A fair way to tax people in the future

Discussion in 'Politics' started by Matthew, Aug 25, 2011.

  1. Matthew
    Offline

    Matthew Blue dog all the way!

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    49,694
    Thanks Received:
    4,596
    Trophy Points:
    1,885
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Ratings:
    +15,163
    I was thinking through a idea of reforming our tax system into a system that is within the 21st century instead of the 18th-19th century as we have now. Our system right now is rigid and one side isn't going to lay down and allow another side to tax them for something that they feel is wrong.

    As a first world civilization we "must" care for our disabled and people that can't, but marxism is unsustainable as it takes from the rich to transfer to the poor. They have to work hard for there money and under force of law(the force of the government) are expected to pay there hard earned money for ssi, ssd, medicare, obamacare, ect. I can see why they hate it and why the very idea fails in so many levels. It fails as if to much of society takes advantage of such----> the society breaks down as nothing could ever get done, so throughout history regimes from Mao, Stalin, Lenin, Po pot, Castro, ect have used force to make people work and to keep a unsustainable system working.

    This can be fixed with changing our tax system from the 15-19th century to that of one of the 21st century...What do I mean; well during those times we had to keep track of our taxes on books of paper, which means we had to make the system "rigid"--- one tax for all people living within the nation. This forces all to pay for things they might hate, but today is the 21st fucking century...We have computers that can think through billions of pieces of data per minute. With such a system we now could easily give the tax payer the choice where they wish to provide there hard earned money to go towards...For you that say that somethings like Defense, road construction, ect, are a necessary part of society, then we can set a constant like 25%( how much of the taxes that needs to go towards those important society running "things"), but then we could have 50-75% of your tax monies that you can choose where you wish it to go; went it to go towards helping the disabled or poor, check. YOU GOT IT. Went the rest of it to go towards the military or the vents, check you got it.

    This would give people the choice to give where they wish it to go-- through there beliefs and idea's in the world.

    We could help the people that need the most help within our society and the people that wish to help them could do just that. People that wish to fund our military more could do that.

    Of course you will still have those that can do and chose not to, but the people that wish to help them---> have the choice to do so. Or maybe we should have a requirement that they can't function within a job and are truly disabled or at least a solid period that is expected to get onto the system where they have to work. Like the current unemployment system today.

    The right might be saying, wow lazy bastards, but the truth is they're American and they're not caring what you have to say as it is. Also the people now have the choice to give there tax money towards such. A change within the tax structure or even constitution can make it against the law to make this a constant as discussed above.

    Why not? We live within the 21st system with computer power that can handle it and will only get faster and better as time goes by. Lets move into the 21st, 22nd and onwards with a system that shows that we care about our disabled, while not sliding into Marxism that forces people to do things against there will. We can discuse the laws that can work towards getting the cans not to be lazy too...We got to think of human nature to.:eusa_whistle:

    What do you think?
     
  2. Lakhota
    Offline

    Lakhota Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Jul 14, 2011
    Messages:
    47,700
    Thanks Received:
    4,706
    Trophy Points:
    1,855
    Location:
    Native America
    Ratings:
    +15,978
    Huh...?
     
  3. Matthew
    Offline

    Matthew Blue dog all the way!

    Joined:
    Mar 16, 2010
    Messages:
    49,694
    Thanks Received:
    4,596
    Trophy Points:
    1,885
    Location:
    Portland Oregon
    Ratings:
    +15,163
    Wouldn't you went after paying taxes for the necessaries of society to be able to put some of your tax monies towards what you wish it to go. marxism doesn't work and this is a way to avoid it, and to still believe in what you believe. A way around Marxism.
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2011
  4. gslack
    Offline

    gslack Senior Member

    Joined:
    Mar 26, 2010
    Messages:
    4,527
    Thanks Received:
    346
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +346
    We already do... Even sales tax goes where its needed (or supposed to) in the allotted area its designed to. If a dime of your tax goes to something you dislike its offset by other taxes going to something you may like or use.

    Under Marxism (according to theory) There is no private ownership. All property is property of the state, therefore there is no "rich" to penalize.. In theory... The reality is a system like that develops a vacuum which inhibits growth and causes the economy and society to stagnate. In that vacuum a new class structure forms where the political and bureaucratic form an elite group of the "haves" and the rest of the society becomes the "have nots". These "haves" do not pay more or most likely not at all for their benefits as a duty to them for their public service (much like we have here).

    Given the fact the system is closed to a select few and very few new opportunities exist for the "have nots" to advance and become one of the "haves", the economy will wither and die.

    Marxism and all of its flavors, are fundamentally flawed in it does not account for humanity to be human and act as humans do currently. Just a few thousand years ago we were still clubbing mates and taking them to our caves. Our needs were simple. We had to eat, drink, procreate, and have shelter. We are not yet so far from those cave dwellers that we can and will do and act according to whats best for each and every one of us as a whole. We still covet, we still steal, we still lie, we still cheat, and we still like shiny things. Until we are no longer like those cavemen, Marxism will fail.

    Whether the books be kept on paper or on a disk drive, there is still the books. Employing super computers to willy nilly take this money and put it there and that goes there, to appease a conscientious objector or a person who wants to feed the poor, on the scale of 100's of millions of people involving numbers in the multi-billions is a logistics nightmare, and thats not even taking corporations or companies into consideration.

    I'm sorry but this has just turned into some kind of Utopian fantasy... YOUR tax dollar once its goes out no longer exists. You cannot follow "matts tax dollar" because matts tax dollar is gone in the sense it no longer belongs to matt, is in matts possession or represents some of matts capital. Once paid to the government (IRS) it now exists as tax revenue. That goes to whatever its assigned to arbitrarily of the feelings of the payer (matt), his feelings, misgivings, or thoughts on how it should be used on a singular personal level. It is in effect the peoples money in care of our elected and assigned representation. The representation must (in theory) use that money to best provide the services for and protection of the people for which they have been charged. If matt or gslack doesn't like his or her tax dollars going for this or that, than we shouldn't pay the taxes, because once paid they are no longer ours and do not exist in a singular personal level any longer.

    I think its an idea that cannot work... John Adams once said...

    "All the perplexities, confusion and distress in America
    arise not from defects in their Constitution or Confederation,
    nor from want of honor or virtue, so much as downright ignorance
    of the nature of coin, credit, and circulation."
     
    Last edited: Aug 25, 2011

Share This Page