Why do Republicans perceive every tax as "punishing" something?

[BlueGin]

I've often wondered the same thing.

Taxes pay for my roads and street lighting, for plumbing and wastewater treatment, for schools and hospitals.

Those are all good things. I sometimes wince when I pay my 24% VAT bill each month, but by and large I pay my taxes with a smile on my face. I am paying my part towards a fair, efficient society with good services.

I wonder sometimes if Republicans would prefer someone else pay their costs for them.

I wonder sometimes if Liberals say these things just to cover for their displeasure? I wonder how they can be deluding themselves into thinking all taxes contribute to something good? There are essential taxes, and wasteful ones.

Especially when we all know the amount of funds are sucked away not only to waste but due to fraud. Ever tried to get a Liberal to address the fraud in the entitlement programs? It's harder than trying to nail Jello to a wall.

 

[whitehall]

It goes back to the quasi-socialist doctrine that all money and property belong to the government. There is no question that some taxes intentionally punish people for legal but unhealthy habits. Tobacco is one but why does the left assume that every tax is good and there should be no accountability for how the confiscated money is spent? Is the post yet another effort by the ignorant left to deflect attention from the criminal way the IRS has been operating?

 

[bripat9643]

Less than $100/month comes out of my paycheck. My employer pays the rest. I don't know how much they pay. I had to pay $2600 in deductibles this year as well. Normally I have no medical issues other than my diabetes medication which costs me something like $10/month, so my deductible is normally close to zero. However, this year I broke both my forearms and I've had over $40,000 in medical bills as a result. The insurance company paid for everything aside from the $2600 deductible.

I think you've made my case admirably.

Sorry to hear about the arms, btw.

How have I made your case? My out-of-pocket for most years is less than $1,200. This year I had a major medical expense and my total out of pocket, including premiums is $3,800. In your case, the government takes the money out of your paycheck so you don't even know how much you're actually paying.

 

[bripat9643]

where in the world have you heard we have huge wait times? Most doctors can be seen within days and surgery within a week. Ture emergencies? Immediately

Yes, that is the same here.

The delays are for non-essential things.

You just got done saying you have to wait 90 days to be scheduled for surgery.

 

[Saigon]

Less than $100/month comes out of my paycheck. My employer pays the rest. I don't know how much they pay. I had to pay $2600 in deductibles this year as well. Normally I have no medical issues other than my diabetes medication which costs me something like $10/month, so my deductible is normally close to zero. However, this year I broke both my forearms and I've had over $40,000 in medical bills as a result. The insurance company paid for everything aside from the $2600 deductible.

I think you've made my case admirably.

Sorry to hear about the arms, btw.

How have I made your case? My out-of-pocket for most years is less than $1,200. This year I had a major medical expense and my total out of pocket, including premiums is $3,800. In your case, the government takes the money out of your paycheck so you don't even know how much you're actually paying.

Here the medical costs for your treatment might haverun to €100 or so.

You are right that I can not say exactly how much of my tax dollar goes into heathcare, but I certainly know that in the event of a medical disaster here, I would not be paying out thousands of dollars.

Don't you think that peace of mind is worth something?

 

[Saigon]

where in the world have you heard we have huge wait times? Most doctors can be seen within days and surgery within a week. Ture emergencies? Immediately

Yes, that is the same here.

The delays are for non-essential things.

You just got done saying you have to wait 90 days to be scheduled for surgery.

For non-urgent surgery the maximum delay is 90 days...do you think the hospital makes someone wait 90 days for surgery if they are having a brain aneurysm?!

 

[JakeStarkey]

bripat is not one of the guys who catches on quickly on the Board.

You have to spell it out to him.

Oh, that's right, you did.

 

[Saigon]

America's health problems are all related to lifestyle choices: diet, smoking and exercise. So where do you get off claiming Finland has better outcomes?

That is something so many people fail to take into consideration when they talk about the health of people on a national scale.

Probably the largest contributor to poor health is obesity, it leads to so many health issues. Many that result in a lower life expectancy.
USA Obesity rate 30.6%
Finland Obesity rate 12.8%
proof
It's not that Finland's healthcare system is so great, it's more likely because they don't have so many fat-asses in their country.
Bur then, with a 24% VAT who can afford enough food to get fat?

Diabetes is a big issue here, and that relates to obesity. But of course the poor diet and lifestyle that contribute to that are influenced by genetics, education, parenting....it's a complex issue.

I do think 24% VAT is too high, but it isn't crippling because our personal taxes came down when it was first introduced, and at times since. That encourages saving.

I do think all real US conservatives should back aVAT of 15% or so, because it targets the black economy and means everyone pays on consumption, not on earnings.
edited by alan1 to clear up the quotes

 

[Mad Scientist]

Why do Republicans perceive every tax as "punishing" something? Except of course the few taxes they actually support.


If taxes "punish" people then so do stop signs.

Strong Logic.

Why do Liberals perceive every Tax as Helping something?

 

[Two Thumbs]

Why do Republicans perceive every tax as "punishing" something? Except of course the few taxes they actually support.


If taxes "punish" people then so do stop signs.

