Who would voluntarily send extra taxes today to offset Amtrak deficit?

[garr]

Just a little fun on tax day, or as I like to call it, involuntary wage seperation day.

We have all heard of the often proposed Line Item Veto for Presidents. What if instead, a Voluntary Tax Funnel Line was placed on the 1040 Form. Any taxpayer wanting to pay taxes above and beyond what is owed could direct the additional money they pay to their favorite government project, i.e. Amtrak.

Would there be any takers (or givers in this case)?

[Anonymous]

Alright, guys - here's your chance to say whether you'd put your money where your mouth's (or word processors) are . . .

Old Timer

[Anonymous]

A "fine" is a tax for doing something poorly

A "tax" is a fine for doing something well.

[klahm]

With David Gunn or someone equally qualified at the throtrle, count me in. Otherwise, count me out until Amtrak's board is fully populated by full-term, not recess, appointees and it has exhibited committment to reform, not terminate, Amtrak.

[Anonymous]

HA ha ha ha ha.

[Anonymous]

I F I actually thought it would get to Amtrak I might consider it.

However, I am sure this administration would say that I actually wanted it to go to Iraq and it would end up there or Halliburton one.

[jeaton]

Let me try this another way.

Who would be willing to have their federal income tax increased by the same percentage as the percentage of the federal budget that would be given to Amtrak if the full requested grant was provided?

How much would your increase be? Pull out your tax return-Federal Form 1040- and look at Line 63-"Your total tax". Multiply your total tax by .0006.

So your line 63 is $20,000? The Amtrak surcharge for you would be $12.

By the way, a single person with no dependents making a $100,000 a year income all from wages would pay about $20,000 in federal income taxes. I am sure an extra twelve bucks would be a real heavy hit on the life style.

[Anonymous]

Well that 12 dollars went into the gas increases for this week's work period. One car took 42 dollars where it usually takes 34 and the other car took 36 where it usually takes 28 so actually I am negative a few dollars compared to last month's gas rates.

No worries, a little over time here and there will compenstate.

Ask me again in two weeks for the 12 dollars after one of my debts was retired and no longer loads my budget.

[PNWRMNM]

Not me.

Mac

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by TheAntiGates

A "fine" is a tax for doing something poorly

A "tax" is a fine for doing something well.

So where does a "fee" fall in? A charge on mediocrity perhaps? lol

How about taking that $12 per person and taking it from some bogus expenditure in the current federal budget.

[spbed]

Not me just like our space program Amtrak is dinosaur & the saved money by cancelling those programs could be used to assist others that may need assistance then wasting on bygone programs like space & Amtrak.[:)]

QUOTE: Originally posted by garr

Just a little fun on tax day, or as I like to call it, involuntary wage seperation day.

We have all heard of the often proposed Line Item Veto for Presidents. What if instead, a Voluntary Tax Funnel Line was placed on the 1040 Form. Any taxpayer wanting to pay taxes above and beyond what is owed could direct the additional money they pay to their favorite government project, i.e. Amtrak.

Would there be any takers (or givers in this case)?

[Anonymous]

"Beeer... flowing through the estate!!" [8D]

How 'bout sending the $12 directly to Amtrak, or buying an Amtrak ticket, or buying an Amtrak ticket for someone who needs to travel?

[wallyworld]

The question has an underlying assumption that the taxes currently collected are allocated in a reasonable manner in the federal budget specifically toward transportation funding. I think not. I would not pay it. Same old story-too much waste- too many lobbying grafters-you know the roll call-Ill spare all the retread of issues

[CANADIANPACIFIC2816]

It's a nice idea, but I would not trust the Federal Government with your tax money.........especially the liberal, leftist, communist democrats who are in congress now.

CANADIANPACIFIC2816

[AntonioFP45]

Amazing......no insult to the poster but this thread is unrealistic.

Amtrak's subsidy? We're complaining about a paltry drop in the bucket!

