should we pay more taxes?

this is taken out of context, but w/e. i don't feel like rewriting it

I'm actually learning about GDP right now, and how it works is that Government spending is added in with consumer spending. so it doesn't really matter which part of the gdp gets the money. and if the government is spending more money than it has, wouldn't it make sense to stop giving the government money?

for example. a kid who knows nothing decides to spend tons of money on his new credit card. then the bill comes and he shits his pants, cries, and eventually tells his parents. now imagine yourself as the parent, do you give the kid the money to pay it back or do something to fix the problem? yes. do you give the kid more money to **** around with so he can do it again? no.

All levels of government are now crying poor since they overspent as you indicated, and now need you to continue to support them in the lifestyle to which they've become accustomed.

Alas, in America, where most people are depressingly stupid, this technique will largely work.  Most people had better prepare for paying a lot more taxes and fees in the next 8 years at least.

It would be prudent for the government to provide the services needed for negotiating debt repayment by those with a negative net worth since this falls vaguely within the criteria for enforcing justice by preventing loan sharking. This would bail them out without screwing over the banks too much or the taxpayer too much, so it would be fair to charge them for the services they used and draw out their debt repayments. For especially large debts people may die before they ever repay them so this would also have to be added to the costs. The final stage would be to completely obliterate any cost to the taxpayer by privatising the debt negotiating service turning it into a small regulated bank or several small banks which specialist in this service.

>>2

Not only is your populist view intellectually lazy, it ignores the fact that most Government agencies are drastically underfunded.  EPA's Superfund, which is tasked with cleaning up the most polluted sites in out nation, is so poor that they often resort to plastic "DO NOT CROSS" police tape and let sites sit around for decades.

The elephant in the room in the military, which receives a whopping 67% of discretionary spending.  It's like welfare for conservitards.  If we leave taxes alone and just cut the military just 20%, we're operating at a surplus.

>>4
Libertarians would cut military spending and privatise the EPA.

>>5

"privatise the EPA."

GTFO foreigner

What we need to do is get rid of the department of education, stop funding the abominations called "modern art", and stop giving money to museums and the like who can't keep themselves open. Plus someone needs to find a solution to congress pork projects. Getting Robert Byrd out of his position would be the first big step in that process.

There's a reason why farmers are generally Republican, and why farm subsidies are now larger than ever.

At this point we're so far in debt that if taxes were raised so high that every man and woman in america goes bankrupt, there wouldn't be enough money to pay it off.

The echonomy is fucked anyway

fuck you all... what what is this thread about???

>>10
Should America raise taxes to reduce its debts.

Also most European countries pay far more in taxes than Americans so quit whinning about how high they are and do something about it (protest about farm subsidies,  military spending, spending tax money on sports stadiums, etc).

Also most European countries pay far more in taxes than Americans
European here. This SUCKS, you fucking dumbarse. Do you think sane people here want this? No, but we get pulled into this shit by the socialist pseudo-intellectuals who fucking dominate us and sprout to us repeatedly that a bloated nanny state is a good thing.

Taxes are bad. Ron Paul said so.

>>13 gb2/n/ eurofag.

>>14
damn, bullseye