This One's Good - Tax Content

Status
Not open for further replies.
Aha... interesting viewpoint in concept, nothing but raving lunacy in practice. Read some history, perhaps the new Ben Franklin bio.

http://images.amazon.com/images/P/0684807610.01.LZZZZZZZ.jpg

Learn all about America before US taxes (British only) and why US government taxation is necessary, at some level at least. You realize, of course, that you are able to make your post and express opinions on this site in no small part due to wise use of past tax dollars.

And no, it wasn't Al Gore using your tax dollars to buy lunch while he dreamed up the internet.

There is too much government spending, waste and welfare, no doubt. Attacking the idea of taxes in general does not address these issues, IMHO.
 
check out claire wolfe's devistating attack on the fairtax system.
it basically goes like this. Baby Boomers, earned all there money and had it taxed under the income tax. Switch to the fairtax and during their retirement it would get TAXED AGAIN. Considering the demographics, its a major screw for them.
that said, as a youngin, it would probably benefit me.

atek3
 
You realize, of course, that you are able to make your post and express opinions on this site in no small part due to wise use of past tax dollars.
Click to expand...
Logical falacy -- the false dichotomy that you either have taxes or you have no internet.

It's just a new, information-superhighway twist on the old -- and often disproved -- false dichotomy that we'd have no roads without the gub'ment.

Just because taxation resulted in something nice does not demonstrate that that the nice thing would not have occurred via the private sector.
 
b-b-b-b-but.....our tax burden is much less than most Europeon countries, and aren't they more enlightened than Americans?
 
It's interesting to read this forum and see the increasing number of folks who call themselves patriots, who say they value the principles on which this country was founded, and yet have not the slightest clue about the moral and political philosophy of our Founding Fathers.


They would have laughed the "living in La-La Land" Ayn Rand out of town, along with all of her modern day followers. They understood that government has legitimate functions, and that those functions must be funded. They were NEVER against taxes per se. They were against abusive taxes.


I'm sure they'd be against our current system, but I'm equally sure they wouldn't have anything to do with the Libertarians of today.


Of course, the same could be said of the Repubs & Dems.
 
They understood that government has legitimate functions, and that those functions must be funded. They were NEVER against taxes per se. They were against abusive taxes.


I'm sure they'd be against our current system, but I'm equally sure they wouldn't have anything to do with the Libertarians of today.
Click to expand...
Logical Fallacy -- Straw Man Argument.

The Libertarian Party understands that the governement has legitimate functions.

The Libertarian Party is NOT against taxes per se. It is against abusive taxes.

http://www.lp.org/issues/cut-taxes.html (Note the use of the word cut versus the word eliminate.)
 
They would have laughed the "living in La-La Land" Ayn Rand out of town, along with all of her modern day followers. They understood that government has legitimate functions, and that those functions must be funded. They were NEVER against taxes per se. They were against abusive taxes.
Click to expand...
If the current income tax situation isn't abusive, I don't know what is.
 
As an example of abuse, let's assume that you are a retiree who has placed most of your retirement savings with a financial planner. You find out that you have become a victim of a massive Ponzi scheme, and your savings are now gone.

Ignoring issues of lackadaisical prosecutors, and incompetent investigators, this is what you will face:

1. If you attempt to claim the stolen funds as a theft loss deduction, the IRS will do the following:

a. Audit you, if you are middle income. Why middle income? The poorest investors will have no funds for the IRS to take. The wealthier investors will be able to hire the legal resources to fight off the IRS. :fire:

b. They will claim that you cannot deduct ANY of your loss until all of it is recovered, which may take years. :fire:

c. They will claim that you were not investing with the profit motive in mind. :fire:

d. If you rolled over IRA or 401k money to the financial planners, they will claim that this was a distribution and is taxable, since (in the case I am referring to) the financial planners were not considered by them to be authorized to offer retirement accounts. You will then be faced with the dliemma of having the IRS demanding that you pay taxes on money stolen from you. :fire:

2. You will see that much of what can be recovered will be paid to a court appointed receiver. In effect, you will be paying for your own restitution.

So, abusive? Yes. The above circumstances are what I have personally observed with friends and acquaintances who were unlucky enough to have been defrauded.

FWIW,

emc
 
The entire income based tax scheme AND the IRS could be eliminated in one fell swoop simply by moving to a consumer based national sales tax.
Simple, anonymous (or less intrusive than filing income tax), and easily enforced.

That ain't gonna happen. This is a consumer driven economy and Congress is not about to withdraw their control of the everyday minutia of people's lives.
 
Those of us who would make this trade should make it our mission to rescue our fellow citizens the way we might rescue an alcoholic or drug addict from their self-destructive ways.

We should appeal to their reason, ...
Click to expand...

Bwah HA Ha ha ha! Whooo. Ha. Hmmm.

The author's heart is in the right place, but...

Bwah HA Ha ha ha!
 
It's interesting to read this forum and see the increasing number of folks who call themselves patriots, who say they value the principles on which this country was founded, and yet have not the slightest clue about the moral and political philosophy of our Founding Fathers.

I'm sure they'd be against our current system, but I'm equally sure they wouldn't have anything to do with the Libertarians of today.
Click to expand...
Someone hasn't read Paine, Locke, or Rand. If you have, I apologize, but please read them again.

The government does have legitimate functions. It does not require putting a gun to someone's head to fund them, if the legitimate functions are all it does. There have been many free-market alternatives that have been proposed, from subscriptions fees for police and courts to lotteries. All it takes is a willingness to think creatively and an unwillingness to screw over your fellow man.
 
Socialism should be declared what it is "a religion" and separated from the state by law. I don't want anyones religion forced upon me.
 
This is all very interesting, but it is no accident that a thread on this topic would come up. Abolishing income tax is a pet Libertarian Party issue.

Ain't it awful! We need to do something about this! Well, it has nothing to do with guns. Now, if there was a tax deduction for self defense, it might get my attention.;)

I'll look elsewhere for general politics. But don't mind me. Have your fun, and I'll shut up (go away).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

E
  • Locked
Outstanding Phila. Inquirer Editor
Replies
11
Views
792
Intune
Intune
C
  • Locked
A Good Op/Ed
Replies
0
Views
527
Cory Steiner
C
A
  • Locked
read this
Replies
9
Views
728
Sir Galahad
S
atek3
  • Locked
Man shot in his apartment by police hopes for justice
2
Replies
46
Views
2K
Ky Larry
K
A
  • Locked
An Outstanding Doctor
Replies
3
Views
2K
AnklePocket
A
Back
Top