Where are your tax dollars really going?
i was sitting here thinking about the question, and the answer is, i have NO idea.
sure, we know X amount of dollars are going to relatively generic areas of government, but where do they go from there? is our money being spent wisely?
should local and federal governments be required to publish every year/few years where exactly all of your money has been going?
something nice and simple, no legalese. just a straight BAM, this much was spent on education. of that x amount went to the actual teachers, x amount went to classroom supplies etc.
it strikes me that every single years millions more are necessary on just a local level to supposedly continue at the same rate as things were functioning just a few years earlier.
where the hell is all the money going?
sure, we know X amount of dollars are going to relatively generic areas of government, but where do they go from there? is our money being spent wisely?
should local and federal governments be required to publish every year/few years where exactly all of your money has been going?
something nice and simple, no legalese. just a straight BAM, this much was spent on education. of that x amount went to the actual teachers, x amount went to classroom supplies etc.
it strikes me that every single years millions more are necessary on just a local level to supposedly continue at the same rate as things were functioning just a few years earlier.
where the hell is all the money going?
Comments
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6092474.htm
Originally posted by Existence
Tax cuts for the rich so that Bush can get campaign monies.
http://www.charlotte.com/mld/observer/news/6092474.htm
A bit off topic perhaps?
Originally posted by Existence
Tax cuts for the rich so that Bush can get campaign monies.
Former President Clinton on Larry King tonight even admitted that the tax cuts aren't going to work because people like him and Larry King are getting HUGE tax cuts and he says that they are the wrong people to be giving more money. He called it horrible economics. He might not have been the best guy in the world, but he was a hell of an awesome president. Think about it, during the Clinton Administration, unemployment was down, the economy was up, and everyone liked us. Once Bush got into office...it all changed. Oh well, we're stuck with the guy for another year and a half
Originally posted by filmmaker2002
Think about it, during the Clinton Administration, unemployment was down, the economy was up, and everyone liked us. Once Bush got into office...it all changed. Oh well, we're stuck with the guy for another year and a half
yes, nothing else happened in that time other than the presidency changing
Tax cuts for the rich so that Bush can get campaign monies.
of course, that tells you nothing about where you tax dollars are going.
i want to know, where the hell is the money being spent, on both a local and national level. i think anyone from any party could agree that there's likely billions of waste in government spending, but no realistic way to get a handle on it.
if you could stop the waste and redistribute the money to programs people actually support, you could give money money to everyone and still have a surplus.
has anyone ever tried to figure out where the money is going? even at a local level it's almost impossible to nail down how the money is being spent. instead, you can follow it to right outside the doors of some institution/program, but after that's it's a jumbled mess.
In the words of Blue Man Group... "Away".
Social Security: 23%
National Defense: 17%
Income Security (Welfare, TANF, etc.) 14%
Net Interest: 11%
Medicare 12%
Health(medicade, NIH) 9%
Other 14%
If You combine SocSec, Income Security, Helath and Medicare you get: 58% of the Fed spending just for transfer payments. Crazy.
That and the towel that asscroft used to cover up lady's justices boobs. He looks like a wall mart sort of guy so i'd say 12.99$ of my tax dollars where spent on it.
any remaining left over taxes from me went to corporate welfare, which dwarfs social welfare yet no one has a cow over it.
Originally posted by Existence
BTW, that "Other 14%" is mainly interest on debt. By 2013, we'll be spending more on interest on debt than national defense(adjusted for inflation) thanks to Bush's useless tax cuts.
Look guys---don't go there.
There is fiscal policy AND monetary policy to consider. Blaming GWB for everthing in the economy is like taking the back off your radio to find the little people inside.
Originally posted by keyboardf12
I'm sure mine probably went to subsidize local tobacco farmers so they can grow tobacco so it can be sold by american coporations that kill 300,000 americans a year with their product. ( yet still claim there is no link to.)
That and the towel that asscroft used to cover up lady's justices boobs. He looks like a wall mart sort of guy so i'd say 12.99$ of my tax dollars where spent on it.
any remaining left over taxes from me went to corporate welfare, which dwarfs social welfare yet no one has a cow over it.
Actually it was a couple thousand dollars for the boobie cover.
