Alternative Minimum Tax
 

I understand but can't explain it in simple terms. So someone (Schneed10, I'm looking in your direction) explain it in simple terms...and then let's talk about what to do about it.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

Essentially, a long time ago in a galaxy far away, when $150,000 was a buttload of money for an American household, the Alternative Minimum Tax rule was put in place to ensure that families making over $150,000 couldn't get out of their fair share of taxes by taking credits and deductions for things like capital gains losses.

Essentially, the Alternative Minimum Tax says OK, go ahead and do your tax return. Figure out how much tax you should pay, based on all the credits and deductions you're eliglbe for. Got it? OK, now if you make over $150,000K as a household, forget that first calculation, we're going to make you pay at least X amount, because you make enough money, you should be paying up a good amount of tax. The X amount is determined by Alternative Minimum Tax.

It was a good idea at the time. I'm not sure when it was put into place, but basically, household income of $150,000 was worth a ton more than it is today. The $150,000 threshold was never indexed to inflation, meaning that as time went along, the $150,000 threshold never increased.

So naturally, as inflation runs its course, more and more families are subjected to AMT who never would have been when the rule was put into place. Certainly nobody should feel sorry for families making $150,000, but because of AMT they now pay an unfairly disproportionate share of taxes.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

I believe Congress and the Prez have been talking about junking it.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alternative_Minimum_Tax]Alternative Minimum Tax - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia[/url]

[I]"Over the coming decade, a growing number of taxpayers will become liable for the AMT. In 2010, if nothing is changed, one in five taxpayers will have AMT liability and nearly every married taxpayer with income between $100,000 and $500,000 will owe the alternative tax. Rather than affecting only high-income taxpayers who would otherwise pay no tax, the AMT has extended its reach to many upper-middle-income households. As an increasing number of taxpayers incur the AMT, pressures to reduce or eliminate the tax are likely to grow."[/I]

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

Here's what Obama and McCain plan to do about our tax situation:

Obama - Roll back the Bush tax cuts, increase Capital Gains to at least 20%, possibly 28%, cut taxes for families making under $ 75K, keep estate taxes. He is on record as voting for keeping the AMT as is, and against removing the Estate Tax. With a Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress we will pay more in taxes under Obama.

[URL="http://www.ontheissues.org/Economic/Barack_Obama_Tax_Reform.htm"]Barack Obama on Tax Reform[/URL]

Obama is also pushing "Universal Health Care" aka "Socialized Medicine" which will push our tax burden even higher and have our health care system managed by government bureacrats. Imagine needing a medical procedure but having to make a "political contribution" to get it done. This is common in countries with socialized medical systems.

McCain - committed to push legislation to permanently repeal the AMT. McCain is committed to reducing other taxes as well.

[URL="http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/0b8e4db8-5b0c-459f-97ea-d7b542a78235.htm"]McCain Staging Site[/URL]

Our current situation is this; there is a huge disparity in who pays the lion's share of taxes in this country. My numbers may be slightly off, but the top 1% of wage earners pay 34% of the taxes in the US. The next 9% pay another 33% and the rest pay the final 33%. The top 50% of wage earners pay approximately 97% of the taxes.

The top 1% made 14% of the total income yet paid 34% of the tax burden. The bottom 50% earned 14% of the total income, yet only paid about 3% of the tax burden.

What do we do? FairTax. [URL="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer"]Americans For Fair Taxation:[/URL] FairTax is a consumption based tax so you basically "pay-to-play".

1) FairTax will eliminate corporate taxes bringing millions of jobs back the the U.S.
2) FairTax takes the power away from Congress of giving tax breaks to favored groups or companies.
3) Enables workers to keep their entire paychecks
4) Refunds in advance the tax on purchases of basic necessities.
5) Abolishes the IRS and repeals the 16th Ammendment.

We also need to be more involved in holding our political leaders accountable and greatly reduce "pork" spending. We need to get rid of congresspeople who hide $ 90K in their freezers, or build "bridges to nowhere", or appropriate millions to family and associates. This stuff is happening on both sides of the aisle and needs to be stopped.

Impose Term Limits - 8 years for Reps, 12 years for Senators.

