Tired of Taxes
Illinois will now be collecting another dollar a pack tax on cigarettes. they are also charging three dollars per customer at strip clubs. They are also taking control (and the profits) from the video poker machines that keep allot of small bars in business. Of course, all of these are elective taxes. If you don't want to pay, don't do those things. However, the state has no right telling people what to do through taxes. I suggest a fair balance to the tax system. ALL political contributions should be charged a 100% matching tax. This would even apply to thirs party ads and super pacs. If you don't want to pay the tax, don't "donate" to a candidate. Does anyone really think taht corporations, special interests and the wealthy donate huge amounts of money without getting something in return? This is a real suggestion taht needs to be discussed.
Your argument that taxing
Your argument that taxing campaign contributions will help the smaller guy is an example of the leftist argument that has never worked in the history of the world. In essense you're really not hurting the politicians at all, because they still get the other half of the money in the form of taxes.
It seems to me that you percieve a problem where there is too much money being spent on elections and/or lobbying. You would like to see more grass roots involvement. I believe that your plan actually puts more power in the hands of the richest, curtails the purchasing power of the smaller donor, and feeds the political system even more money in the form of taxation. Plus, there is no one stopping anyone from participating in grass roots movements in this country. Any person is free to knock on doors and pool their resources for a candidate or a cause. Very, very, very, very few people do. Even fewer have the guts or time to put their own reputations on the line to run for public office, be it local, state or federal.
By the way, I don't hate unions. I believe that in my posts what I've tried to do, is hold government employee unions to task, when I see complaints about the funding of the pensions system and health care benefits. They have used their considerable resources to elect these politicians who have chosen not to fund the system.
George Will explains campaign spending best, this quote below was related about the 2 year election cycle in 2010.
GEORGE WILL: Two points about money. First of all, in this gusher of money we may spend this year in the two year cycle $4.2 billion, something like that. That's less than half of what Proctor & Gamble is going to spend advertising its products in one year. It is approximately what Americans will spend on yogurt this year.
Read more: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/10/24/george-will-schools-christiane-amanpour-campaign-spending#ixzz1yXRhjpSS
Taxing campaign contribution
Taxing campaign contribution is stupid, even if you're not a leftist like me.
It's stupid for even the simplest of reasons, that it deflates our utter hostilty to the idea that corporations have any right of involvement in public debate. They don't. Not even their vast lobbying fees merit any consideration, as tax deductions.
Corporations are, simply, establishments empowered by the State, to further the well-being of the people of a State. The price the people pay, in granting incorporation, is that the people promise not to sue the corporation's founders, personally, unless the corporation exceeds itself, penetrating the corporate veil. (Arguably, Citizens United, did that, saying, erroneously as it did, that corporations were entitled to free speech, and hence that there was no corporate veil, at all. A folly, truly, a folly of reason.)
Nonetheless. Corporate contributions should not be taxed. They should be, properly, banned. Citizens United was decided wrongly.
'...As much as some of you
'...As much as some of you hate unions,...'
Can you be more specific? Are you speaking of labor unions in the private sector? Or government employee unions, which even FDR, the champion of workers' unions in the private sector, railed against? Or are they both the same, in your opinion?
"Does anyone really think
"Does anyone really think taht corporations, special interests and the wealthy donate huge amounts of money without getting something in return?"
Considering that unions have outspent all other organizations and industries over the past 15 years or so, by a margin so wide there really is no close second, I would say that I do NOT think they don't get something in return. They get a lot in return, which is why they give the money. It is funny how some people try to defend unions by bashing other organizations, industries and corporations for donating campaign money, when the unions (keyword "special interest) are by far and away the largest contributors.
What does this tax really accomplish? What are you trying to accomplish? Are you trying create a disincentive for people to give money? When you water down the money, doesn't that put people who have less money to give at a disadvantage? So follow me here, if a big, evil corporatation like, say, Ford, gives $50,000 to a Super Pac, they get $25,000 in your example of 100% taxation. Say that's enough to purchase 25 television commercials. If I, as a small business owner give my candidate $5000, they actually get $2500 which can buy, say, 2 or 3 commercials. How is that helping anything?
I don't bash unions in the
I don't bash unions in the private sector, but I'll forever trash government employee unions...
I bash Obama, but then again I bashed Bush, Cllinton and all the previous front-men for the international bankers...
I've never talked about this because (1) I've never considered it and (2) the Supreme Court has already decided that campaign contributions are considered to fall in the category of free speech.
Methinks some are in a hurry to pre-judge and generalize.
Social Media
Comments
News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.