Originally posted by Existence
BTW, that "Other 14%" is mainly interest on debt. By 2013, we'll be spending more on interest on debt than national defense(adjusted for inflation) thanks to Bush's useless tax cuts.
Existence, I am really starting to question your intelligence. I'll use the $100 more a month I am getting, thank you. Oh BTW, that's $100 more of the money that was mine to begin with.
filmaker...
Former President Clinton on Larry King tonight even admitted that the tax cuts aren't going to work because people like him and Larry King are getting HUGE tax cuts and he says that they are the wrong people to be giving more money. He called it horrible economics. He might not have been the best guy in the world, but he was a hell of an awesome president. Think about it, during the Clinton Administration, unemployment was down, the economy was up, and everyone liked us. Once Bush got into office...it all changed. Oh well, we're stuck with the guy for another year and a half
Oh! Even Clinton admitted! What did you think he would say?
An awesome President. Wow. Yes, because he was responsible for all of those things you mentioned!
And, are you really gullible enough to think "everyone liked us"" Hello? Embassy bombings, anyone? USS Cole, anyone? Seriously. Get a grip.
let's take, for example, Medicare.
Medicare 12%
what i'd love to see is a breakdown of that 12%.
where is it going? fine, 12% goes to Medicare, but that doesn't really tell me anything. where is that 12% going. what's it being spent on. who's it helping? who isn't it helping that it should be?
where is it being spent that it doesn't need to be, or shouldn't be?
Originally posted by alcimedes
hey now, let's keep this at least (pretending) to relate to economics. yes, republicans hate clinton, democrats hate bush. we all understand that lets move on.
let's take, for example, Medicare.
what i'd love to see is a breakdown of that 12%.
where is it going? fine, 12% goes to Medicare, but that doesn't really tell me anything. where is that 12% going. what's it being spent on. who's it helping? who isn't it helping that it should be?
where is it being spent that it doesn't need to be, or shouldn't be?
I'd bet you could find that online. I think alot of those agencies have diabolically boring stats on their web sites. But in general Medicare is for the elderly, in the form of an psedo-insurance company.
Originally posted by Existence
BTW, that "Other 14%" is mainly interest on debt. By 2013, we'll be spending more on interest on debt than national defense(adjusted for inflation) thanks to Bush's useless tax cuts.
It's interesting that ena and SDW reacted so strongly to this. I think it's telling that they did, because it really nails the coffin on the tax-cuts-without-spending-cuts approach.
To cut taxes in the present with the implied goal of cutting spending sometime in the future is just cynical. But Existence's point shows that it's stupid, too.
The simple fact is that not taxing enough to cover your spending will INCREASE future spending, not decrease it. That's because it increases the debt, and interest on the debt is paid as part of the federal budget each year.
That, combined with the fact that higher debt probably increases interest rates and therefore harms long-term economic growth, cuts off the primary arguments for tax-cuts-without-spending-cuts, which are usually that 1. it will decrease future spending and 2. it will help the economy. Instead, it appears that tax cuts 1. increase future spending and 2. harm economic growth. Oops.
[edit]Just realized this was supposed to be a non-political thread. Sorry.
Proof. It is also interesting to note some of the other charts on the site.
Originally posted by alcimedes
oh well, i guess i should know better than to start any thread on any topic that involves money and hope it might not degenerate into politics.
heh I thought this was the other thread on borrow-and-spend Republicans.
Most information is theoretically available, but it might not be easy to get or put together. I work for a University, as do you I think alcimedes, and I believe our salaries are public information. But I wouldn't want to try to find it. I'm not even sure that it's on the web, for example.
I think it would be a good idea to require that all spending be easily accessible and laid out in comprehensible form. It would certainly provide some accountability. On the other hand, I'm sure they'd have to hire 10% more employees and spend another 100 billion dollars to do it.
sure, you'd have to bring on more people, but i can't help but think that by doing so, you'd plug a pile of money pits that just waste tax dollars.
i know my info is supposed to be public knowledge, but short of going to a library on campus and checking out a huge book (that can't leave the room) there's no way to really find out what i make. it's "available" so to speak, but not really.
i guess that's what reporters are for.