If fiscal liberals are convinced that the government is a fair, intelligent and efficient spender of tax dollars, and that society is a better place when we give the government a larger share of community resources, why have I never heard of a liberal donating extra money to the IRS?
I'm not trying to say that every liberal should do this. But it seems like something that a real liberal ideology would compel at least some to do. Yet I've heard of many wealthy liberals going to great lengths and taking great risks to pay less taxes than they owe, which would seem to go directly against their beliefs. And I've never heard of a single person volunteering to pay extra, no matter how outspoken they are about believing that people should be legally required to do so.
Any idea why this is?
Posted by Glenn Arnold (Member # 3192) on :
During the end of the Clinton presidency, it was the conservatives who were trying to figure out how to spend the surplus. There were a number of liberals that sent checks to either the IRS or the White house and asking that the money be used to pay down the national debt, rather than just more of the same conservative spending.
My wife seeks out tax deductions, such as deducting travel expenses for a vacation that we took when she wrote a column about the trip and got paid for it. I will avoid taking deductions, for things like that, or in fact anything that I think shouldn't be a deduction, even if it is allowed. I think taking advantage of tax loopholes is unpatriotic.
New York state tax forms include a place where you can enter an amount to "give a gift to wildlife," which is added to the tax bill. Someone must use it.
I'm sure there are a lot of people that do include extra money in their taxes, but exactly why do you expect that you would hear about it?
Posted by BlackBlade (Member # 8376) on :
Your first statement off the bat rubbed me the wrong way, let me explain how.
quote:If fiscal liberals are convinced that the government is a fair, intelligent and efficient spender of tax dollars,
Liberals are not so naive that they think the government exacts with perfect equity the tasks given to it. It's just that there are certain services that have enough niche space for the government to fill in the gap.
quote:and that society is a better place when we give the government a larger share of community resources,
The theory is not to give the government a larger share of the resources, rather, that the people themselves who the government represents are better served by that government.
quote: why have I never heard of a liberal donating extra money to the IRS?
I donate 10% of my income to my church, as well as the cost of one of my meals a month, of which a part of that money is dedicated to helping people who do not have enough to eat, the jobless, even those who might need professional therapy.
Having said that, I don't have alot of money myself even to simply pay all the bills, but when I make just a bit more, I would have no qualms with my taxes being higher so that I can at least be reasonably certain my wife and I can decent medical care.
Why do rich liberals lie on their taxes? People are greedy, it's not news. They'd much rather donate money to a cause that will be publicized and others will sing their accolades rather than privately contribute to a cause.
Posted by Kwea (Member # 2199) on :
Quite a few do, actually, and some people also leave their estates, or part of them, to the USA as well.
Posted by TomDavidson (Member # 124) on :
quote:why have I never heard of a liberal donating extra money to the IRS?
I've donated extra money to the government, actually. More importantly, I have also donated a lot of money to charities and causes that also receive federal funds.
quote:If fiscal liberals are convinced that the government is a fair, intelligent and efficient spender of tax dollars, and that society is a better place when we give the government a larger share of community resources...
You should know that this is a straw man. Fiscal liberals believe that there are certain efficiencies of scale available to the government, and moreover certain functions which for a variety of possible reasons should not be privately administered and/or be governed by the desire for profit. This does not mean that liberals believe that government is in all cases more efficient, or that efficiency is the most important attribute of a program's administration. Liberals, like conservatives, are perfectly capable of forming nuanced opinions.
Posted by Christine (Member # 8594) on :
You don't seem to understand what a "fiscal liberal" is.
Granted, I'm not sure I know what a "fiscal conservative" or a "fiscal liberal" is anymore, since in recent history the conservatives are just as eager to take and spend our money. They just want to spend it on different things -- like corporate welfare.