What The **** are you babbling about?

I mentioned a Fed level sales tax and every last liberal accused me of hating poor people.

aside from that, it's always more taxation on the same people.

 

[Stephanie]

Why do Republicans perceive every tax as "punishing" something? Except of course the few taxes they actually support.


If taxes "punish" people then so do stop signs.

Strong Logic.

Why do Liberals perceive every Tax as Helping something?

good one

 

[Contumacious]

Why do Republicans perceive every tax as "punishing" something? Except of course the few taxes they actually support.


If taxes "punish" people then so do stop signs.

Oopoo, because the 16th Amendment was adopted in order to PUNISH the rich. In 1913 we were not yet a welfare/warfare state, so the money was not needed.

Income below $3500.00 dollars was exempted. Now those were ACTUAL CONSTITUTIONAL GOLD DOLLARS not federal reserve notes.

A gold dollar weighs 1.672 grams which at today's value it is worth around $55 federal reserve notes. So according to the 16th Amendment, 3500 dollars or today's equivalent $190,000 would be exempted from federal taxation.

.

.

 

[bripat9643]

America's health problems are all related to lifestyle choices: diet, smoking and exercise. So where do you get off claiming Finland has better outcomes?

That is something so many people fail to take into consideration when they talk about the health of people on a national scale.

Probably the largest contributor to poor health is obesity, it leads to so many health issues. Many that result in a lower life expectancy.
USA Obesity rate 30.6%
Finland Obesity rate 12.8%
proof
It's not that Finland's healthcare system is so great, it's more likely because they don't have so many fat-asses in their country.
Bur then, with a 24% VAT who can afford enough food to get fat?

Diabetes is a big issue here, and that relates to obesity. But of course the poor diet and lifestyle that contribute to that are influenced by genetics, education, parenting....it's a complex issue.

I do think 24% VAT is too high, but it isn't crippling because our personal taxes came down when it was first introduced, and at times since. That encourages saving.

I do think all real US conservatives should back aVAT of 15% or so, because it targets the black economy and means everyone pays on consumption, not on earnings.
edited by alan1 to clear up the quotes

A VAT is just a way to slip tax increases under the door without anyone noticing them. A national sales tax would be preferable because then you'd see what you were paying int taxes every time you made a purchase.

I wouldn't approve of either unless the 16th Amendment was repealed first.

 

[bripat9643]

I think you've made my case admirably.

Sorry to hear about the arms, btw.

How have I made your case? My out-of-pocket for most years is less than $1,200. This year I had a major medical expense and my total out of pocket, including premiums is $3,800. In your case, the government takes the money out of your paycheck so you don't even know how much you're actually paying.

Here the medical costs for your treatment might haverun to €100 or so.

You are right that I can not say exactly how much of my tax dollar goes into heathcare, but I certainly know that in the event of a medical disaster here, I would not be paying out thousands of dollars.

Don't you think that peace of mind is worth something?

No, I don't. I think it encourages people to take big risks with their health. The amount I paid out of my own pocket was reasonable. It didn't wipe me out financially. Consumers should always have to pay part of their healthcare costs directly so they will consider the costs of their behaviors.

 

[The2ndAmendment]

The power to tax is the power to destroy. Justice John Marshal. In fact if we quote from the Anti-Federalist Papers:

AntiFederalist Papers, Paper 17, Freedom Documents

The legislative power is competent to lay taxes, duties, imposts, and excises;-there is no limitation to this power, unless it be said that the clause which directs the use to which those taxes and duties shall be applied, may be said to be a limitation. But this is no restriction of the power at all, for by this clause they are to be applied to pay the debts and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the United States; but the legislature have authority to contract debts at their discretion; they are the sole judges of what is necessary to provide for the common defense, and they only are to determine what is for the general welfare. This power, therefore, is neither more nor less than a power to lay and collect taxes, imposts, and excises, at their pleasure; not only the power to lay taxes unlimited as to the amount they may require, but it is perfect and absolute to raise ;hem in any mode they please. No State legislature, or any power in the State governments, have any more to do in carrying this into effect than the authority of one State has to do with that of another. In the business, therefore, of laying and collecting taxes, the idea of confederation is totally lost, and that of one entire republic is embraced. It is proper here to remark, that the authority to lay and collect taxes is the most important of any power that can be granted; it connects with it almost all other powers, or at least will in process of time draw all others after it; it is the great mean of protection, security, and defense, in a good government, and the great engine of oppression and tyranny in a bad one. This cannot fail of being the case, if we consider the contracted limits which are set by this Constitution, to the State governments, on this article of raising money. No State can emit paper money, lay any duties or imposts, on imports, or exports, but by consent of the Congress; and then the net produce shall be for the benefit of the United States. The only means, therefore, left for any State to support its government and discharge its debts, is by direct taxation; and the United States have also power to lay and collect taxes, in any way they please. Everyone who has thought on the subject, must be convinced that but small sums of money can he collected in any country, by direct tax; when the federal government begins to exercise the right of taxation in all its parts, the legislatures of the several states will find it impossible to raise monies to support their governments. Without money they cannot be supported, and they must dwindle away, and, as before observed, their powers be absorbed in that of the general government.

