anyways, this is just another route to plutocracy. those paying more taxes will have it go towards things that make them richer. those in government wouldn't even have to pretend they were doing the right thing with tax money. they would just be making policy for those that line their pockets. yes, they already do this, but this would only exacerbate the problem.
Disabled avatars? Did I now? Wasn't intentional, had a frew brews before I posted this one ifuknowhatimsayin . but yes I see this rathe embarassing flaw now, seems like damn near everything just ends up with plutocracy, I did kinda just fart this idea out in a mix of boredome and intoxication, but I think there might be something to it, maybe some way to make something similar work
I think if people were given that chance, they would all go soft and send their money towards the obvious "charitable" causes like feeding the homeless and sending orphans to college or stuff like that, which is nice and all, but they would neglect the other more obscure necessities crucial in keeping the country running. So then you'd have some over-funded areas and other areas that no one cares about would collapse.
Takes more than a kind heart to run a country and I'll trust my tax money to the people who actually know what they're doing, as corrupt as they may be. I may not agree with everything politicians do but I know damn well I couldn't do a better job since everything I know about politics I've heard on the radio.
If people were fully aware of what their money could be possibly going to be, sure. But even so, would a person still have to choose an actual government program? Or could they say: "I only want you to spend this on research regarding if monkeys like chocolate milk and strippers?" to prevent the government from actually using their money, or force the government to do stupid wasteful things long enough to eventually stop taxing you?
If you were asking this of people who understood that the government is the servant, not the master of the people, and thus has to earn its pay like anyone else, you'd probably get some honest answers. Since those people are few and far between on here, you're going to get people more worried about losing their looter benefits.
Yes, the government actually having to earn the money it loots every year would be nice and very economically sound (not to mention that the true functions of government involved in the protection of individual rights are very visibly worth the cost), but unfortunately, people have gotten too used to government bribes to want them ended anytime soon. So yes, it would work, but no, it won't be brought about anytime soon.
That could backfire in a big way considering the poor pay very little in taxes. Things like education and unemployment could end up underfunded if rich people vote only to spend money on defense and prisons.
The best was to get people more involved is the way my town does their budget. Every year they draw up a budget and then have an election to vote on it: yea or nay. If it passes than taxes and debt go up but if nay wins then the previous years budget is used and the government does not increase in size. It is a very good system and it should be used on the national level.