New society without taxes

[New society]

All people complain that they don´t have enough money. They complain, that little earn, that rich people have more and more, that everything is expensive, that in socialism, people have better social conditions, that government spends a lot of money from our taxes, that there is corruption, everyone complains that pays high taxes, the government complains that cannot collect enough money from taxes and must make debts. What will solve all these problems?

In every society there are three main groups: people, companies and government.

People are working and receiving a salary, from which pay to companies money for products and services, which they need for live - food, housing, clothing, transportation, etc.

Companies provide work to people and pay them salaries and provide to people products and services necessary for life.

Both of groups pay taxes to the government, and government pays from this money other services necessary for the functioning of the country, such as police, justice, authorities, education, culture, environment, military, transport, research etc.

Companies finance country so, that pay to people salaries and pay taxes to the government.

This is the system, which we have now. And how we could change it?

If we want to change it, that everyone complains, that have to pay a lot and gets little, companies should have the choice, whether they want to pay to people salaries and to government taxes, as it is now, or they want directly pay to other companies and institutions for services and products, which the government buys now for collected taxes and people for salaries.

E.g. some companies provide to people lunch. So people do not get money in salary and pay for lunch, because they directly have lunch.

Some companies pay people's pensions. So again, people do not pay part of the salary, which they would pay to social insurance so to the government, which pays the pensions to the current retirees.

Some companies pay employee´s taxes directly to government, and they are presented as part of salary.

When we look at the structure of salary using, we see that it is used for paying taxes and insurance, food, housing, clothing, transportation etc.

Companies can provide certain services or products directly to people and then they don´t need to pay for the equal part of the salary. For example, the company will pay the doctor to the employees and will not pay the equal part of the salary for health insurance.

In this way the company, if wants, could take over all payments, which are part of the salary and may not pay people salaries, and people could work without the salary, but may have from company everything, what they are paying from salary for.

The same means for the taxes, that companies pay to the government for which the government finances the functioning of the country.

For example, a company will pay and ensure the education of children in any district and will not have to pay a percentage of the taxable amount, which is equivalent to the share of education funding in the state budget.

Such a transfer of responsibility and funding from governments to companies could be carried out across the entire spectrum of paid taxes. Because in taxes are included also costs for police, justice, offices, culture, education, environment, military, transport, research etc. Such change will be able to choose companies their self and it will be advantageous for them because the costs for country life will be more effective and will be lower, because the company is still trying to reduce costs.

No matter, whether companies are owned by the state in socialism or by owners in capitalism.

In the past people paid taxes to the king and it was unfair for the people and the reason for revolutions. After revolutions in democracy people again pay taxes, even to democratic voted government. But anyhow there was not created system of the fair money redistribution from government back to the people. And this is the problem which put democratic society back to kingdom before revolutions, where are unfair big differences between reach and poor people. But now in society there are companies, which give to people salaries and to government taxes. This all money in society comes from companies anyhow.

People every time need certain things for their lives. Society has been developed such way, that these things obtain people their self and some things obtain government. Companies finance these needs through taxes and salaries. If main groups of society – people, government, companies are not satisfied with the redistribution of money in the country now, they could be satisfied then, when the responsibility and actions to procure the necessities of the people lives will shift to companies. They will take care for the people lives in all.

Everyone will be happy. Companies will not pay taxes or less, will not pay salaries or less, people will have everything, what they need for their lives, and the government will not have to worry about the people and will not need to indebt, only will control society, how is working.

 

[Rustic]

Tax money is just wasted... No reason to continue

 

[waltky]

Granny says, "Dat's right - Obama taxin' us to death...

Obama Has Collected $18,764,164,000,000 in Taxes--$124,003 Per U.S. Job
April 15, 2016 | Over the course of the 86 full months that President Barack Obama has completed serving in the White House—from February 2009 through March 2016--the U.S. Treasury has collected approximately $18,764,164,000,000 in tax revenues (in non-inflation-adjusted dollars), according to the Monthly Treasury Statements issued during that period. (President Obama was inaugurated on Jan. 20, 2009.)