Our government is supposed to serve the people, not the people serving the government. The more control (taxes, regulations) given to government the more it will take, until we are a socialist state. If we look at the government's power from 1900-1950 vs. 1950 to now, we are much further down the path to socialism than many believe. As few nudges upward in the tax rate and a few expansions in government programs and our tax burden would be close to 50%.

P.S. The current administration has been as much to blame for this as any Democrat.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

There are myriad problems with your post, beginning with the fact that you are clearly drawing from a highly partisan site operating under the guise of being strictly looking at 'the issues'. I'm running off to the gym so don't have time to respond in full, but briefly ...

1) Universal health care and "socialized medicine" are not synonymous. Providing citizens with health care coverage - and Obama is going light on this issue by not even discussing a single-payer plan - does not mean that doctors work for the government. It means the government pays the bill. Currently I pay $5,000+ a year to be on my wife's health insurance, and my deductibles are such that I really can't get any real meaningful medical treatment without paying out of pocket anyway. Basic point is that you should get your information from a less partisan source. When you start seeing phrases like "socialized medicine" and "government bureacrats" that is a tell-tale sign you are probably getting a slanted view.

2) I hate it when I see some guy in a beat up truck with a "Fair Tax" bumper sticker. Taxing consumption is a regressive form of taxation. Quite simply, people who don't make a ton of money (such as myself) spend nearly their entire income. People who make lots of money do not, they save, invest, etc. This is why people fought for progressive tax structures at the beginning of the century. Tax reform is necessary, but taxing consumption is not the answer.

3) I really should try to avoid the 'Parking Lot'.

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;451414]Here's what Obama and McCain plan to do about our tax situation:

Obama - Roll back the Bush tax cuts, increase Capital Gains to at least 20%, possibly 28%, cut taxes for families making under $ 75K, keep estate taxes. He is on record as voting for keeping the AMT as is, and against removing the Estate Tax. With a Democratic majority in both Houses of Congress we will pay more in taxes under Obama.

[URL="http://www.ontheissues.org/Economic/Barack_Obama_Tax_Reform.htm"]Barack Obama on Tax Reform[/URL]

Obama is also pushing "Universal Health Care" aka "Socialized Medicine" which will push our tax burden even higher and have our health care system managed by government bureacrats. Imagine needing a medical procedure but having to make a "political contribution" to get it done. This is common in countries with socialized medical systems.

McCain - committed to push legislation to permanently repeal the AMT. McCain is committed to reducing other taxes as well.

[URL="http://www.johnmccain.com/Informing/Issues/0b8e4db8-5b0c-459f-97ea-d7b542a78235.htm"]McCain Staging Site[/URL]

Our current situation is this; there is a huge disparity in who pays the lion's share of taxes in this country. My numbers may be slightly off, but the top 1% of wage earners pay 34% of the taxes in the US. The next 9% pay another 33% and the rest pay the final 33%. The top 50% of wage earners pay approximately 97% of the taxes.

The top 1% made 14% of the total income yet paid 34% of the tax burden. The bottom 50% earned 14% of the total income, yet only paid about 3% of the tax burden.

What do we do? FairTax. [URL="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer"]Americans For Fair Taxation:[/URL] FairTax is a consumption based tax so you basically "pay-to-play".

1) FairTax will eliminate corporate taxes bringing millions of jobs back the the U.S.
2) FairTax takes the power away from Congress of giving tax breaks to favored groups or companies.
3) Enables workers to keep their entire paychecks
4) Refunds in advance the tax on purchases of basic necessities.
5) Abolishes the IRS and repeals the 16th Ammendment.

We also need to be more involved in holding our political leaders accountable and greatly reduce "pork" spending. We need to get rid of congresspeople who hide $ 90K in their freezers, or build "bridges to nowhere", or appropriate millions to family and associates. This stuff is happening on both sides of the aisle and needs to be stopped.

Impose Term Limits - 8 years for Reps, 12 years for Senators.

Our government is supposed to serve the people, not the people serving the government. The more control (taxes, regulations) given to government the more it will take, until we are a socialist state. If we look at the government's power from 1900-1950 vs. 1950 to now, we are much further down the path to socialism than many believe. As few nudges upward in the tax rate and a few expansions in government programs and our tax burden would be close to 50%.

P.S. The current administration has been as much to blame for this as any Democrat.[/quote]

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

Dont think capital losses affect AMT for your average capital gain/loss (stock or bond). Normal capital gains and losses allways get netted. If you have just losses you can only take 3k deduction per year but cary foward any remaining.

