Your Taxes, Your Beliefs

[eflatminor]

Its almost as if you're trying to describe me as being selfish for thinking about my neighbor. I'm sorry.

No, we're describing you as a tyrant for forcing others to pay for the neighbor that you're thinking about.

Stop thinking about that neighbor and lend a hand, write a check, or offer him a job. Then we wouldn't have to steal from some in order to satisfy your ideas of what's best for others, which may very well conflict with mine.

If you really believe you live in a community...a society, you wouldn't advocate forcible theft. You'd actually step up and give to those causes/people you believe need your assistance without taking from others.

Believe it or not, you really don't know what best for everyone else, but you are free to put YOUR money where you mouth is.

 

[Wake]

What about regulations, Wake? Seeing as regulations are the 4th branch ( illegal ) of Government bypassing the other 3 branches how do suggest we cut it off?

Jeremiah, I have no idea about that. You're talking to a simple man here. Would you please help me to understand that better, lol?

 

[ModerateGOP]

Should taxes be voluntary/eliminated? I don't think so ... but somewhere along the line (really, IMO, the Great Depression/New Deal era), we became okay with giving more of our money to the government in exchange for services/help. That is a good thing at first, but it's gone too far. After it's all said and done, I keep a little less than half of my income, and that's not counting all the sales tax I pay. "Fair share" is great and all, but my "fair share" is over 50%? Doesn't seem right, and I can tell you for a fact that I'd be spending that money, putting it back into the economy, if I could keep it.

 

[ClosedCaption]

Its almost as if you're trying to describe me as being selfish for thinking about my neighbor. I'm sorry.

No, we're describing you as a tyrant for forcing others to pay for the neighbor that you're thinking about.

Stop thinking about that neighbor and lend a hand, write a check, or offer him a job. Then we wouldn't have to steal from some in order to satisfy your ideas of what's best for others, which may very well conflict with mine.

If you really believe you live in a community...a society, you wouldn't advocate forcible theft. You'd actually step up and give to those causes/people you believe need your assistance without taking from others.

Believe it or not, you really don't know what best for everyone else, but you are free to put YOUR money where you mouth is.

I don't force anything buddy. That's part of being in a society. Like I said you can bitch about and day dream about that, unicorns and bubble gum trees but it wont happen. You're welcome to leave all the comforts but no one is lining up to live in the forest by themselves. The beauty of it is...you can do that and no one is stopping you.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Being able to opt out of taxation kind of defeats the purpose of taxation, but I'd certainly be more than ok with that. The only legitimate tax would be a voluntary tax, or, in other words, a donation.

Did you miss where he stated taxes such as road improvements would be shared by all. He didn't mean opt out on all - but rather ones that posed a conflict of interests for the payer.

It is a good idea. Another example why we should probably vote for people out of the phone book ( normal folks ) next election ( 2014) rather than career politicians who work for NGOS and do nothing but rob us blind.

No. Did you miss where I questioned why he makes certain arbitrary exceptions?

 

[eflatminor]

Its almost as if you're trying to describe me as being selfish for thinking about my neighbor. I'm sorry.

No, we're describing you as a tyrant for forcing others to pay for the neighbor that you're thinking about.

Stop thinking about that neighbor and lend a hand, write a check, or offer him a job. Then we wouldn't have to steal from some in order to satisfy your ideas of what's best for others, which may very well conflict with mine.

If you really believe you live in a community...a society, you wouldn't advocate forcible theft. You'd actually step up and give to those causes/people you believe need your assistance without taking from others.

Believe it or not, you really don't know what best for everyone else, but you are free to put YOUR money where you mouth is.

I don't force anything buddy.

Bullshit. Trying not paying those taxes. They'll be FORCED from you.

That's part of being in a society.

Not a free one. There's a reason income tax was outlawed when America was formed. It's not part of a free society.

Like I said you can bitch about and day dream about that, unicorns and bubble gum trees but it wont happen. You're welcome to leave all the comforts but no one is lining up to live in the forest by themselves. The beauty of it is...you can do that and no one is stopping you.

Right back at ya.

 

[jwoodie]

Taxes are , by definition, mandatory; otherwise, they would be voluntary contributions. That being said, the multiplicity of taxes (and "fees") we pay are designed to hide the total amount of taxes we pay. I am beginning to think a national sales tax wouldn't be so bad if it REPLACED all other federal taxes. At least it would be more honest than the current system, and voters would be able to make more informed choices.

 

[ClosedCaption]

No, we're describing you as a tyrant for forcing others to pay for the neighbor that you're thinking about.

Stop thinking about that neighbor and lend a hand, write a check, or offer him a job. Then we wouldn't have to steal from some in order to satisfy your ideas of what's best for others, which may very well conflict with mine.

If you really believe you live in a community...a society, you wouldn't advocate forcible theft. You'd actually step up and give to those causes/people you believe need your assistance without taking from others.

Believe it or not, you really don't know what best for everyone else, but you are free to put YOUR money where you mouth is.

I don't force anything buddy.