Liberal ideology doesn't have anything to do with wanting to give away our money to the government. Instead, it is a belief that the community ought to provide certain services for everyone. In a sense, the liberal belief is that these services are a right and since they are a right, we will split the cost according to our ability to pay and make sure everyone gets those services. These services include, but are not limited to: education, police, fire, roads, military, emergency management, etc.
You may observe that "fiscal conservatives" agree on most of those. At the moment, the big disagreement is health care. So-called conservatives are trying to obfuscate the heart of the debate by throwing fear words like "socialism" out there and associating this word with "liberalism."
Posted by Lyrhawn (Member # 7039) on :
For me anyway, I don't have a problem with higher taxes if the money goes is spent on the things I want it to be spent on (health care, the environment, paying down the debt), but I'm not going to volunteer to pay more, at least not with how much I make, but I will certainly advocate that EVERYONE pay more, and when that time comes, I'll happily pass along more tax dollars.
I suspect a lot of "fiscal liberals" fall into that category. They're perfectly fine with higher taxes, and thus paying more, but they aren't going to do it by themselves.
Posted by Strider (Member # 1807) on :
Baron, every wealthy liberal who supported Obama is a refutation of the your OP(since obama wanted to raise taxes 2% on the wealthiest 5%). The strongest example being someone like Warren Buffet, who would stand to lose a truly outstanding amount of money with a just a small percentage increase in taxes. This is an extreme example, but many other wealthy liberals were willing to give more money to the government because they believed it was the right thing to do.
Posted by Samprimary (Member # 8561) on :
Am I a 'fiscal liberal' because I amply desire to have my tax bracket assume a much greater share of the burden for making sure our country provides for people in need? Or what? It doesn't seem like a very useful term, like one of those things a very few people will self-identify as.
Would I be a fiscal liberal if I were really poor and thus wanted rich people to take up more of the tax burden using a progressive tax scheme, rather than regressive or flat taxes?
Posted by The Rabbit (Member # 671) on :
Christine pretty much nailed it. Your question reveals a total lack of understanding of liberalism. Liberals believe in cooperation and community and see government (at least good government) as tool we can use to meet the needs of our community, such as educating our children, caring for the poor and elderly, building and maintaining infrastructure, protecting personal rights and so on. We believe that these things are best accomplished when everyone in community shares the burden. We are willing to pay higher taxes as long as we perceive that these taxes are going to support the things we value AND that the tax burden is being fairly shared through out the community. Donating money to the IRS wouldn't meet those goals.
I do donate money to specific government services that I feel are underfunded like public schools, the fire department, wilderness conservation funds and so forth. I also donate large amounts of money to NGOs that I believe are filling the gap left by inadequate community support for certain programs. I think that most of those programs would be more effective if they were supported by the entire community than solely by those who are generous to donate their time and money while others greedily refuse to support publicly funded programs.
Posted by Darth_Mauve (Member # 4709) on :
Baron, try this for a thought...
All Dichotomies are false dichotomies.
There are people who are labeled and label themselves as "Fiscal Conservatives."
You assume that there must be their polar opposite, the "Fiscal Liberal." You then assume that the Fiscal Liberal will be the mirrored reflection of the Fiscal Conservative, believing in the opposite of everything.
The fiscal conservative believes that the government is the least fair, practical, and efficient spender of tax money so the fiscal liberal must believe that the government is the most fair, practical and efficient.
Actually most liberals believe that fiscal responsibility is important, but only after other social concerns are met first.
If we turn it around and mirror what you asked, if fiscal conservatives believe that corporations are the best folks to handle money, why are they upset about bailouts that transferred Tax money to corporate entities?
Posted by T:man (Member # 11614) on :
Well, I don't give much extra money to the IRS because I don't have any extra money Posted by theamazeeaz (Member # 6970) on :
I was annoyed during the presidential debates because both candidates kept telling Joe the Plumber that the other guy was going to raise his taxes. Whoop te do. Honestly, I would have given the government more money if they just talked about something else.
![[Smile]](smile.gif)