Because tax is necessary for the economy.
... to be defined by any reasonable person as dystopic, yes.
Topic: why do people agree to pay taxes? - page 125. (Read 51023 times)
... to be defined by any reasonable person as dystopic, yes.
Because tax is necessary for the economy.
False.
If the State surpluses were returned to the people in the form of refunds or tax/charges for service fees/assessments/etc. reductions, it would create the greatest economic expansion in the history of the U.S.A. and probably the entire world.
If your neighbor steals $2,000 from you, you get all excited, want immediate justice. Yes, "Throw the b_____d in jail." However, whenever State governments steal $2,000 from you, you say nothing. I guess it is no fun to talk about the stealing by governments at the water cooler. It takes too much "thinking".
If you rush to your representative to ask them about the surpluses, do you really believe that he/she are going to tell you that there are surpluses? If you do, you live in a dream world. It would be political suicide to say, "Yes, we have excess funds that we are not using."
The composite totals of investment assets held internationally by USA government is staggering. Between local and Federal government, the total of liquid investment assets held Internationally as of 1998 was a conservative sixty (60) Trillion dollars. Come the year 2007 the collective totals topped a conservative (110) Trillion dollars.
"GROSS" INCOME of government is now 1/3rd "TAX" income and 2/3rds NON-TAX income derived from: return on INVESTMENTS and money generated from government Enterprise projects.
The Blackout of the mention of the CAFR and government’s collective investment wealth held is still firmly in place. The public continuously is masterfully entertained into distraction and the beat goes on for the government inside players as they perpetuate their next wealth transfer plan to build and perpetuate their own financial empires.
Do you know how many trillions of dollars YOUR Local and Federal Government has invested with Mexico, China, the old Soviet block countries? Investments held in foreign currency? Government investments that greatly profit from that cheap labor abroad and a lower dollar.
Investments that profit even more when the dollar drops in value due to foreign currency exchange rates?
THEY SAY THIS IS A COUNTRY OF LAWS, WELL, WHEN THE LAW ITSELF IS LAWLESS BY APPLICATION AND WHEN THE INTENT OF THE LAW IS FOR EXTORTION OF WEALTH OR REPRISAL OVER PROTECTION OF THE PEOPLE, THEN THE LETTER OF THE LAW ITSELF BECOMES MUTE AND THE APPLICATION THEREOF A CRIME IN ITSELF TO BE REPUDIATED.
Sources: http://cafr1.com/
http://web.archive.org/web/20040708041151/http://www.cafrman.com/
http://cafr1.com/STATES/1KLATT1999-Read.pdf
Because tax is necessary for the economy.
why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
What you say is true, except that you wouldn't have solved anything because after you overthrow the government, given enough time, a mini government will emerge from within your group of rebels/do-gooders. It is inevitable. No man is an island, remember?
How would you pave the roads or build school or build hospitals genius?
Oh, yeah, a community effort... where everyone pitches what they can... oh wait a minute... Joe has a bigger farm than me, ...
Oh, yeah, a community effort... where everyone pitches what they can... oh wait a minute... Joe has a bigger farm than me, ...
Wait. So roads, schools, and hospitals can only fathomably be created through a community effort but farms can be created and owned privately? What is it that makes the provision of food fundamentally different from the provision of transport, education, and health care.
Private schools and private hospitals, like private roads, could exist without government intervention. The problem is these schools and hospitals would only cater to the moneyed elite, as they have always done in the past. Creating an angry, unsightly, and violence-prone class.
The reason we have public schools and public healthcare in most of the civilized world is not because of some misguided egalitarian need to help the poor, but because the poor have become unmanageable in early 20th century--giving us inconveniences such as Russian Communism and German National Socialism.
TL;DR: Yes, private industry can and does build roads, hospitals, and schools. Obama does not go out building with his family in tow, singing "I been ballin' a shiny black steel jack-hammer/Been chippin' up rocks for the great highway." No, governments don't build roads in US--private industry does that.
What governments do is collect the money & pay private industry.
why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
What you say is true, except that you wouldn't have solved anything because after you overthrow the government, given enough time, a mini government will emerge from within your group of rebels/do-gooders. It is inevitable. No man is an island, remember?
How would you pave the roads or build school or build hospitals genius?
Oh, yeah, a community effort... where everyone pitches what they can... oh wait a minute... Joe has a bigger farm than me, ...
