The chief architect of a bill to increase taxes to pay for the Afghanistan war said he didn't believe adding troops would yield much benefit.
"The problem is you can have the best policy in the world but if you don't have the tools to implement it it isn't worth a bean bag,"Rep. David Obey (D-Wisc.), the House Appropriations Committee chairman, told CNN on Sunday.
President Barack Obama is expected to announce on Tuesday he will add 30,000 troops to the war effort in Afghanistan to stem the rise of Taliban and to pursue al-Qaeda. But Obey said supporting a corrupt Afghan government by adding troops amounted to a "fool's errand."
If policymakers believe continuing the war effort in Afghanistan was an important public policy, Obey added, then they should be willing to pay for it by raising taxes on higher income levels.
The war would likely cost as much over the next decade as the effort to reforming the healthcare system, Obey said. "If we're being told we have to pay for healthcare we certainly pay for this effort as well," Obey said.
Otherwise, Congress would eventually have to raid other parts of the budget targeted at education or the economy to fund the war effort. Using deficit spending to pay for the operations has also removed most Americans from any burden in the war effort. "In this war, we have not had any sense of shared sacrifice," Obey said.
Obey's bill would increase taxes by 1 percent on incomes over $150,000. Tax rates would increase further at higher income levels. The financial cost of sending more troops to Afghanistan was a central theme on Sunday talk shows.
Earlier on CNN's "State of the Union," Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.), the ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said a surtax should be part of the debate about how to pay for the war. "We're going to have to have a serious talk about budget and about the $1 trillion deficit we are in now and will continue to be in," Lugar said.
But his colleague, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.), told ABC's "This Week" that Congress should cut spending to pay for the additional troops.
28 comments:
Either it's going to be a voluntary, "Everyone donate money for the war effort," or involuntary TAX. Either way--the troops need money.
I agree with Obey when he says that if we plan on sending more troops, we're going to have to pay the price. Simple as that.
Sooner or later money to finance this war is going to have to come from somewhere, and where ever the tax comes from someone is going to be upset. So it is just better to find a relatively low impact tax now instead of always pushing the debt off. Really a 1% tax increase on a minority of the population is not going to cause economic loss, but it will offset our current military debt.
The U.S. knows what there doing and know what they need in order to find peace in our country. And in order to be able able to send these troops the government needs money. The way you raise money is by taxing the American people. The war has to end sooner or later, im just glad that its over there and not here in the U.S.
it is very true that you can have the best policy in the world but if you don't have the tools to implement it it isn't worth a bean bag. U.S. has the tools and everything we need for the war but adding troops and using forec will not slove probblems from the roots. and by the same time we are spending another uncounterbale amount of fundings on the wars that seems never ends up. Maybe this funding could be used in health bill and that could make the public fell better
In the first place, I don't understand why everyone feels it's ok to tax the "rich" people more. It's really not their fault that they are making more money than some of the citizens of the U.S. They actually cared for their future and decided to get an education and to stay in school...what's wrong with that? It's interesting how the government officials find it a punishment to make $150000 or more.
Obey proves a very good issue here on sending the 30,000 added troops to the war effort. Really though, how is this going to be all paid for? It does strike me as yes this could put America in another fix and that more likely us Americans would have to pay for this effort but look here, since Obama has devised a carefully thought out plan in entering Afghanistan and even a plan in the exit of the war I'm VERY sure President Obama already has an effective plan in how to pay for this and what economical procedures must be taken.
Is the the same Obama that the American people voted for last year? Doesn't matter, I'm willing to bet that over half of these people didn't even know Obama's election platform. But what is the deal of escalating a war to end a war? I think he is just too chicken to admit that he's playing a fool's game. But I will give it to him that if I'm surrounded by people from every party and interest group that want different things and want to blow my head off, I'd be a little chicken, too.
I agree with Obey in that we should not send more troops. When we talked about Obama's speech today in class, Mr. Perry asked the question, "what are the troops going to do there?" It really seems to me that there is nothing to do and to spend peoples money on nothing is stupid.
I don't blame politicians for being a little upset about this whole thing. The war we are in is so expensive and so they are showing that there might be a rise in taxes. Sadly, this is a lose-lose situation to me bc whether or not more troops go overseas and/or taxes will increase, the public will not be happy either way.
I think they have a right to be upset. The taxes shouldn't go up. If they don't get what needs to be done in Afganistan then they will have to go back or stay there longer which will cause taxes to go up even more.
I believe that it is a complete waste of time to let the enemy know how long you're going to be in their country. That's like a teacher telling us the answers to a test before we take it. It will solve nothing if we leave in 2011 and then al-queda decides to pop back up. The 1% tax raise will more than certainly upset those who it effects. It sort of discourages success if you get more money taken from you if you make more.
