Should tax payers be able to direct their income and property taxes to certain fields of interest ? (ex: 50$ from my taxes to education)

Asked by: Lex89
  • I think I should be able to direct 100% of all my taxes.

    I would like my tax money to go to education, health and infrastructure 100%. I'd give nothing to secret agencies or military.
    I believe that a tax payer should decide when he/she payers his/her taxes where that money goes. Because most of the time the government will spend huge amounts of money on things that do not benefit the tax payer. Imagine 1000 people have to pay 1000 $ in property taxes. So that would be 1.000.000 $. Would it not be fair that those tax payers decide what's done with their money completely ? Say all of them have kids, they all decide to "send" the 1.000.000 $ to the local school. What could the local school do with 1.000.000 $. Say they send the local hospital 500$ and the local school 500$. That would mean 500.000$ for the local school and 500.000$ for the local hospital which in turn would benefit the tax payers themselves. If this option was available the authorities could not redirect the money to other destinations since the tax payer made a "sort of a donation". In other words I'm thinking of making it illegal for the authorities to spend tax payers money on things tax payers them selves don't want.
    I'd like to hear as many logical opinions as possible and please don't post links to any economic articles or financial articles about how money is spent by the authorities.
    Also I'd like to hear any other suggestions on making this idea any better.
    Thanks for reading an time spent in reading & voting.

  • I've been saying this FOREVER

    I'm tired of having my money going to things like funding the war in the middle east, I'm tired of having my money be used to defend things DOMA, I'm tired of having my money used for things I don't support. No I don't think that everybody is going to send their money to the same thing because not everybody has the same ideological opinions; conservatives could flaunt their money to growing the military and defending pathetic bills like DOMA while liberals could be productive and fund a national healthcare system, schools, and things that matter more than just trying to compenstate for a small peni$.

  • Popular funding is a bad idea.

    Assuming that you would be paying the same amount total, this would be a real bad idea unless you were in the top 10%.
    Think about this.
    Top 1% own 38.1%
    Top 10% own 70.9%
    Top 96-99% own 21.3%
    Top 90-95% own 11.5%
    of all U.S. assets.
    Seeing that the top 10% also tend to pay higher tax rates this would mean that if they decided where to send their tax money there would be little funds for anything that the poorer people need.
    Example: If you are a multimillionaire, you probably don't send your kids to public school. What kind of education do you think would be available if over 70% - 90% of the funding disappeared? Even if the remainder of the people put all their income into public schools, they would still be too poor to operate.
    The money they don't send to schools and other such programs would most likely go towards programs that would add to their own finances.

  • Sounds appealing but it's a very bad idea

    This may sound appealing on the surface but I believe it would have disastrous results. In fact, it is my opinion that it would put our country at risk, and that it would result in turmoil and conflict. We elect officials to to make sound decisions on our behalf. We may get irritated when we feel they are failing to act in our best interests but we can express our preferences and we can vote them out of office.

    If everyone chose not to support defense spending our military could be depleted in a short period of time, placing this country and many others at risk. Politicians would likely resort to marketing and sales pitches in an attempt to sway people to designate tax funds to their pet programs. Their time came best be spent in worthwhile debate, decision-making, and management of the nation's affairs. Many programs would suffer through lack of popularity. It might be nice to designate our taxes but we would have to accept the fact that everyone else would have the same right. This could result in serious social and political turmoil. We also have to consider another important factor, what percentage of our population is willing to adequately research the financial needs of our country prior to designating their taxes?

    If you ask if I am happy with how my taxes are spent I will answer "no", but this would not be an improvement. It is my opinion that this would be very disruptive, and extremely dangerous.

  • Not practical, selfish, and not just.

    First it can never work in reality, it is impractical. Second, it is really selfish as the individual would direct those taxes to what is best for him and not the society as a whole, when the reason we have governments and states is to create policies that would benefit the society as a whole.

    Posted by: L.D
  • I vote no.

    The government has a job of allocating tax funds for the maximum benefit. They are provided intelligence to accomplish a good budget.

    If you want to fund a certain sector or corporation etc donate your money and get a tax credit.

    It does not make sense for taxpayers to make the government budget and pay wherever they choose.

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
No comments yet.