Currently, 50% of Americans pay 96% of the Federal Income Taxes. I would guess that these tax payers receive less in government benefits than others.

Compare the above numbers with 53% of Americans receive some sort of government paid social welfare. This figure includes benefits like welfare, Medicaid, WIC, Financial Aid, housing subsidies, Medicare, Social Security, etc. I would guess that many of these individuals are not in the 50% of Americans paying Federal Income Taxes.

The poor haven’t voted in as large of numbers as other voting blocks in past elections, but certain political parties keep hope alive by promising them a redistribution of wealth. Finally, if you believe the statistics above, you can see that you don’t have to be poor in this country to pay no federal income taxes or receive government benefits.

When is *that* going to happen?? I suspect that we’re no where near it happening right now. Since when do the poor vote in large numbers anyway??

“Get together a bunch of your like-minded friends and vote out the people that are running those unsuccessful programs or ordering that those unsuccessful programs be run. It’s called democracy, and it works.”

Here’s the problem with your statement… Liberals (most democrats and many republicans) are handing out more and more social welfare to those that they are in turn exempting from the income tax rolls. You need to understand that this is one of the ways (along with the tax code) that our current politicians buy votes. As the number of social welfare recipients become larger than the number of income tax payers, it becomes increasingly difficult for the tax payers to have a say in our democracy (republic). Why shouldn’t the welfare recipients keep voting for people that give them something for nothing? The welfare recipients have not vested interest in keeping the social welfare programs cost efficient.

BTW–you’re in for the Libertarians carnival. I’m hosting the next one.

“Justifying the government’s ill use of taxpayers’ money in one area because they spend even more in another is not a valid argument.”

It’s not justifying anything, it’s simply putting it in perspective.

I haven’t gotten to the part where I might share a different point of view of what the purpose of government is, I don’t think.

Well, we’re definitely not getting any of that on the ‘classified’ 45 Billion going to the Defense Department.

Not to beat this issue to death, but what are the others?

However, if we’re talking about actual expenses of supporting and maintaining our military strength, that is one of the fundamental legitimate functions of the federal government, and one of the few truly legitimate purposes for levying federal taxes on the citizens.