More troops? Por que?!?! More troops equals more funding which in turn is a rise in our taxes! This is so not cool for the people that are already on the edge with this health care reform. By sending troops we are just adding to the fire, and only in the end will America get burned. Obama needs to think really quick about this decision and how it will affect us as people. Of course they say that taxes will increase by one percent but as war time progresses so will the amount of taxes collected from our very pockets. Bad Idea
Obey's bill is clearly designed to further diminish public attitude on the war. While it may appear to be for the war because it provides funding for it, the bill requests another tax hike in order to do so. The People already don't like the war. The Rich People definitely won't appreciate the tax hike. This bill doesn't seem to stand a chance, seeing as Congressmen get elected by funding from the rich. Raising their taxes to pay for a war they already don't support just doesn't seem like a viable option.
In my opinion, sending more troops to Afganistan is not the right thing to do. After 8 years or however long its been, I think its about time to count your losses and pull out. By sending more troops, more money will be sapped out of the pockets of all Americans. When will the troops be sent? Its been 8 years, what's 2 more months at home so they can spend the holidays with their family, or let alone stateside.
There is already a large amount of troops there and nothing is happening so i don't think sending more troops will help anything. But, they are sending more troops and one way or another they have to pay for it all. So they have to raise taxes, how else are they going to pay for these troops.
I personally don't think that the public should be paying and that we shouldn't be sending more troops. However, this both of these events are practically inevitalbe, the money might as well be from taxes. I mean honestly, 1% of the rich's income isn't going to be the end of the world. We can't expect to finance a Healthcare Reform and a War without a little help.
I still don't understand why we're sending more troops into the war if we're trying to end it. I, too, don't see how it will yield much benefit; why should tax payers have to pay for something that won't be beneficial? Well, they're going to do it anyway, but I also don't understand why they would only tax the wealthy. Shouldn't the "shared sacrifice" Obey is talking about be "shared" among all classes? I really hope Obama finds a way to get us out of this war; I'm tired of it.
I believe that it is unfair to increase the taxes of those who make more than $150,000 a year. What have they done to deserve a raise in their taxes when nobody else does? This could even discourage people from striving to better their situation. Why should you get a better education or try for that raise when you'll be taxed more for it. What kind of an incentive is that?
I disagree entirely with Obey and also with his proposed bill. We don't need higher taxes to help support the war. What we do need is MORE TROOPS. Obama's decision to send more troops is a perfectly good idea, because right now our soldiers are being outnumbered by the enemy. In a way, this war is a modern-day War of the Little Big Horn, with the terrorists playing the parts of the Indians. Obey's idea of higher taxes is just going to be unpopular amongst the masses. By sending more troops, Obama is showing that he wants to end the war quickly. I couldn't agree more with him.
Well, there's only so much money to distribute. The government needs to create distinct priorities because if the government taxes people into poverty the money will eventually run out. The administration can only do so much with what they have. If the government believes that Afghanistan needs more troops then some other plan will simply need to sacrifice some money.
I seriously don't think we need to be sending in 30,000 more troops - I thought this war was supposed to be coming to an end? It's been 8 years; we don't need to be continuing it.
& regardless of what happens concerning the taxation & whatnot, people are still gonna be moaning & groaning about it. Not everybody's gonna be happy with it. Might as well just deal with it.
So let me see if I have this right. America is in debt and is having to borrow money from other nations to pay for the war taking place in another country across the globe. The options on the table are send more troops to this country to fight and tax the "rich people" so that we can afford the war as well as the healthcare reform. It seems to me that many of these steps are unnecessary. By sending more troops to Afghanistan, the nation is building up a large demand to our already diminished supply of money. By taxing the "rich people," this small population will become even more dissatisfied with the situation and their dissatisfaction will be reflected in their voting as well as their support for other bills. I'm not saying that what we are doing isn't right, but with options like these it seems to be a lose-lose situation. Congress-people, let's think this one over.
We know that somedaye we're gonna end up paying for the way later on. But i think that increasing the taxes may cause problems for other people, even if its just 1%. Not just because of the money, but just the fact that they are raising tax to send 30,000 troops to afghan. i mean, 1% isnt that much but...if its better for us in the present and future...go for it. =]
The united states is getting into more and more debt. How are we ever going to pay any of this off? and i guess taxing could help, but it shouldn't percent increase they tax shouldn't be a lot. We should keep it at a minimum. no one likes to give up more money than they need when they aren't receiving any in return.
The american people freak out about higher taxes no matter what group the higher taxes are for. They always will freak out about that because they don't like to give up their money. But Obey is right, if the American people expect to stay in wars they should expect to pay higher taxes. It's simple. That's what taxes are there for, to pay for things... like wars.
Obey is correct on the issue of war money. If more troops get sent then of course more money will be needed in order to get the job done.
The war was started with the american people's consent. in years and wars past Americans have sacrificed so much with food rations and women working and entering unknown territories. Yet here we are sending troops into a warzone and what we expect they make their artillery from dirt and water? We need to provide them with the economic backing for them to do their jobs. it will come from some place and if we sent them in to fight for us, why are we gripping with the 1% tax increase?
Wow, Im taken aback by Barack's move to send 30,000 more troops. But to the real issue, what exactly are we fighting in Afghanistan the warrants the deployment of 30,000 more troops? It seems as if our government is forgetting the economical deficit our own country is in the midst of. In the end, the troops will be deployed and we will, eventually, pay for it. Jeez, I sure hope we can at least find some oil over there...
Post a Comment