That equals approximately $124,003 for each of the 151,320,000 persons who, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, had either a full- or part-time job during March 2016. During the same 86-month stretch of the Obama presidency, the total debt of the federal government increased from $10,632,005,246,736.97 to $19,264,938,619,643.07, according to the Treasury. That is an increase in the debt of $8,632,933,372,906.10—or approximately $57,051 for each of the 151,320,000 people with jobs as of March. If the Treasury succeeds in collecting the full $3,335,502,000,000 in reveneus that the White House Office of Management and Budget estimates it will collect in fiscal 2016 (which will end on Sept. 30), Obama will become the first American president whose Treasury collected more than $20,000,000,000,000 in taxes (in non-inflation adjusted dollars) during his time in office.

As of the end of fiscal 2015 (on Sept. 30, 2015), the Treasury had collected a total of approximately $17,287,946,000,000 during the 80 full months Obama had at that point served as president. By the end of this September--if the Treasury collects the estimated $3,335,502,000,000 in revenues for this year—the Treasury will have collected $20,623,448,000,000 in taxes during the 92 full months Obama will by then have served in the White House.

During the first 86 full months that George W. Bush was president (February 2001 through March 2008), according to the Monthly Treasury Statements, the Treasury collected approximately $15,099,826,000,000 in taxes. (From February 2001 through January 2009, the Treasury collected $17,251,191,000,000 in taxes. Bush was inaugurated on Jan, 20, 2001 and left office on Jan. 20, 2009, when Obama was sworn in.)

The $15,099,826,000,000 in taxes that the Treasury collected during Bush’s first 86 full months in office equaled approximately $103,363 for each of the 146,086,000 persons who had a full- or part-time job in March 2008. During the first 86 full months of George W. Bush’s presidency, the debt increased from $5,716,070,587,057.36 to $9,437,594,138,091.39. That is a debt increase of $3,721,523,551,034.03—or approximately $25,475 for each of the 146,086,000 persons who had a job in March 2008.

MORE

See also:

Obama tax inversion rules may overstep authority: U.S. lawmaker
Apr 15 2016 | WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama's proposed rules to stop U.S. companies from reincorporating abroad, if only on paper, to avoid U.S. income taxes appear to overstep legal authority, a top Republican lawmaker said on Friday.

Representative Kevin Brady said his staff is scrutinizing the rules, which were unveiled last week by the U.S. Treasury Department. Legal experts have offered mixed views on the viability of any court challenge. The new rules, intended to discourage tax "inversions," led to the collapse of U.S. drugmaker Pfizer Inc's $160 billion acquisition of Ireland's Allergan Plc. "We recognize there is broad discretion in some areas of that tax code," Brady, a Texas Republican and chairman of the tax-writing House of Representatives Ways and Means Committee, said in a speech to the U.S. Chamber of Commerce. "But it certainly appears that Treasury overstepped its authority, especially in effect, taking legislative proposals that haven’t passed this Congress or any other Congress and essentially making it law through regulation."

Brady gave no indication of what his committee might do. It was unclear what action, if any, the Republican-controlled Congress would take against the inversion rules in an election year marked by voter anger over taxes and international trade. "I share the concern about inversions. Everyone does. But there’s a right way and a wrong way to tackle them," Brady said. An inversion is a tax-driven deal in which a U.S. company acquires a smaller, foreign business and adopts its tax domicile to reduce the combined company's overall tax burden. The deals most often involve reincorporating in Ireland or Britain.

Though inversions have been going since the 1980s, a new wave has been under way for about five years. The Pfizer-Allergan deal would have been the biggest inversion of all time. There is bipartisan agreement on the need for comprehensive tax reform to address inversions, but the deeply divided Congress is unlikely to tackle this until 2017, especially with elections coming in November, analysts said. In the interim, the Obama administration has tightened inversion rules in limited areas, drawing Republican criticism. "The administration’s strategy won’t solve the fundamental problem and likely will make it worse," Brady said.

Obama tax inversion rules may overstep authority: U.S. lawmaker