Ive allways been taught to think about it like a completely different tax. So if you calculate what your tax would be normally (skip that section of the 1040), and AMT wise and you just pay which everone is greatest. It makes people who are allowed certin dedutions under the normal tax code add things back.

Some AMT add backs for you schedule A'ers are Medical Expenses, Investment Interest, Charitable Deductions, Casualty Losses, Gambling Losses and Home Equity Loans.

The Standard deduction and Personal exzemption isnt allowed.

Preference items are tricky. If you have them odds are you are at the very high end of the scale the AMT affects, or have very low earned income.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;451424]There are myriad problems with your post, beginning with the fact that you are clearly drawing from a highly partisan site operating under the guise of being strictly looking at 'the issues'. I'm running off to the gym so don't have time to respond in full, but briefly ...[/quote]
The facts are what they are. The positions I stated for Obama and McCain are their positions based on quotes directly from them. What difference does it make what site the facts came from if they are correct?
[quote]1) Universal health care and "socialized medicine" are not synonymous. Providing citizens with health care coverage - and Obama is going light on this issue by not even discussing a single-payer plan - does not mean that doctors work for the government. It means the government pays the bill. Currently I pay $5,000+ a year to be on my wife's health insurance, and my deductibles are such that I really can't get any real meaningful medical treatment without paying out of pocket anyway. Basic point is that you should get your information from a less partisan source. When you start seeing phrases like "socialized medicine" and "government bureacrats" that is a tell-tale sign you are probably getting a slanted view.[/quote]
I was referring to the broader term of "socialized medicine", which means the government administering and paying for the program but the doctor's & hospitals being independent. I didn't mean that the doctors and hospitals would be government entities. Either way, my point is that if Universal Health Care or socialized medicine is pushed through it will create a massive tax burden on the American taxpayer. Each person should be responsible for their own health care, not the government. I agree with government oversight to prevent abuse or negligence, but not control.

I understand the high cost of insurance. I pay a significant amount also. I also have seen the problems of Medicare first hand. When my father was very sick prior to passing away, my mother was working and had insurance that covered him. When he hit 65, the insurance company was able to drop his coverage because he was forced to Medicare. When this happened the benefits dropped greatly. The quality of the health care we receive will definitely decline under a government managed system. Government rarely does a better job than private industry at anything.
[quote]2) I hate it when I see some guy in a beat up truck with a "Fair Tax" bumper sticker. Taxing consumption is a regressive form of taxation. Quite simply, people who don't make a ton of money (such as myself) spend nearly their entire income. People who make lots of money do not, they save, invest, etc. This is why people fought for progressive tax structures at the beginning of the century. Tax reform is necessary, but taxing consumption is not the answer. [/quote]
You should look into the program rather than use the beat-up truck, red-neck generalization. The Fair Tax is designed to put the money of the American people back in their pockets and take the power away from Washington. Imagine getting your whole paycheck back rather than the reduced amount from taxes taken out. That paycheck you earned is yours, not the government's. In the Fair Tax program there are also "pre-bate" checks sent out to families to cover the taxes that would be paid on basic necessities.

The Fair Tax also effectively taxes the underground economy of illegal activities and illegal immigrants.

The payroll tax is actually a regressive tax. The Fair Tax is not. Check out the link for an explanation.

[URL="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_fairtax_four#regressive"]Americans For Fair Taxation:[/URL]

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

AMT is total crap. A great example of our politicians "thinking" and coming up with a great idea then f*ing i up and watching like a bunch of pollyanna wimps while it screws average Americans. Why any of us trusts any of them to do anything remotely competent in service to our country baffles me.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=FRPLG;451439]AMT is total crap. A great example of our politicians "thinking" and coming up with a great idea then f*ing i up and watching like a bunch of pollyanna wimps while it screws average Americans. Why any of us trusts any of them to do anything remotely competent in service to our country baffles me.[/quote]
That is why the government needs to have the least amount of power possible. Everything they do gets screwed up, but for some reason people want to give them more power and control.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[QUOTE=steveo395;451441]That is why the government needs to have the least amount of power possible. Everything they do gets screwed up, but for some reason people want to give them more power and control.[/QUOTE]

I hear ya brother.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

To those who want to scrap AMT altogether I say you don't know WTF you're talking about. Does the law need to be updated? Absolutely! Are the principles behind the law just? Jesus would find it just!