 

[Meister]

America's health problems are all related to lifestyle choices: diet, smoking and exercise. So where do you get off claiming Finland has better outcomes?

That is something so many people fail to take into consideration when they talk about the health of people on a national scale.

Probably the largest contributor to poor health is obesity, it leads to so many health issues. Many that result in a lower life expectancy.
USA Obesity rate 30.6%
Finland Obesity rate 12.8%
proof
It's not that Finland's healthcare system is so great, it's more likely because they don't have so many fat-asses in their country.
Bur then, with a 24% VAT who can afford enough food to get fat?

Diabetes is a big issue here, and that relates to obesity. But of course the poor diet and lifestyle that contribute to that are influenced by genetics, education, parenting....it's a complex issue.

I do think 24% VAT is too high, but it isn't crippling because our personal taxes came down when it was first introduced, and at times since. That encourages saving.

I do think all real US conservatives should back aVAT of 15% or so, because it targets the black economy and means everyone pays on consumption, not on earnings.
edited by alan1 to clear up the quotes

A VAT is just a way to slip tax increases under the door without anyone noticing them. A national sales tax would be preferable because then you'd see what you were paying int taxes every time you made a purchase.

I wouldn't approve of either unless the 16th Amendment was repealed first.

In every country that implemented a VAT, it started out as a small percentage, and has grown into a monster.
I would not want a VAT with the greedy government that we have.

 

[bitterlyclingin]

The two rules of social engineering: If you want more of something, subsidize it. If you want less of something, tax it.

Democrats forget both those rules all the time in their desperate search for more votes to buy. They increase state subsidies for children ad infinitum, expecting no one to immediately go out and begin fornicating at the same pace after removing the pain of having to suffer the consequences paving the way for that kentucky father of 22 by 14 different mothers. They would have given Frank McCourts father, of Angela's Ashes fame, all the Guinness he wanted and paid for each and every baby he made after coming home in a drunken stupor.
Then the Democrats, thinking of business and the economy as a limitless, inexhaustible fountain, obviously constantly as much under the influence of too many pints of Guiness as Frank McCourt's father was, proceed to load as many taxes on business and the economy as they can until it gives every appearance of having its knees begin to buckle underneath it, then turn around and exhort it to go out and run in and win the Kentucky Derby.

Incidentally, I provide my own drinking water and sewage disposal, my own plumbing, heating and cooling, and electrical wiring as well as the roof over my head and the shirt on my back. The government doesn't even provide a paved road for me, and as always "When seconds count, the police are only minutes away." So you make provisions for that, always aiming to shoot to kill. You become really suspiscious of a government that demands ever increasing levels of taxation in order to support a harlot like this:

Welfare Queen: ?Who Would Want To Work In America? This Is What The Taxpayers Are Paying For?? | Weasel Zippers

 

[Contumacious]

A VAT is just a way to slip tax increases under the door without anyone noticing them. A national sales tax would be preferable because then you'd see what you were paying int taxes every time you made a purchase.

I wouldn't approve of either unless the 16th Amendment was repealed first.

If you are a wage or salary earner then the 16th Amendment is irrelevant. Those forms of "income" were subjected to DIRECT TAXATION in 1944.

The FDR administration levied a direct tax on property pursuant to the Victory Tax - a war tax - that they can levied for two years. The welfare/warfare state "forgot" to remove it after the two years lapsed.

Too bad, if you try now, they will declare you a "tax protestor" , an enemy of the state which allows then to **** in the ass in the name of "national security".

.

 

[eagle1462010]

OKay, if I'd have looked at the upper right hand corner I'd have seen Finland. So, you got me on that one.

SUE ME

Finland has a whole GDP OF 195 billion.
Finland spends 54.1% of it's GDP for Gov't.
Tax rates................
Taxation in Finland - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

So again, I'll ask the question is your VAT taxes passed on to the consumer?

You said you loved paying them, and you paid them every month. Yet a VAT tax is a CONSUMPTION TAX.

So again, who is really paying it?

 

[Ernie S.]

I've often wondered the same thing.

Taxes pay for my roads and street lighting, for plumbing and wastewater treatment, for schools and hospitals.

Those are all good things. I sometimes wince when I pay my 24% VAT bill each month, but by and large I pay my taxes with a smile on my face. I am paying my part towards a fair, efficient society with good services.

I wonder sometimes if Republicans would prefer someone else pay their costs for them.

I wonder sometimes if Liberals say these things just to cover for their displeasure? I wonder how they can be deluding themselves into thinking all taxes contribute to something good? There are essential taxes, and wasteful ones.

Especially when we all know the amount of funds are sucked away not only to waste but due to fraud. Ever tried to get a Liberal to address the fraud in the entitlement programs? It's harder than trying to nail Jello to a wall.

Yet they are always claiming that they will pay for some new give-away by cutting the fraud from Medicaid or FEMA or 100 dollar military hammers.
Once they get their bill passed and find that the money from all this fraud is about to fund their reelection, we never hear about fraud at that particular agency again.