least it is guaranteed that the people who voted in the war starters are paying for the war, and not their children.

@tinyfaery because your country is going into debt. Debt with nations we are not too keen on being indebted to. He who controls the money controls the power. But, mostly I think the people initially who thought war was such a great idea might have thought of it differently if they knew the money would be coming straight out of their pockets.

@Snarp I know, so why add a new one? Maybe the surtax will turn America into a neutral country. Yeah, righ.

WWII sure.

This fucking fiasco?

Nope.

I would be curious to know if some of the people who are against paying for the war, are ok with the pro-lifers paying for abortions through tax money? I am not picking on anyone on this thread in particular, it is more of a rhetorical question. I am just thinking about people in the media and in politics who are outraged that the Republicans are fighting to keep abortion not covered on the healthcare bill. If we get political I am more annoyed with the right wing republicans who bitch about the defiticit being passed onto our grandchildren, because the hypocrisy is unbelievable, than the dems/liberals who take a stand for not wanting to pay for a war that they feel was wrong on many levels, so don’t get me wrong. But, we also have to be consistent.

Tax money does not fund abortions, except when medically necessary.

@tinyfaery Are you sure? Do you mean federal taxes, or are you including all taxes? I truly don’t know the answer, I am not trying to be challenging. There is a fight in media that the health bill will not cover abortions and dems are making this a sticking point. When I lived in years ago they had a vote about whether the government should pay for abortions, can’t remember if it was a city or state level issue, and I don’t remember if it was that they were paying for it, and they wanted to to take it away or that they were not paying and wanted to add it (I was not able to vote, because I was a resident of another state, I was a student at the time). It comes up and some liberals want it covered. The republicans argue they should not have to pay for it if they are morally against it and then some argue they should not have to pay for it because it is not their “mistake.” Hell, I want it covered, but it does not make or break the healthcare issue for me.

No federal or state aid program will pay for a non-medical abortion. Overseas aid does, now, but it didn’t under Bush. Mind you I’m basing this on a sociology of reproduction/reproductive rights I took 7 years ago. ;)

@tinyfaery Is correct.

Thanks.

But it does pay for embryonic cell research, which some people are morally against. Our tax money does not always go to things we are ok with.

Excellent idea. I’m not kidding. Not raising taxes means taxing our grandchildren. I’m appalled by this whole popular let’s lower taxes approach. It’s dishonest and unfair.