Bullshit. Trying not paying those taxes. They'll be FORCED from you.

That's part of being in a society.

Not a free one. There's a reason income tax was outlawed when America was formed. It's not part of a free society.

Like I said you can bitch about and day dream about that, unicorns and bubble gum trees but it wont happen. You're welcome to leave all the comforts but no one is lining up to live in the forest by themselves. The beauty of it is...you can do that and no one is stopping you.

Right back at ya.

That's the law...so if youre talking about illegal vs legal then yeah..They force you to pay taxes the same way they force you to not murder

You are free to leave and find this "free society" that doesn't exist anywhere on earth.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Spoken like a true tyrant. the law is the law. If you dont like it, tough shit.

It's easy to be so docile and complacent when you have zero ethical stance or omit all moral implications.

Lets say the law is you pay all of your wages to the governement and get in line for items via a voucher system. Well, thats the law. So you either follow the law or shut up. Makes for a really interesting discussion regarding the ethical grounds of having all of your productivity stolen, doesn't it?

 

[dblack]

If we can conceive of a legitimate reason for someone to opt-out of a paying taxes for a government service, it shouldn't be a tax-funded government service in the first place.

What a long list that is...

It sure is. But, if going by dblack's logic, we're already at compulsory taxation. it really doesn't even matter to have the discussion. This is just the way it is. So pay up and shut up.

You know that's not what I'm saying. I'm just say that entire point of making something a government service is to make paying for it compulsory. The argument for allowing people to opt-out of taxes for a service they don't agree with is the same argument for eliminating it as government service altogether.

 

[TakeAStepBack]

What a long list that is...

It sure is. But, if going by dblack's logic, we're already at compulsory taxation. it really doesn't even matter to have the discussion. This is just the way it is. So pay up and shut up.

You know that's not what I'm saying. I'm just say that entire point of making something a government service is to make paying for it compulsory. The argument for allowing people to opt-out of taxes for a service they don't agree with is the same argument for eliminating it as government service altogether.

Not necessarily. Government, if supposedly byand for the people, could just as easily be set up in user taxes. That way, those who use the service, pay for its upkeep. While those who do not, aren't robbed to pay for it so Paul can.

This would work for:
Courts
Police
Fire
many others

I would agree an advocate for a voluntary tax system is simply saying that the government shouldn't be providing that service. because as we know, government must secure a monopoly on the services it provides. Otherwise competition would send them to the extinction bin.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Being able to opt out of taxation kind of defeats the purpose of taxation, but I'd certainly be more than ok with that. The only legitimate tax would be a voluntary tax, or, in other words, a donation.

One should pay for services used.

If one uses many government services then one should pay more than one who uses few.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Being able to opt out of taxation kind of defeats the purpose of taxation, but I'd certainly be more than ok with that. The only legitimate tax would be a voluntary tax, or, in other words, a donation.

One should pay for services used.

If one uses many government services then one should pay more than one who uses few.

What about when one is forced to use a service because the government has given itself a monopoly on that service? Saying that "one should pay for services used" would simply be a self-fulfilling prophecy in that sense. Since I have no choice but to use this service, I must then fund the service, thus continuing to force myself into using the service.

 

[dblack]

Being able to opt out of taxation kind of defeats the purpose of taxation, but I'd certainly be more than ok with that. The only legitimate tax would be a voluntary tax, or, in other words, a donation.

One should pay for services used.

If one uses many government services then one should pay more than one who uses few.

That's a dangerous premise, especially in the context of compulsory taxation.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Being able to opt out of taxation kind of defeats the purpose of taxation, but I'd certainly be more than ok with that. The only legitimate tax would be a voluntary tax, or, in other words, a donation.

One should pay for services used.

If one uses many government services then one should pay more than one who uses few.

What about when one is forced to use a service because the government has given itself a monopoly on that service? Saying that "one should pay for services used" would simply be a self-fulfilling prophecy in that sense. Since I have no choice but to use this service, I must then fund the service, thus continuing to force myself into using the service.

The government does not currently have that many monopolies.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

One should pay for services used.

If one uses many government services then one should pay more than one who uses few.

What about when one is forced to use a service because the government has given itself a monopoly on that service? Saying that "one should pay for services used" would simply be a self-fulfilling prophecy in that sense. Since I have no choice but to use this service, I must then fund the service, thus continuing to force myself into using the service.

The government does not currently have that many monopolies.

Roads and the Post Office come to mind. But aside from those blatant monopolies, the government creates a monopoly for itself simply by providing a service like police or fire. Why would I pay for private fire departments when I'm already being taxed for the public fire department? Not to mention schools, which is a whole other beast.

 

[Coyote]

Cool topic Wake!

Wouldn’t it be something if people could opt out of paying taxes towards things they don’t agree with? A liberal wouldn’t have to pay taxes towards something he doesn’t like… wait, I can’t think of anything liberals wouldn’t want to pay taxes towards. Just joking. A conservative could decide that she wants to opt out of paying taxes towards abortion clinics, expense involving gay marriage, etc. I suppose if certain liberals don’t like enforcing the Southern border they could choose to opt out on paying taxes towards that, too. The thing is, I don’t like to have money taken from me to pay for stuff I don’t like.

