Your Taxes, Your Beliefs

[itfitzme]

The fire department service only if you pay wasn't workable.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The fire department service only if you pay wasn't workable.

I'm sorry I don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

 

[Rozman]

I don't have a problem paying taxes for the most part.
I do have a problem with the people who feel we don't pay enough.
Between Federal,State,City,SS tax,medicare and the rest...enough already.
Sales tax,tax on liquor,cigarette tax,tax on gasoline,surcharge tax on my cable/phone bill....

On and on it goes.
We are drowned in taxes and the Libs don't feel we pay enough.

 

[eflatminor]

The fire department service only if you pay wasn't workable.

Actually, it worked well for quite some time. Just because central planners take over a market and impose a government monopoly doesn't mean they were justified in doing so.

 

[itfitzme]

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.

Yeah, no ond has ever shipped a single page, 8&1/2 x 11 piece of paper by UPS or FED Ex.

It makes more sense to send it to obscure locations because USPS is requiredn to service obscure locations while private companies, like Fed Ex aren't, and therfor don't.

 

[itfitzme]

The fire department service only if you pay wasn't workable.

I'm sorry I don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

Sorry to hear that.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

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.

Yeah, no ond has ever shipped a single page, 8&1/2 x 11 piece of paper by UPS or FED Ex.

It makes more sense to send it to obscure locations because USPS is requiredn to service obscure locations while private companies, like Fed Ex aren't, and therfor don't.

It is illegal for UPS or FedEx to deliver mail.

They don't because it is cheaper for them to send it through the Postal Service. In the absence of the Postal Service, they would have to charge accordingly. That doesn't mean they wouldn't deliver there, it simply means that it would cost more.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

The fire department service only if you pay wasn't workable.

I'm sorry I don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

Sorry to hear that.

Maybe you should write more clearly.

https://www.ruralmetrofire.com/

Nobody told them their business model "wasn't workable," apparently.

 

[eflatminor]

I'm sorry I don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

Sorry to hear that.

Maybe you should write more clearly.

https://www.ruralmetrofire.com/

Nobody told them their business model "wasn't workable," apparently.

 

[oldfart]

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.

Well we have repealed the shaft tax, but the LUST tax remains. BTW, the LUST tax is assessed per gallon. Who knew?

About thirty years ago I suggested a pecker tax. It would be charged by the inch, and like all good taxes, it would be self-assessed. The tax role would be published in the newspaper. Wives, girlfriends, and gay hookups could demand audits and get refunds. Surveys at local bars indicated that such a tax could easily replace income and sales taxes, with some left over. Tax cheating would be rampant [pun intended] but underassessment rare. Within a year the reported results, if true, would indicate a doubling of size over current scientific studies. All agreed that the subject required much further study, and promised to get right on it!

 

[itfitzme]

I'm sorry I don't really understand what it is you're saying here.

Sorry to hear that.

Maybe you should write more clearly.

https://www.ruralmetrofire.com/

Nobody told them their business model "wasn't workable," apparently.

Which explains why we find them in the majority of counties and cities. Yep

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

Sorry to hear that.

Maybe you should write more clearly.

https://www.ruralmetrofire.com/

Nobody told them their business model "wasn't workable," apparently.

Which explains why we find them in the majority of counties and cities. Yep

I suppose this was some attempt at sarcasm. Regardless, as I've already explained, the fact that the government is going to tax you to pay for their public fire departments regardless of whether there is a private fire department in the area means you're not going to turn around and pay for the services of the private fire department. In the absence of government coercion, however, we would see far more examples of this in every city. There is certainly no lack of demand.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

Wouldn’t it be something if people could opt out of paying taxes towards things they don’t agree with?

Yeah, it would be something, particularly when they realize they’ll end up paying the same or more, and getting less for it.

 

[eflatminor]

Wouldn’t it be something if people could opt out of paying taxes towards things they don’t agree with?

Yeah, it would be something, particularly when they realize they’ll end up paying the same or more, and getting less for it.

Oh good grief. Another statist that thinks competition and voluntary choice drives prices...UP!