There are so many schemes available to rich people to lower their tax rate it's insane. Take Warren Buffet for example who end up with a [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html"]17.7% tax bill[/URL]. There's a reason behind AMT and that is to stop people with money from gaming the system by paying themselves $1 in annual salary, making the rest of their income through incentive based options and investments, and ultimately ends up paying 15% capital gains tax on all of their income.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

making 75k in a household in fairfax country is barely enough to pay a mortgage. without Cost of Living adjustments, 75k is an awful low household number...

btw, how about killing corn subsidies first. they tried about a month ago (or less) and instead of the original "if you earn more than 500k total income, you get no government money" turned into 5mill total income (which is a big enough sum to make it easy to spread around with kickbacks and defeat entirely)...

i mean, i'm a nice guy, but f'ing letterman shouldn't be getting 270k a year from (me, you, etc through) the government. those farm subsidies where supposed to protect joe average farmer from losing the ranch, not as a tax shelter for the rich and corporate (and already profitable) farmers.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=saden1;451456]To those who want to scrap AMT altogether I say you don't know WTF you're talking about. Does the law need to be updated? Absolutely! Are the principles behind the law just? Jesus would find it just!

There are so many schemes available to rich people to lower their tax rate it's insane. Take Warren Buffet for example who end up with a [URL="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/27/AR2007062700097.html"]17.7% tax bill[/URL]. There's a reason behind AMT and that is to stop people with money from gaming the system by paying themselves $1 in annual salary, making the rest of their income through incentive based options and investments, and ultimately ends up paying 15% capital gains tax on all of their income.[/quote]

Nobody's arguing the principle, saden. They're criticizing the execution.

Making sure everyone pays their fair share of tax makes all the sense in the world. Failing to adjust the threshold for inflation, however, is nothing short of f*cking retarded. Good idea, but as usual, f*cked up by the geniuses within the US government.

Getting rid of the AMT would be more fair than keeping it as-is. As it stands now, it's one of the great tax injustices of all-time. Ideally, they'd keep the AMT (because it's a decent idea) but simply adjust the threshold up. It'd be pretty easy - go back to the year the threshold was set, multiply it by the CPI for every year until 2008, bringing it up into the $200-300K range. Then index it to inflation moving forward.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=Slingin Sammy 33;451430]
You should look into the program rather than use the beat-up truck, red-neck generalization. The Fair Tax is designed to put the money of the American people back in their pockets and take the power away from Washington. Imagine getting your whole paycheck back rather than the reduced amount from taxes taken out. That paycheck you earned is yours, not the government's. In the Fair Tax program there are also "pre-bate" checks sent out to families to cover the taxes that would be paid on basic necessities.

The Fair Tax also effectively taxes the underground economy of illegal activities and illegal immigrants.

The payroll tax is actually a regressive tax. The Fair Tax is not. Check out the link for an explanation.

[URL="http://www.fairtax.org/site/PageServer?pagename=about_fairtax_four#regressive"]Americans For Fair Taxation:[/URL][/quote]

Why would I go to an advocacy group to find out information about a program? Admittedly, I spoke without a detailed knowledge of to proposal (partially because it is more complicated than advocates would admit), but if I am going to go look for information I'd rather go someplace like this:

[URL="http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html"]FactCheck.org: Unspinning the FairTax[/URL]

Sorry for breaking into the AMT discussion, but I find it frustrating when highly partisan information is presented as simply "the facts". It actually does matter where you get your information from and when I see code words like "socialized medicine" and "fair taxation" I become pretty skeptical of the source of information. You should too.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;451476]Why would I go to an advocacy group to find out information about a program? Admittedly, I spoke without a detailed knowledge of to proposal (partially because it is more complicated than advocates would admit), but if I am going to go look for information I'd rather go someplace like this:

[URL="http://www.factcheck.org/taxes/unspinning_the_fairtax.html"]FactCheck.org: Unspinning the FairTax[/URL]

Sorry for breaking into the AMT discussion, but I find it frustrating when highly partisan information is presented as simply "the facts". It actually does matter where you get your information from and when I see code words like "socialized medicine" and "fair taxation" I become pretty skeptical of the source of information. You should too.[/quote]

This is just a post in a show of support for what SC Skins Fan is saying. Media bias is prevalent even in the major networks, who employ journalists who pledge to report the facts and remain neutral. Political bias still manages to creep into their reporting.

Interpreting bias and identifying each source's slant is critical to obtaining reliable information. In this age when anyone can post anything on the internet, interpreting this bias is critical when searching the web for information.

In the end, if you link to or reference biased information, it's your credibility that ultimately suffers.

FactCheck is an excellent, unbiased source of information.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

My Bad.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=Schneed10;451466]Nobody's arguing the principle, saden. They're criticizing the execution.

Making sure everyone pays their fair share of tax makes all the sense in the world. Failing to adjust the threshold for inflation, however, is nothing short of f*cking retarded. Good idea, but as usual, f*cked up by the geniuses within the US government.

Getting rid of the AMT would be more fair than keeping it as-is. As it stands now, it's one of the great tax injustices of all-time. Ideally, they'd keep the AMT (because it's a decent idea) but simply adjust the threshold up. It'd be pretty easy - go back to the year the threshold was set, multiply it by the CPI for every year until 2008, bringing it up into the $200-300K range. Then index it to inflation moving forward.[/quote]
Ok you say everyone should pay their fair shair but its retarded to have a AMT for lower income people. Is that wanting it both ways. Maybe it just seems OK to hit people making more because they have more but why is it a good idea for one group of people and not the other?

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[QUOTE=firstdown;451550]Ok you say everyone should pay their fair shair but its retarded to have a AMT for lower income people. Is that wanting it both ways. Maybe it just seems OK to hit people making more because they have more but why is it a good idea for one group of people and not the other?[/QUOTE]

As to the question why should the rich pay more taxes? Their are two reasons:

1) As others have pointed out, the greater your wealth - the greater your level of disposal income. A loaf of bread and a gallon of gas cost the same whether you make 30,000 or 300,000. A family of four can get by okay on 50,000 but every penny counts and 10% of their income will affect their ability to afford much more beyond the basics. A family of four can live in moderate luxury on 500,000. While they will not be able to afford all the luxuries they might if they pay 20% of their income in taxes - would anyone suggest that a family of four could not live very very well on an income of 400,000?

2) More importantly, the richer you are the more you have benefitted from the governmental infrastructure supported by the taxes. My ability to collect wealth is directly related to the stable economy, the transportation infrastructure, the regulation of commerce and the enforcement of the criminal code by the various governmental entities in the US. It seems self evident to me that those who profit the most from the structures and institutions created and sustained by government should be pay a higher percentage of their income.

It is, of course a balancing act. Destroying the incentive to be wealthy will destroy the tax base. i.e. for all our benefit, people most be allowed to be wealthy.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=firstdown;451550]Ok you say everyone should pay their fair shair but its retarded to have a AMT for lower income people. Is that wanting it both ways. Maybe it just seems OK to hit people making more because they have more but why is it a good idea for one group of people and not the other?[/quote]

Your posts almost always confuse me. I can never quite tell what you're trying to say/ask.

Perhaps you just don't understand what the AMT is. By definition, AMT was designed to target the affluent, not the upper middle class, not the middle class, and not the poor. It was designed to ensure the rich could not take advantage of deductions and shelters to avoid paying their fair share.

If you're questioning what "fair share" is, then you seem to be arguing for a flat tax, which JR just addressed. That's an entirely different discussion.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

For me the solution to the AMT is simple, just adjust the threshold for inflation like Schneed said. It was designed for the rich, if you adjust it for the rich due to inflation then it continues serving its' purpose instead of hurting middle class citizens. Unfortunately I don't think our current gov't would realize this lol. I hope in this case I'm wrong.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=SC Skins Fan;451476]Sorry for breaking into the AMT discussion, but I find it frustrating when highly partisan information is presented as simply "the facts". It actually does matter where you get your information from and when I see code words like "socialized medicine" and "fair taxation" I become pretty skeptical of the source of information. You should too.[/quote]
I want to address what you and Schneed have mentioned, without going down the rathole of arguing detailed points of Fair Tax, tax policy, or politcal philosophies. I do completely understand media & political bias.

