Why are conservatives opposed to taxes?

Taxes fund:
-public schools
-healthcare for the old and poor
-Veterans鈥?benefits
-military services
-infrastructure
-public offices
-an your unjust war

Someone in a previous forum had made the point that it is 鈥渕ore patriotic to pay taxes鈥?and help better this country that we ALL love, than leaving it in shambles.

All it takes is for everyone to put a little in the pot (proportionately to what you earn annually) and the country thrives! What鈥檚 wrong with that?

I'm will to sacrifice for the country I pledge allegiance to, why can't you?

I never understood this either. They want their taxes cut so they can make more money, then they call for free market. But a free market would adjust to their increase in income, and they would be back to where they started in the first place. So to me, when they make that argument it is mute and short-sighted.

Because, conservatives in general are rich, upper class white people who like tax cuts because it helps them get either more tax money back or keep more money in general

Yes taxes do pay for those things , the problem is that there are to many taxes and taxes are to high. Not to even mention the fact that the collection of income taxes by the IRS is totally against any concept of liberty

public schools - Local Taxes
-healthcare for the old and poor - not my problem
-Veterans鈥?benefits - Yes
-military services - Yes
-infrastructure - See the gasoline TAX
-public offices - wasted money
-an your unjust war - YAWN!!

Don't trust Conservatives to accurately self-report. Just because they say they are against taxes doesn't mean they are. Conservatives want government to stay out of people's economic lives and regulate people's moral/social lives.

The way Cons see it, if the government regulated people's moral/social behavior there would be little need for taxpayer-funded social services. Of course all those moral police would cost us a pretty penny, but to CONSERVatives it would be worth it. They would even support a monarchy for the sake of social stability. And hey, there would be no need for free public education if the populace didn't vote! Things would be simpler if we had a goofy king who says things like "there ought to be limits to freedom", invades other countries and sends our citizens to their deaths over his own foolish emotions, and otherwise doesn't accomplish anything.

cause they have the "not in my backyard"mentality, or scratch with your own nails kind of thing..

it's stupid, they don't want to see the benefits thay they bring...

if we continue this way China will probably dominate use in a couple of years

Because the liberals misappropiate the funds to serve their best interest or only to help those who refuse to help themselves. I am sick and tired of my tax dollars going to people who CHOOSE to sit home on their rears because the government will just keep paying their way.

1. To benefit the wealthy since they pay the largest part of taxes (income taxes, anyway).
2. Privatization, which allows for current public infrastructure to become private enterprise.

Think about it, turn the roads over to private companies. Think it is impractical? That's the way it used to be. You had to pay to go anywhere (the origin of the turnpikes). Indiana has already contracted their toll roads to a foreign corporation.

There have been calls to privatize the postal service.

Personally, I think taxes were fine until Bush messed with them. They weren't overly high (think about income taxes in Europe - the Beatles at their peak were in a 95% income tax bracket). It's been my experience (forty years of it), that tax cuts by conservatives only benefit one group: the people that need it the least. The idea is usually that they will create jobs, and Reagan called it the "trickle down effect"; but for some reason, the trickle down effect doesn't quite seem to trickle very far.

They are greedy people and selfish.

Its simple economics. We all get more for our buck by relying on competition, free markets, and the private sector to deliver goods and services

Government is a monopoly. Monopolies ALWAYS give you less for your money because they can charge pretty much what they want for products. They don't have to be concerned with losing business on price, so they have no incentive to contain cost.

In our economy, tax cuts generally result in higher tax receipts. Paradox? No, because tax cuts stimulate the economy, moving everyone higher in the tax rates.

Conversely, tax increases slow the economy as a whole because we pay more, but get less for it than if we spent it ourselves in the private sector.

Government has a role in doing things that the private sector can't handle well:

1. National defense
2. Making the rules - Government is needed to set the rules of the economic game and personal behavior, so we can all compete on a level playing field.
3. Roads, utilities, and infrastructure that benefit everyone, but where its difficult for private entities to come up with a universal system without a lot of duplication of facilities.

Conservatives prefer government stick to a minimal role.

Government has become involved in schools over time. We might all be better off if it became uninvolved. Yes, you would have to pay for schools, but you would have a lot more money available to pay for it because the tax burden would be less.

As for health and elder care, should the government do it? Or should the government just make rules for the private sector to make it possible for people to handle it as they see fit? Recall that some 70% of the current Federal budget goes to Social Security, medicare, and welfare. Are giant bureaucracies the most effective and cost efficient way to handle these things? Is there perhaps a better way?

Excessively High Taxes are one of the Ten Planks of Communism. It diametrically opposes Democracy and free trade among average citizens. Taxes were Never to exceed 2-3% of your Total Income!