J
jesswzmn
Guest
...hike to local governments? when they have to later wrestle with how they will fund those projects that their representatives use to get federal funding for?
I mean if the project is really needed, than its really needed and funding will have to come from somewhere. The only difference I see is that instead of borrowing the money from china to fund the pork barrels, the local citizens will actually pay higher fees, sales taxes, real estate taxes, etc.. to fund them...which is admittedly a fiscal improvement as tax and spend is better than borrow and spend...but nevertheless it is a tax hike to the locals. But who bears the brunt of the tax hike? is it the rich locals, the corporate locals, the middle class locals or the poor locals.
In my humble opinion, the effective tax hike would be affect mostly the middle and lower classes and be more of a regressive tax.
So, in summary, the elimination of pork barrel spending at the federal level shifts the tax burden back to local government.....which is not a bad idea, but it shifts it in such a way where the tax goes from being progressive at the federal level to being regressive at the state level and from affecting the wealthy more at the federal level to affecting the middle and lower classes more at the local level.
Any opinions on my analysis?
Assuming of course the elimination of pork barrel spending was to come with a reduction in federal income taxes to the tune of the amount that normally would have been requested in pork barrel spending...since that money was no longer needed federally.
someone who is crusading against pork barrel spending like John McCain does is essentially saying to cut out that portion of federal spending, cut income taxes as a result...a progressive sort of tax that affects the rich more, but then indirectly, he is saying to raise taxes at local governmnent levels to make up the difference...a regressive sort of tax that affects the middle class and poor more.
wait, you give 2 examples of wasteful spending and then conclude that all those projects are wasteful? lol nice !!!! nice try !!!!
What about the not wasteful projects.....how will they get funded? I guess my argument is not as false as you say in that case.
if you read the first part of my question notice i said "if the project is really needed"...oops your bad !!!
I mean if the project is really needed, than its really needed and funding will have to come from somewhere. The only difference I see is that instead of borrowing the money from china to fund the pork barrels, the local citizens will actually pay higher fees, sales taxes, real estate taxes, etc.. to fund them...which is admittedly a fiscal improvement as tax and spend is better than borrow and spend...but nevertheless it is a tax hike to the locals. But who bears the brunt of the tax hike? is it the rich locals, the corporate locals, the middle class locals or the poor locals.
In my humble opinion, the effective tax hike would be affect mostly the middle and lower classes and be more of a regressive tax.
So, in summary, the elimination of pork barrel spending at the federal level shifts the tax burden back to local government.....which is not a bad idea, but it shifts it in such a way where the tax goes from being progressive at the federal level to being regressive at the state level and from affecting the wealthy more at the federal level to affecting the middle and lower classes more at the local level.
Any opinions on my analysis?
Assuming of course the elimination of pork barrel spending was to come with a reduction in federal income taxes to the tune of the amount that normally would have been requested in pork barrel spending...since that money was no longer needed federally.
someone who is crusading against pork barrel spending like John McCain does is essentially saying to cut out that portion of federal spending, cut income taxes as a result...a progressive sort of tax that affects the rich more, but then indirectly, he is saying to raise taxes at local governmnent levels to make up the difference...a regressive sort of tax that affects the middle class and poor more.
wait, you give 2 examples of wasteful spending and then conclude that all those projects are wasteful? lol nice !!!! nice try !!!!
What about the not wasteful projects.....how will they get funded? I guess my argument is not as false as you say in that case.
if you read the first part of my question notice i said "if the project is really needed"...oops your bad !!!