Oh, yeah, a community effort... where everyone pitches what they can... oh wait a minute... Joe has a bigger farm than me, ...
Wait. So roads, schools, and hospitals can only fathomably be created through a community effort but farms can be created and owned privately? What is it that makes the provision of food fundamentally different from the provision of transport, education, and health care.
If your argument was true, every person would then say " Of course we need taxes, but keep people who earn as much as me out of the tax net".
Yep. Suppose we're in the US and the median personal income is 40 000 USD/year. Enter a politician which promises to tax the hell out of everyone with a personal income greater than 50 000 USD/year so that everyone else can enjoy free government. We put this new policy to a vote. 56% of votes are for the policy with 44% against. Great, now we have a new law passed in truly democratic fashion which allows the majority of people to live tax free with plenty of free government services.
If your argument was true, every person would then say " Of course we need taxes, but keep people who earn as much as me out of the tax net".
Well. Isn't that what most people argue :-) ?
Isn't there a huge lobbying effort to get tax cuts for "your" club, while having others pay them ?
why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
I think that the main incentive for people not only to be willing to pay taxes, but to demand from the gouvernment to raise taxes, is the pleasure and joy modest people have from the knowledge that rich people have to give up part of their wealth. The power of jealousy and the joy it brings to see richer people having to give up on their wealth (partly) is easily paid for by one's own taxes.
I think a lot of people are willing to give up 10% more of their income, if they know that rich people will suffer from that.
I doubt if people are happy to give up a portion of their income, just because the rich may have to pay more.
Every time a person migrates from a lower slab to a higher slab, the feeling of being burdened by taxes would increase a lot. Then a person may look at poorer people in his neighbourhood, who pay no taxes, and feel jealous.
If your argument was true, every person would then say " Of course we need taxes, but keep people who earn as much as me out of the tax net".
why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
I think that the main incentive for people not only to be willing to pay taxes, but to demand from the gouvernment to raise taxes, is the pleasure and joy modest people have from the knowledge that rich people have to give up part of their wealth. The power of jealousy and the joy it brings to see richer people having to give up on their wealth (partly) is easily paid for by one's own taxes.
I think a lot of people are willing to give up 10% more of their income, if they know that rich people will suffer from that.
why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
How would you pave the roads or build school or build hospitals genius?
Oh, yeah, a community effort... where everyone pitches what they can... oh wait a minute... Joe has a bigger farm than me, maybe he can pitch a little more... oh but wait, he makes great produce and his volume keeps the vegetables affordable..ok, well, lets come up with a table where we everyone is placed into categories of how much they can pitch in based on what they make... and let's name our trusted, smart, Yale graduate as the keeper of this log..... Fucking bingo... taxes and some form of government...
Or everyone can just go fuck themselves...
For shredding/burning/disappearing if they're from big birds, sure.
Quote
The problem is that people who care about rights and understand how things work are usually too busy leading productive lives and being good citizens. The people who have time to do what you suggest enjoy using government force to make up for their laziness and lack of ambition.
Well, this don't have to be that way.
Say every citizen vote on a screen Candidate A, B, and C.
After the vote, they get back an id called "proof of vote".
With such id the citizen can check in the blockchain that his vote is taken into account, without revealing to others.
If the citizen is too lazy to check by himself in the blockchain he can trust other services that do so on his behalf.
Such ID can even include clues about the location of the voter so we can get accurate aggregate of vote by state/region/city.
The citizen does not have to know about the plumbing. Just to trust that the majority of people don't want to cheat the vote, and if they do, then why would they cheat since they are the majority ? (As contrary to now, where one well connected politician is enough to cheat the vote)
There are reasons why voting is done in private, and why it is impossible to carry proof of a specific vote away. Whatever one hopes to gain with "verifiable voting" isn't worth giving that up.
Paper ballots are a better solution all around.
Every single government does engage in human rights violations, and then immunizes itself via the law and/or kangaroo courts, in bad faith. Every "democracy" on earth refuses to conduct E2EE verifiable elections, which ensures the worst possible evil (that counts the votes, pays the judges and enforcers) cannot be defeated.
Stop rejecting reality and substituting your own utopia.
Engaging in "verifiable" elections would likely result in many people not being able to vote as the process would be much too complicated. You need to remember that everyone has the right to vote not just the people who are educated or who are smart enough how to figure out the process.Stop rejecting reality and substituting your own utopia.