I want to clarify a couple things about my original post:

1) I didn't cut & paste from a highly partisan website. What I said in the post are my views & opinions, based on facts listed in the early part of the post. The part of my post below "What do we do?" wasn't intended to represent fact. It is my opinion of what we should do. Perhaps I should've been a bit more clear.

2) The first part of my post describing what Obama & McCain plan to do about our tax situation is fact and based on direct quotes, or in the case of McCain, a direct link to his website. The numbers & statistics are correct, how they are interpreted is a lengthy discussion, but the numbers themselves are correct.

3) The part of the post about Obama & health care are my words. But, they are based in fact and I don't believe they are up for debate. Obama [B]is [/B]pushing "Universal Health Care". It [B]will[/B] push our tax burden higher and, if passed into law, our health care system would be managed by government bureacrats.

The below two sentences weren't intended to be represented as facts but are very realistic and do happen. "Imagine needing a medical procedure but having to make a "political contribution" to get it done. This is common in countries with socialized medical systems."

I understand a couple of the terms "socialized medicine" and "bureaucrat" have negative connotations, but they are both used accurately in the context of what I've stated.

4) The website I linked to is definitely an advocacy site for the Fair Tax program. It accurately lists what Fair Tax proposes, what supporters see as advantages, and responses to common criticisms of the program. In evaluating your support or opposition for this, or any program, I would want to gather information both pro & con and then third-party info and make an evaluation. My point in linking to the Fair Tax site was to give a bit more information on the program and show that the ideas proposed are not from the redneck, "beat up truck" crowd.

No matter what, at least we agree that Cowboys fans with no connection to Texas suck. :food-smil

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

What about socialized welfare for farmers? Socialized police force? Socialized fire departments? Socialized education? Socialized defense department, homeland security, and wars? Socialized corporate welfare? Socialized disaster relief? Socialized foreign aid?

Quit with the socialized b.s. I pay for things I don't want to pay for too and stop acting like you're the only one that gets money taken out of your pockets.

I swear, I wish we had the ability to directly choose where our tax dollars goes!

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[QUOTE=saden1;451761]I swear, I wish we had the ability to directly choose where our tax dollars goes![/QUOTE]

We do. It's called the general election.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;451766]We do. It's called the general election.[/quote]

Having you congressman/senator/president pick and choose which programs to fund/not fund is [B]directly[/B]? Vote for whoever you want and you'll still have a farm bill, pork, etc. Direct means directly choosing in your tax return you want fund specific programs and direct where your tax money goes.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=saden1;451769]Having you congressman/senator/president pick and choose which programs to fund/not fund is [B]directly[/B]? Vote for whoever you want and you'll still have a farm bill, pork, etc. Direct means directly choosing in your tax return you want fund specific programs and direct where your tax money goes.[/quote]A good idea in theory, but in practicality, a total disaster waiting to happen.

People are fickle. The media is everywhere. I, for one, know I don't want the media deciding which gov't programs we can fund and which ones we can't.

I understand that you wouldn't choose which programs to push based on media spin, but you'd be in the minority on that one.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

I guess my prior answer was a bit snarky. It's just the concept of direct voting for taxes is ridiculous (as GTripp said). Everything would become a popularity contest. You think electioneering is bad now - Imagine if various departments of the Govt. had to compete for your dollars on a dollar by dollar basis? In depth analysis of spending needs? Consistency in funding to acheive long term goals? Forget it. Mob rule by money is just as bad as mob rule by violence.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[quote=JoeRedskin;451800]I guess my prior answer was a bit snarky. It's just the concept of direct voting for taxes is ridiculous (as GTripp said). Everything would become a popularity contest. You think electioneering is bad now - Imagine if various departments of the Govt. had to compete for your dollars on a dollar by dollar basis? In depth analysis of spending needs? Consistency in funding to acheive long term goals? Forget it. Mob rule by money is just as bad as mob rule by violence.[/quote]

Of course it's not practical or wise, I'm just frustrated with people always complaining...socialized this, socialized that...everyone has something they don't want to pay but that doesn't mean they are unworthy of being funded with tax dollars (of course there are some exceptions). This country is a union, we're all in it together, and we're as strong as our weakest link.

Re: Alternative Minimum Tax
 

[QUOTE=saden1;451804]...and we're as strong as our weakest link.[/QUOTE]

Which is our increasingly gov't and policitians in my opinion.