Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin  How did the country get by without an income tax from 1776 to 1913? Quite well it seems. Why the need for an income tax? |
Actually it didn't get by without an income tax during that time. Income tax was established for a brief period during the Civil War (Revenue Act of 1861). The tax was repealed in 1872. During the rest of the time, government relied heavily on tariffs and taxes on commodities (alcohol, tobacco) which had their limits. After the 16th amendment was ratified, income tax was raised during World War I, and then lowered again in the 20's. World War II saw another big raise in income tax, and again taxes dropped after it ended. Then there was the Korean War.. So historically most of the income tax was necessary for funding the military. In the last 50 years things have changed a lot (though I think the military is still responsible for a good chunk of the tax), and I'm going to have to read about all this stuff.. But this at least partially answers your question.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Colin And if you think that your income tax is being used to fund schools, build roads, and all the other things you expect your tax money to be paying for you would be sorely mistaken.
Local property taxes are used primarily to fund local education. Gasoline tax pays for road infastructure.
Your income tax pays for the interest on the debt the government owes to a private corporation, of which the real owners are never know. |
Got any appropriation data to back that up? I think a fairly large portion of income tax goes to fund the military, just as happened in the past. Check out the
Cost of War site -- the Iraq war has so far cost around $347.5 billion.* I have to look at some appropriation reports to see where the rest is going. You've piqued my interest.
* "Spending only includes incremental costs, additional funds that are expended due to the war. For example, soldiers' regular pay is not included, but combat pay is included. Potential future costs, such as future medical care for soldiers and veterans wounded in the war, are not included. It is also not clear whether the current funding will cover all military wear and tear. It also does not account for the Iraq War being deficit-financed and that taxpayers will need to make additional interest payments on the national debt due to those deficits"
So the actual combined cost of our military being in Iraq is even more than that..