Taxes should be Significantly Cut

Point 1: Well it's impossible to have no taxes unless you want no Government (I'm not an Anarchist or extreme Libertarian). "On average, the wealthiest people in America pay a lot more taxes than the middle class or the poor, according to private and government data."" The 10% of households with the highest incomes pay more than half of all federal taxes. They pay more than 70% of federal income taxes, according to the Congressional Budget Office.": http://www.usatoday.com.... "Data compiled by the nonpartisan Tax Policy Center show households pulling in more than $1 million pay about 29.1 percent of their income in federal taxes. By contrast, households making between $50,000 and $75,000 pay about 15 percent.": http://www.foxnews.com.... The supposed "rich tax loopholes" are just made up by people like you just wanting a free slice of the pie. Besides the Middle East and a few parts of Africa, almost all countries have a double digit taxes as a percentage of GDP ratio. Zimbabwe has a 49.3% tax rate-GDP ratio. Lesotho has a 42.9% tax rate-GDP ratio.:http://en.wikipedia.org.... Having a high percentage is also bad. These tax rates are common. The higher taxation rate arguments is again bombed by the fact that these tax rates are common. Almost all of Europe has over 25% tax rate-GDP ratios. And they are tumbling into disaster. And it's the fact they use the high revenue in taxes to have health care, other welfare programs, cleaner environment, and infrastructure that they are in that mess. "Universal coverage does not mean universal care, as it will lead to rationing of care, either overt or via extended waits for care. Universal coverage would result in the government running the health care system making it worse than it is today - because the government can't do anything right. Competition is what made this country great, and universal coverage is anti-competitive as the government is involved. Even though every other industrialized country has some form of universal coverage, many are looking to add market mechanisms to their plans. This shows universal coverage doesn't work.Health care is not a right; if we are guaranteeing health care why not guarantee food, clothing, housing...": http://www.joepaduda.com.... With the environment, it is not as bad as the Government says it is and the Government is overstepping boudaries. And infrastructure works better under a competitive environment. Implemented immediately. Expansion increases jobs. There is no other way. Point 5: The Constitution also says that Government overstepping its bounds (tyranny) is unconstitutional. Providing a bill like that is overstepping Governmental bounds. Government Social Security is an unconstitutional way of providing welfare. Point 6: If the lower and middle classes don't WANT to save, why force them? If they are dumb enough with finances, why make sure that the Government provides it to them free of charge and at a cost to the Government? The whole thing is unconstitutional because it makes the Government to big (read the Constitution) and just raises the Government debt. Point 7: Again, why make the poor pay it? This is just a "just-in-case" tax in case they run a deficit and need to balance. If the Government spends too much, they should face the consequences. Point 8: Why do it through the property tax? Why not some other tax? Why charge agriculture for education? Surely there must be better taxes for this. And if this is all you are proposing is necessary for the tax… Point 9: Again, most excise taxes are on addictive substances. They cannot stop taking the substance because they are addicted to it. It does not lower use because nothing can lower use except internally. Point 10: The competitive increase from the corporate tax decrease would be a great thing because that would increase quality and reduce price, thus helping the economy. And again, given free money, businesses will expand. That is the good thing about greed. It never ends. They will always want more. And with more comes more jobs. Businesses handed profits would not in their right mind not grow because they are essentially losing money. They will expand when given the opportunity. Point 11: Renewable energy sources are good when they are one, used in the right places (they cannot be used everywhere), and two, be managed properly and be kept out of by the Government (which means no carbon or gasoline tax, but also includes Government interference in the Renewable energy business). But you can also reduce dependence on foreign oil by drilling at home. Right now, renewable energy sources are just too expensive. If we drill at home, gas prices will plummet, and we will live in a stabler economy. We should wait to use renewable energy until it become practical to do so. Completely jumping in would be totally wasteful (but a little bit is good). Point 12: We need to cut all that is unnecessary to save the Country from disaster. That will mean making some hard sacrifices including the complete repeal of welfare. VOTERS: The Computer cut out half of my argument and I do not feel like re-making it. Please vote for my opponent. CONTRA: Thank you for accepting the debate and debating through. Thanks for a through and intelligent debate. I hope you will except a re-challenge on this same topic later once I get out of my many debates and get to feeling better. Enjoy the win.