Now, of course there are some things that can’t be opted out of, like putting taxes towards repairing our roads and keeping our public libraries from going belly-up, but why should I have to put money towards the more social-related things that I don’t see eye-to-eye on?I’m sure both liberals and conservatives can agree there are things they’d rather not have their taxes go towards. For the sake of freedom people ought to have the right to choose what they’re willing to afford. It’s not nice to have to keep having your paycheck gouged to be put towards things you disagree with, or even passionately oppose.

My friends, we should support the right of the people to decide what we want to pay taxes towards, and what it is of true value that all should pay for. Conservatives shouldn’t have their money forcefully funneled towards liberal causes, and liberals shouldn’t have their money forcefully funneled towards conservative causes. It’s about you, the precious people, and your right to decide where your money should go.

It ought to be said that most Americans don’t like taxes. It’s money that’s basically stolen from you, legally. Lol. It’s your money that you’ve busted your hump to get, but it’s then taken and put towards stuff that you may just not like. Guys, I’ve got a few examples of weird taxes that you, the people, should be allowed to choose if you want to pay for, for example infrastructure repair and maintenance.

Here's what I think....I'd rather not pay any taxes But, the reality is they pay for things I like, or support or think are necessary. And they pay for things I oppose. The thing is, for me, I'm even willing to have my money pay for what I oppose becuase I'm also getting what I support.

If people could pick and choose exactly what they want their tax money to go to we would end up with an extremely unpredictable revenue process tied to popular sentiment and fads. It would be impossible to plan long term or create a budget. Taxes also pay for things that might only help a small group of people who by themselves could not support the cost: for example services for the mentally ill (chronically underfunded with no cute poster children to illicite funds), social safety nets, health clinics to serve the poor. So....I'd say no....

Sliced Bagel Tax

You might want to think twice about getting that schmear. In New York City, bagels that are sliced or prepared are subject to sales tax, whereas whole bagels are not, according to the Wall Street Journal.

15 Totally Bizarre U.S. Taxes

Yeah, people, a bagel tax. Now, I’m like you. Bagels are sacred, especially those precious morsels that have peanut butter and strawberry jelly schmeared on them. Don’t you, dear and precious people, want to have to pay to get your bagels schmeared? WHAT WORLD DO WE LIVE IN?! What next, a burger tax in Wisconsin that affects all burgers that have more than one patty of meat? If we get a cheese tax in WI, there will be riots.

PBJ???? Blasphemy! I think there is a law against insulting a bagel like that

My bagels are untaxed and schmeared with cream cheese. Weird tax though...

Pet Tax

If you live in Durham, North Carolina, you could be paying a tax on Rover. The state charges a $10 tax for neutered and spayed pets and $75 for pets that are not neutered or spayed, according to Turbo Tax.

15 Totally Bizarre U.S. Taxes

Oh look, a tax in North Carolina on pets. So… you get taxed $75 if you pet isn’t fixed. You know what I want to fix? This stupid tax! Where do these bureaucratic schmucks in stuffy suits get the idea that furry pets should be taxed? I suppose reptiles and fish are exempt, but cats and dogs aren’t. This is a bogus tax that we shouldn’t have to pay for if we don’t want to.

That one kind of makes sense when you regard the number of unwanted animals - entire litters - dumped in some of our shelters in lieu of spay/neuter.

 

[Pop23]

Being able to opt out of taxation kind of defeats the purpose of taxation, but I'd certainly be more than ok with that. The only legitimate tax would be a voluntary tax, or, in other words, a donation.

One should pay for services used.

If one uses many government services then one should pay more than one who uses few.

One should but a very large minority does not. Kind of makes the argument nonsense

 

[itfitzme]

What about when one is forced to use a service because the government has given itself a monopoly on that service? Saying that "one should pay for services used" would simply be a self-fulfilling prophecy in that sense. Since I have no choice but to use this service, I must then fund the service, thus continuing to force myself into using the service.

The government does not currently have that many monopolies.

Roads and the Post Office come to mind. But aside from those blatant monopolies, the government creates a monopoly for itself simply by providing a service like police or fire. Why would I pay for private fire departments when I'm already being taxed for the public fire department? Not to mention schools, which is a whole other beast.

Fed Ex, UPS?

Oh yeah, that monopoly on Rural routes where private companies won't deliver.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The government does not currently have that many monopolies.

Roads and the Post Office come to mind. But aside from those blatant monopolies, the government creates a monopoly for itself simply by providing a service like police or fire. Why would I pay for private fire departments when I'm already being taxed for the public fire department? Not to mention schools, which is a whole other beast.

Fed Ex, UPS?

Oh yeah, that monopoly on Rural routes where private companies won't deliver.

FedEx and UPS are not permitted to deliver mail, and of course they won't deliver to more obscure locations when it makes more sense to just send it through the Postal Service.