What Amtrak uses in a year......my town's municipal government blows away in controversial art exhibits, repairing brand new government buildings with low quality construction work, and purchasing a fleet of huge gas-sucking SUV's so that one, possibly 2 city officials can "get around" to important meetings.

Last I checked this sounds like a lot of town's in the U.S.

The "potential" tax revenue lost from the Enron scandal was greater than the amount of funding Amtrak received in a 20 year period.

SPBed, no disrespect to you.......but I've used Amtrak, it was more comfortable than any airplane or bus I've been in, and the train(s) were packed.

If we're complaining about Amtrak's subsidy, then why isn't anyone complaining about the millions our government funding the complete upgrading of Iraq's railroad? It's no secret.

Let's see.......kill Amtrak and some of you will celebrate. Then that money could be diverted to a really worthwhile project......like Alaska's great highway to nowhere.

Very good.

[garr]

AntonioFP45 and Jeaton,

If the taxpayer directed money could truly be funneled to the appropriate government program, then no one could complain. Those wanting Amtrak could back it with their contribution to the Federal government (along with their recurring ticket purchases). Those not wanting to spend their hard earned money (be it $5 or $500) on Amtrak could just send in the mandated amount on the tax tables.

Deficit spending comes not from one large purchase, but a series of smaller purchases be it government or individuals. Breaking the Amtrak deficit down to $5 per person, the highway to nowhere down to $X per person, the new Medicare or Medicaid Drug program down to $XXX.xx per person, etc. is what causes the massive deficits.

Breaking the combined large number down to small increments makes one believe that something is affordable when it truly is not.

Jay

[CNW 6000]

If you want money to go to AMTRAK...make an anonymous donation!

[Anonymous]

Giving the government ANY form of a raise, after the way they have screwed things up royally, and showing no remorse whatsoever, would be an even bigger joke than giving *** Cheney a new gun for his birthday...

Let them peel some of the money overpaid to Haliburton on no bid projects away, combine it with the money we flush down the drain to Israel, and we could build bullet trains from coast to coast.

Not one more thin dime from me to those jokers.

If they wanna raise, let them get a second job.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by CANADIANPACIFIC2816

It's a nice idea, but I would not trust the Federal Government with your tax money.........especially the liberal, leftist, communist democrats who are in congress now.

CANADIANPACIFIC2816

Better recheck your thinking here. We have a republican president and a republican controlled house and senate. But I guess you could call them liberal, leftist, communist republicans who are in congress now.

[vsmith]

QUOTE: Originally posted by jhhtrainsplanes

QUOTE: Originally posted by CANADIANPACIFIC2816

It's a nice idea, but I would not trust the Federal Government with your tax money.........especially the liberal, leftist, communist democrats who are in congress now.

CANADIANPACIFIC2816

Better recheck your thinking here. We have a republican president and a republican controlled house and senate. But I guess you could call them liberal, leftist, communist republicans who are in congress now.

Jim, Isnt it funny how our government always spends like a drunken sailor when the red states are in power? [V]

[jchnhtfd]

vsmith -- you took the sentence on too long: 'Isnt it funny how our government always spends like a drunken sailor ?' ANY government will do this. It doesn't matter what level it is, from town to nation, or even what nation it is, nor who's in power. It's the nature of the beast. A little trip through history will show you this.

The number of instances in history where a government has reduced expenditures is vanishingly small; reassigned funds from one project to another, yes. Cut overall spending, No.

To go back to the original question, would I check off a box to increase the funding for Amtrak? Yes, if it were like the other check boxes on the IRS forms. Otherwise, no; not because I don't support Amtrak, but because a) I don't trust the feds to properly collect and account for the money and b) I don't trust the folks on the board of Amtrak to be able to figure out what to do with the money. So I put my extra cash into BNSF, CN, and NS.

