Tax Policy : New Jersey And Alabama

Whenever somebody hears the word 'taxes' the general response will be that they hate them or they do not understand why the government is taking their money that they so rightfully earned. All of that is fine; I hate my money being taken from me. People that hate taxes hate them mainly because they fail to see the bigger picture. Where they see the government stealing from them; I see roads being constructed, salaries being paid, and technologies being produced. I see taxes as paying for the leisures of freedom you get as a right of being an American citizen. I only hate taxes when they are being used poorly. An example of poorly used tax money is when the government chooses to spend the peoples money on private schools. Public money should

The American government has struggled with the issue of taxes and the budget for over a hundred years. Class conflict, adversarial political parties, and convoluted economic philosophies have resulted in a never-ending debate over taxation. The New York Times newspaper article, “Senate Panel Vote Backs Budget Plan”, from June 1993, discusses the current feelings of the time in regards to the budget and taxation. Moreover, the article mentions factors such as democrat-republican debate, trickle down economics, and high verse low taxes for the middle class. The issues discussed in this 1993 article differ only slightly from the taxation conversation of today. However, now in 2011, we face a budget crisis that threatens the American economy

The Virginia plan and the new jersey plan were plans on how many representatives a state received when voting. The Virginia plan proposed representation by the state's population and proposed an upper chamber to be elected by the lower chamber. With Virginia being one of the states with the highest population they would receive most of the power to govern the country over smaller states which would mean their state’s interest would overpower interest of smaller population states. Many other smaller states disagreed with this plan as they saw it as unfair and thought the needs and views of their state would be ignored.

“Considering that the top marginal tax rate for the wealthiest Americans today is 35 percent, that figure seems astounding. But it's true that in the 1950s, the top marginal tax rates were over 90 percent” (Farley). Many may think, how does lower taxes on the highest income earners have an effect on them. Simple, less funding of programs that enrich the quality of one’s life. When the government does not receive the needed funding spending cuts must be made. Unfortunately, these spending cuts are more often than not are on government programs that help those who are

The funding issue remains in New Jersey concerning the Pension plan. Unable to work together to reform an ailing state pension system that faces a $170 billion deficit. The budget committees of the Democratic-controlled Senate and Assembly approved a budget plan this year that would raise taxes on businesses and millionaires to add $1.8 billion to the state’s pension contribution for the fiscal year that begins July 1 (Watchdog.org). The proposal would increase the state’s total payment to $3.1 billion next year, the amount originally required by statute. But the state Supreme Court ruled that law unconstitutional earlier this month, allowing the Governor to legally slash the pension payment to $1.3 billion for next year (Watchdog.org.). In essence, to change the pension reforms agreements when deemed necessary.

It is clear that the political spectrum has two distinct sides, where leftist or liberals are constantly competing with rightist or conservatives to promote their political ideas. In the case of Steve Brouwer and David Horowitz: it is no different. Each of these writers clearly define where they stand in the political spectrum. Brouwer’s stance is on the left or liberal unlike Horowitz where he maintains more conservative views on the right. In this essay, I will contrast the writings of Steve Brouwer’s “If We Decided to Tax the Rich”, and David Horowitz’s “The Intellectual Class War.” Although some superficial similarities exist, the

Although taxes are inevitable, the way states tax their citizen may be vastly different. I compared two states in order to understand the contrast and comparison between their state’s tax system. I chose to research the tax systems of Oregon and Florida. Oregon and Florida are two states that are distinct from each other not only in location but in their state’s tax system as well. Oregon is heavily dependent on a personal income tax, however, Oregon is not dependent on sales tax by all means. On the other hand, Florida is highly reliant on sales tax, however, Florida holds no need for a tax on personal income. Ultimately, these two states are gaining enough taxes for them to continue to survive. This does not mean, however, that both

In America, we enjoy freedoms that we often take for granted. We have the power to decide things for ourselves, such as our leaders, our rights, and our liberties. We have the ability to debate and evaluate the effectiveness and the relevance of a law or bill, and we must use this power when it comes to the methods of taxation. Currently, the US uses a progressive income tax as its means to raise revenue. Deborah Lee and Richard A. Grant, in “Counterpoint: Expanding Sales Taxes Helps the Rich, Hurts the Poor,” believe that a progressive income tax is the fairest and most constructive ways to fund the government, and that such a tax benefits the poor more than a sales tax.

While the concepts, statistics, and conclusions Noah raises are vitally important to the overall message of the book, it could never achieve critical acclaim without its accessibility to the everyday reader. While many of the concepts seem above readers’ heads, Noah’s direct, clear, and concise writing style ensures that he will not alienate an audience uninformed about the nuances of the US tax code.

With the next presidential election just around the bend, there have been many heated policy debates on both sides of the caucuses. One of the more intriguing of these has to be the debate on the structure of the current tax system. Many GOP hopefuls are putting forth plans to impose a Flat Tax System. The scope of this paper is not to analyze, per se, the reasons behind their putting forth such ideas. Instead, this paper will attempt to analyze the ethical considerations and ramifications of a flat tax system as opposed to our current progressive system. In order to accomplish this goal the following study will: present a thorough analysis of the background surrounding this issue; the stakeholders and their involvement in the issue as well as the issues effects on each; two ethical theories and test and how they apply; and finally a Biblical interpretation on the ethical issues that will be brought to light and a suggestion to believers on what side they should take given the analysis presented.

For some time now, the United States economy has been trending in the direction of social injustice. Income inequality is ever expanding, and the primary reason is that those people at the very top of the income distribution are accumulating wealth at rates never seen before. The rich are getting richer to the extent that they are driving a massive wedge between socio-economic classes within the United States, and the impacts are far-reaching. Combating this inequality begins with an examination of the economic policies currently in place. Federal tax policy is an ideal place to start, considering the prominent role it plays in determining the distribution of wealth.

Almost every American adults in the United States of America has to fill out a tax return to see if those still owe the government some money, or if those will get some back from the government. A recurring thought in the mind of many of these adults is,” How can my taxes be this high”. The middle class is supposed to be living comfortably and not have to live their lives worrying about money. But, in today’s United States the middle class has to worry about money every single day. The upper class is almost being penalized for earning too much money based on the percentages that they have to hand over to the government. The businesses that once were able to create jobs are now having to cut jobs because of the astronomical percentages

Taxes policy is one of strategies that states have to increase their competitiveness. From 51 states nation-wide, only five states that do not impose sales tax or 0% sales tax rate. They are Alaska, Delaware, Montana, New Hampshire and Oregon. Without sales tax, in this five states, people can buy everything without spending extra dollar for tax, which mean they will have extra ‘money’ for saving or spending to other goods compared to other states because some of states impose both income and sales tax.

When it comes to income taxes, the focus is usually on jobs, personal investments, and savings. The debate on who should bear the greater burden when it comes to income taxes is timeless. If all types of tax are aimed at developing the economy, it should be everyone’s equal responsibility to engage in taxation regardless of one’s economic class. Both parties involved proclaim the legitimacy of their arguments. The articles under discussion are representative of this debate. On one side of the debate, there are those who feel that the rich should pay more taxes. Then there are those who feel that the rich should not be punished by shouldering the burden of taxation (Benson and White 1). From an economic theorist’s point of view, both articles articulate valid arguments. However, this does not nullify the significance of the prevailing economic situation. The above debate can be based on various economic contexts.