- Income tax should be percentage proportionate; no breaks above a limit
- Campaigning via Word of Mouth & Charity
- Jobs must stay in the US
Income tax is vital to funding the government, but it needs to be streamlined. Leave sales tax to individual states, but do not make a flat rate for everyone. While the same percentage means, basically, "the more you make the more they take," low income families need the room to breathe, while those who make far more than ever necessary even to live beyond their lifestyles should be willing to give more to help provide the services to those who need them. This is not a Socialist view, but a simple tit-for-tat: a majority of wealthy people make their money as executives in companies where the "little people" do all the legwork.
As for tax breaks, let's look at the word "break." In essence, it implies it is much needed. So, giving tax breaks to a single parent of 3 children makes sense. Giving tax breaks to a small mom-and-pop company makes sense. Tax breaks to multi-million-, if not -billion-dollar corporations? They don't need it.
I have always been a giver. I believe a great deal of good can be done by helping the right charities. Thus, for my campaign, I refuse to accept most donations directly to me. Instead, anyone who wants to support my campaign should donate to a charity in the name of my campaign. I only ask that it be a charity that does not discriminate.
In today's day and age with all the technology we have, it is ludicrous how much money is spent campaigning by most candidates. According to The Washington Post, the following figures are as of June 30 and include sources like PACs:
$600 million by Hillary Clinton
$296.6 million by Donald Trump
$238.4 million by Bernie Sanders
$163.4 million by Ted Cruz
$159.3 million by Jeb Bush
$127.7 million by Marco Rubio
$76 million by Ben Carson
$49.7 million by John Kasich
$39.8 million by Scott Walker
$32.2 million by Chris Christie
$26.3 million by Carly Fiorina
$22.9 million by Rand Paul
$15.4 million by Rick Perry
$11.6 million by Mike Huckabee
$9.8 million by Bobby Jindal
$9 million by Lindsey Graham
$7.2 million by Martin O'Malley
According to the FEC, the following figures are not inclusive of outside sources such as PACs:
$1.4 million for Gary Johnson
$.9 million for Jill Stein
That is well over a billion dollars that could have gone to better sources such as charities, which could in turn have supported the candidates with thanks and good words. With many of these candidates already having had large following on social media, word of mouth would have cost nothing to gain them momentum.
As for me, just a mere few hundred dollars out of my pocket to "test the waters" as the FEC calls it. And that was to promote posts on social media because I didn't already have a following.
So, think about how you may have donated $10 to your candidate's campaign. Not much, right? What if 100,000 people did that? That's a million dollars that could have gone to charity. Cost to support your candidate on social media? Free posts.
Jobs must stay in the US – I have believed this for decades. If a product can be "homegrown," then it should come from the US (w/rare exception). This will help boost our economy.
As a young boy (and yes even now as an adult), I looked at how many toys are made everywhere else. Imagine the explosion of jobs we'd have if that industry alone stopped sending jobs overseas.
Did you know that if you buy flowers from a supermarket, you are supporting Colombia? Yes, all those flowers are transported from Latin America all over. We can and do grow flowers right here!
We would also need to tax companies more heavily for sending jobs and manufacturing elsewhere. Make them want to bring everything back to the States.
And no more allowing foreign companies to buy out American ones.