[JoeKoh]

the goverment already has the $$$ for amtrak if they would take it from the other super pork projects.
stay safe
Joe

[edbenton]

Over 250+ billion a year in extra war spending yet we can not get 2 billion a year to properly fund a passenger rail system. That tells were the priorities of this goverment are. We have a president with teh biggest warhawk of a VP in the history of america running the show. Remember Cheney was Bush 1 Secratary of Defense. Now he is second in charge and he wanted to get rid of the man who made him and his boss look like a fool. I for one can not wait til 08 and we will be able to get rid of Both of them. I hope Hillary runs in 0-8 give me 8 more years of Clinton any time over this one. Plus we will not have to worry about Hillary involved in a sex scandal.

[Paul Milenkovic]

I would gladly pay more in tax to support things such as Amtrak to the extent that there is a quantifiable public benefit that cannot be readily collected from fares and the like.

On the other hand, I bristle at the argument that 1) we spent 250 billion in Iraq and cannot spend $2 billion (extra over same time period) on Amtrak, or 2) we spend x-billion on Nasa in Tom Delay's district and we can't get decent Amtrak funding, or 3) we are giving massive tax cuts to the rich but not one dime for Amtrak, or 4) that blankety-blank Mineta and Bush are all to blame.

There is a lot of frustration in the passenger-rail advocacy community that people won't listen to us and won't properly fund Amtrak. But the "we are only asking for a pittance of tax money and look at all of the other money flung around" didn't persuade enough people back in 1971, and it isn't bringing enough people on board now. President Bush and Secretary Mineta are not on our side on rail, but Amtrak has been whittled down by all manners of President since 1971.

The War in Iraq will have to stand on its own merits, and history and the voters will be the ultimate judges on that. What we are supposed to be getting from the war is national security, and yes, access to oil is a big part of national security. Perhaps money and more importantly lives are being wasted when we could become more energy independent instead. But the numbers on energy usage indicate that Amtrak is marginally better than air, about the same as intercity travel in a reasonably fuel-efficient car. Tell me some different numbers -- what amount of money could be put into Amtrak, and tell me what percentage of our overall oil consumption could that save?

As far as Senator Clinton, I am sure she would make a fine President as would a number of other people, but last I heard she is positioning herself as a hawk on Iraq -- her critique of the President is that he made mistakes in execution. Some may say Senator Clinton is pandering to red-state voters or trying to triangulate between pro-war and anti-war factions, but that is what are politicians are supposed to do in a republic -- lead from principle but temper their positions by the will of the voters.

[Jetrock]

It seems very, very odd that other countries on this planet don't seem to have a problem with funding rail transit systems--like, say, pretty much ALL OF THEM, but in the United States it is somehow heresy to suggest that the taxpayers pay for something that taxpayers throughout the rest of the world pay for. I don't trust the government to handle my funds, but then, I don't trust private industry with my funds either.

I do give money to Amtrak--when I ride Amtrak.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by JoeKoh

the goverment already has the $$$ for amtrak if they would take it from the other super pork projects.
stay safe
Joe

[#ditto][#ditto][#ditto][#ditto][#ditto]

Exaclty, right on!!

The money isn't the problem, it's our sense of priority that is screwed up..

Even if we agreed to raise taxes for Amtrak, the weasels would just find a way to siphon it off to put more foreigners on welfare.

[Anonymous]

QUOTE: Originally posted by edbenton

Plus we will not have to worry about Hillary involved in a sex scandal.

Heh, really believe that huh? Don't you recall all the tabloid gossip from clinton's first 4 years about Hillary having alt/preferences?

[sanvtoman]

Amtrak should be concentrated on a few core routes.I think most other countries support their passenger service.The U S should do the same on a few routes.There is very little money to be made otherwise Amtrak would not have been created.The freight railroads would have kept passenger service.

[DaveBr]

OK<Since I travel Amtrak a couple times a year ,My neice who is in Chicago called
and said She could'nt make it till June.I bought my ticket 2 months ago,so now I have to
donate $140.00 extra because of time .How is that for a donation?? DaveBr,

[Anonymous]

Or maybe have a 2 Cent a Gallon Gas Tax for Railroad Improvements and Amtrak. A 1 Cent Excuivslvey for Amtrak would get about $1.85 Billion.