I don't disagree, but at the same time, if you are too lazy to put in a little effort to figure out the voting process (assuming it's not unreasonably hard), then you probably aren't willing to put in the work to make informed decisions.
It's amazing that people will complain about the most minor inconveniences for voting and then put someone who makes a mistake in complying with their outrageously complicated tax obligations in jail.
I have figured out the voting process: 1 you vote 2 nothing happens.
Nothing happens? In 2008 voters managed to trample quite a few of my rights... I'd say it's an impressive accomplishment personally.
Quote
The problem is that people who care about rights and understand how things work are usually too busy leading productive lives and being good citizens. The people who have time to do what you suggest enjoy using government force to make up for their laziness and lack of ambition.
Well, this don't have to be that way.
Say every citizen vote on a screen Candidate A, B, and C.
After the vote, they get back an id called "proof of vote".
With such id the citizen can check in the blockchain that his vote is taken into account, without revealing to others.
If the citizen is too lazy to check by himself in the blockchain he can trust other services that do so on his behalf.
Such ID can even include clues about the location of the voter so we can get accurate aggregate of vote by state/region/city.
The citizen does not have to know about the plumbing. Just to trust that the majority of people don't want to cheat the vote, and if they do, then why would they cheat since they are the majority ? (As contrary to now, where one well connected politician is enough to cheat the vote)
Every single government does engage in human rights violations, and then immunizes itself via the law and/or kangaroo courts, in bad faith. Every "democracy" on earth refuses to conduct E2EE verifiable elections, which ensures the worst possible evil (that counts the votes, pays the judges and enforcers) cannot be defeated.
Stop rejecting reality and substituting your own utopia.
Engaging in "verifiable" elections would likely result in many people not being able to vote as the process would be much too complicated. You need to remember that everyone has the right to vote not just the people who are educated or who are smart enough how to figure out the process.Stop rejecting reality and substituting your own utopia.
I don't disagree, but at the same time, if you are too lazy to put in a little effort to figure out the voting process (assuming it's not unreasonably hard), then you probably aren't willing to put in the work to make informed decisions.
It's amazing that people will complain about the most minor inconveniences for voting and then put someone who makes a mistake in complying with their outrageously complicated tax obligations in jail.
I have figured out the voting process: 1 you vote 2 nothing happens.
Every single government does engage in human rights violations, and then immunizes itself via the law and/or kangaroo courts, in bad faith. Every "democracy" on earth refuses to conduct E2EE verifiable elections, which ensures the worst possible evil (that counts the votes, pays the judges and enforcers) cannot be defeated.
Stop rejecting reality and substituting your own utopia.
Engaging in "verifiable" elections would likely result in many people not being able to vote as the process would be much too complicated. You need to remember that everyone has the right to vote not just the people who are educated or who are smart enough how to figure out the process.Stop rejecting reality and substituting your own utopia.
I don't disagree, but at the same time, if you are too lazy to put in a little effort to figure out the voting process (assuming it's not unreasonably hard), then you probably aren't willing to put in the work to make informed decisions.
It's amazing that people will complain about the most minor inconveniences for voting and then put someone who makes a mistake in complying with their outrageously complicated tax obligations in jail.
why is it ok for a group of people calling themselves the government to force everyone to buy their services?
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
if enough armed people refused to pay and told the government to go fuck itself there is nothing they could do.
The problem is that people who care about rights and understand how things work are usually too busy leading productive lives and being good citizens. The people who have time to do what you suggest enjoy using government force to make up for their laziness and lack of ambition.
...I currently believe that, in such a world, life would be significantly better than it is now...
And such a world has never existed* because?
*Though Soviet Union & some forms of dictatorship don't technically have taxation, let's not get hung up on such technicalities, k?
It is really more about the rule of law and what is good for society as a whole. When the government imposes taxes on it's citizens, it is effectively forcing them to pay for things that is good for society as a whole.
How can we know when a thing is "good for society as a whole"?
Just try to speculate what would happen if that thing did not exist.
What would happen if there were no taxes and hence no roads were built, no police force was around, etc..
I have tried, and I've studied the writings of others that have tried. I currently believe that, in such a world, life would be significantly better than it is now. I reject the assumption implicit in your "and hence".
Jump to: