Obama Care

[CRedskinsRule]

Originally Posted by Slingin Sammy 33

Certainly the crisis of the Civil War constituted extreme measures (income tax). Even so, the tax was less than the SS tax alone is today.

And I'm not saying there should be "no oversight" into the financial system, but not the monstrosity of regulations/legal burdens companies must jump through for the government.

You really should read Chapter 1 of The Fair Tax Book by Neal Boortz to understand how the Income Tax really came to be. As is the same today, the Income Tax (or expansion of taxes) was a Democrat creation, and unfortunatley a few liberal Republicans signed on.

Again, as usual with lefties, my original point wasn't countered....at all, only nit-picking minor details. Please enlighten me, how does the federal government/infrastructure allow/facilitate private individuals & companies to make money? And do you believe the cost of that is worth about 33% of a mid-high end workers income?

Far be it from me to be defending the government per se; but I think it is safe to say that the federal government has a major role in the US's ability to be an effective marketplace. Remember the reason the federal portion was needed was otherwise the individual colonies/states would have bickered endlessly and we would have grown as a country much more like Europe. The Articles of Confederation through their failure to provide the stability and accountability to a greater good certainly showed a need for Federal intervention, and establishment of commerce, roads, a common military defense etc. I am sure you aren't saying we don't need these things.

Your second half saying that should it be 33% of your income. Absolutely not. But the 33% does not pay just for the government necessary to provide the safe and honest transactions conducted over a billion times over the course of a normal business day. It is required to be 33% (and growing) because of the misguided belief that government, better than individuals and charities, can help solve individual hardship, and that in a country as grand as ours, no one should go without. As Schneed said, if a person needs urgent medical attention, all hospitals are required to provide it. However, if a person chooses, or has thrust on them, the option of not securing health insurance, that is where the debate lies. I say each individual/family must come to terms themselves. Others would disagree.