 

[Desperado]

Great Idea
You still pay taxes but you determine where your tax money goes or even more important where your tax money does not go. Then Congress can see where people think the priorities are and act in the appropriate manner to ensure that "Government for the People, by the People" is more than just a saying. This would then make the US Taxpayer the strongest lobby there is.

 

[editec]

Back when the STATES were levied taxes by the CONFDERATION, but those taxes were paid VOLUNTARILY by the states??

What happened?

The CONFEDERATION went broke.

Now if the STATES won't voluntarily pays their taxes, what chance that individual citizens would volunteer to pay them?

If we want a viable government, taxes must be paid.

Utopia - Greek ou-topos meaning 'no place'

 

[TakeAStepBack]

Back when the STATES were levied taxes by the CONFDERATION, but those taxes were paid VOLUNTARILY by the states??

What happened?

The CONFEDERATION went broke.

Now if the STATES won't voluntarily pays their taxes, what chance that individual citizens would volunteer to pay them?

If we want a viable government, taxes must be paid.

Utopia - Greek ou-topos meaning 'no place'

Putting things in caps doesnt make your point any more logical. Then again, Im speaking to the king of semantics.

 

[Wake]

All of you have brought up good points, and for that I'm grateful.

From my very limited perspective (not so much thanks to you guys) I still think people should be able to opt out of some taxes. It just doesn't seem fair to have to pay for a bagel tax, especially if you don't even eat bagels. Or to have to pay for abortion clinics if you're ardently pro-life. If you don't believe in going to war in the Middle East, one's taxes shouldn't have to go towards that, either.

These politicians are like mosquitos and they'll stop at nothing to siphon money from you to pay for whatever it is they're up to, whether you like it or not. We should make it so that citizens pay the essentials, but not, in the very least, the fringe taxes around the country.

 

[Foxfyre]

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.

In my opinion, services like Police, Fire, and Schools are unconstitutional at the Federal level, or at least that was the original intention before we handed over government to the courts.

But at the local level these kinds of services are formed via social contract by the citizens who find it mutually beneficial to form them. Rather than everybody buying a fire truck or other heavy duty fire equipment and trying to fight fires themselves, it makes sense to pool resources and buy equipment to be shared by all. In the beginning it starts out as a small volunteer fire department and grows as the area and population to be served grows.

The same with public schools--these started out as a one room schoolhouse and the community pooling resources to hire a teacher for the children.

In time it makes sense to hire a town sheriff to take care of rowdies and drunks and worse rather than the people having to cope with these by themselves.

And when the community grows enough to need more mutally shared services, the people will vote to incorporate and pool resources to build a town hall housing a clerk who will take care of deeds and licenses and other local needs of the community as well as a mayor to coordinate and oversee other services. In time the people will vote to have a municiple water and sewer system, to pave the streets, to install street lights, for parks and libraries and open space, and other quality of life considerations.

Those joining the community automatically accept the provisions put into effect by those who preceded them and have a voice in what will be added within the social contract. And all expect to share in the costs and receive mutually beneficial value for their tax dollars.

Where it spirals out of control is when a government, at local, county, state, and federal levels, becomes so big it becomes its own entity instead of social contract and imposes its will on the people. That has happened in some states, in some large cities, and in spades at the federal level.

And it is that which the Founders were most worried about and warned us most strongly to be vigilant and be willing to fight back when it happened. It isn't a matter of opting out. It is a matter of who is in control - we the people, or a government that presumes to tell us how we must live our lives.

 

[Kevin_Kennedy]

All of you have brought up good points, and for that I'm grateful.

From my very limited perspective (not so much thanks to you guys) I still think people should be able to opt out of some taxes. It just doesn't seem fair to ave to pay for a bagel tax, especially if you don't even eat bagels. Or to have to pay for abortion clinics if you're ardently pro-life. If you don't believe in going to war in the Middle East, one's taxes shouldn't have to go towards that, either.

These politicians are like mosquitos and they'll stop at nothing to siphon money from you to pay for whatever it is they're up to, whether you like it or not. We should make it so that citizens pay the essentials, but not, in the very least, the fringe taxes around the country.

The problem is that once you say we should pay the "essentials," you ultimately leave it up to the discretion of politicians to arbitrarily decide what is essential. They've obviously already decided these taxes are essential, otherwise they wouldn't have imposed them.