All Forums | Politics

There's something happening here

...
Participants:
Search model icon
Views: 1099
Posts: 48
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56707
Posted: #26
If you think taxation is theft, you should not live in a large society.

 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2004
Posts: 20323
Posted: #27
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:

If you think taxation is theft, you should not live in a large society.



His post has got to be a joke.  How does he think society would function if we didnt have taxes to pay for the things that keep society functioning?

I know one thing, hes got to stop thinking we are living in a country of 13 million people and things can be like it was 200 years ago.

I just cannot believe anybody can have thoughts like this. I have never met anybody with these kinds of thoughts, in the 50 years i have been alive.  Boggles my mind

I guess the money will just have to fall from the sky to pay for anything.
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2005
Posts: 66698
Posted: #28
@26 and 27

there was no income tax in the US until 1913. did we not have a society until then?

only government can provide the goods or services citizens need?

i am not against schools because i am against government run schools. just as i am not against feeding the poor because i am against government feeding the poor

please make the distinction
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2005
Posts: 66698
Posted: #29
“Socialism, like the ancient ideas from which it springs, confuses the distinction between government and society. As a result of this, every time we object to a thing being done by government, the socialists conclude that we object to its being done at all. We disapprove of state education. Then the socialists say that we are opposed to any education. We object to a state religion. Then the socialists say that we want no religion at all. We object to a state-enforced equality. Then they say that we are against equality. And so on, and so on. It is as if the socialists were to accuse us of not wanting persons to eat because we do not want the state to raise grain.”
? Frédéric Bastiat, The Law
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56707
Posted: #30
Koaj,

You said tax is theft..or didnt you?

If you dislike tax then find an avenue that you can maximize your satisfaction of not paying taxes..then find out what "costs" there are for living somewhere that taxes do not exist.

You are against public school, you have said multiple times your idea of a school is a 1099 teacher in a Charter school format existing in a store front. That is not school and is not possible for society in which we live.

Your thinking is so narrow minded and selfish that it lacks common sense. You cannot think of society in terms of only cost to you, that if you do not want that benefit then you do not pay the cost. That sort of thinking works best if you were to isolate yourself completely from society..you cannot exist in a society without having a cost of living IN that society.

You know what would happen if you bought Koaj island (as we have mentioned in the past), your wife would make severely less, you would not have the benefits of community, your side business would not have a customer to sell to (isolate means you do not have ACCESS to that society either since you do not want to pay taxes to function with that society). 

I am far from being a socialist, I just realize the cost/benefit of living in a society and understand the cost of my choices and dont isolate myself like you do.
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2005
Posts: 66698
Posted: #31
Quote Originally Posted by DiscoD69:


I think this is actually a pretty good example of what separates libertarians from typical conservatives. Many conservatives realize in a modern society we need some form of basic taxation (yes they want as low as possible, but 'none' is not really realistic). Hence my quote. I think that is a smart, reasonable approach. 

Assuming something has to be taxed, I agree with the notion that we should tax things we don't want, while lowering taxes on things we do want, like income which is productivity. Right now income is heavily taxed while things like oil companies are actually subsidized.



the only time you will find me defending government is when i speak to an anarchist or anarcho capitalist or whe i have to defend the Constitution. its very tough to have a free society and be a free people when government and private banks rob you through the currency you earn (inflation)

lets start with questions:

-who owns your labor? you or government
-who is best to determine how your earnings are spent? you or government
-do you believe that only government can build roads?
-do you believe that government mandates services that are not demanded by the market?
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2005
Posts: 66698
Posted: #32
wall - the disdain for taxation is simply because i believe the market is the best barometer for services

if i have no kids in school, should i pay for local schools? if so, then apartment renters in my town with kids in public schools should pay a piece of my landscaping bill

its the same principle

if i came to your house every two weeks with a gun and demanded 25-30% of what you earn for the betterment of society as i see fit, you would have the police arrest me and press charges for armed robbery. why is taxation any different?
 
Legend
Participation Meter
Joined: Jan, 2007
Posts: 33782
Posted: #33
I believe the population in 1776 was around 2/3 million ...the other 9 million were illegal immigrants ...
 
Covers Linesmen
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2003
Posts: 56707
Posted: #34
Koaj,

Where is the "market" without said society?

The market cannot perform utility functions, there are costs associated in a society outside of the market, that is not a complicated theory and you should understand that.

Even with that being said, you can still find your place if you are seeking to minimize taxation..but you will find a cost with that end goal..

Do you really think that a lawyer can find work on a remote island or in a rural area? Can you find customers to sell your stuff if there are no customers to sell to?

It doesnt matter if you have kids in school or not, you went to school and schools are a part of society..the larger group, the rest of us outside you and the wife.

If you are so mad about taxation that you equate it to someone holding a gun to your head, then search for ways to minimize it..

You live in an area BY CHOICE that has high taxation, you can move probably within an hour of your current location and cut property taxes by 70% if you wanted to. Nobody forced you to buy in the suburbs where houses cost more and society demands great schools and the community wants services. Go move to another area and cut those taxes. 

Apartment dwellers pay taxes by paying rent..the owner of the property pays taxes, so those lazy suckers in the apartment complexes are not getting a freebie off your back, they pay taxes via rent, via buying goods and services, via paying utility bills..

It must suck being so mad at everyone like you are..sounds like you would be better off living in a rural area where you can provide your own electricity, water, pave your own road and not be taken advantage of like you feel you are.
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2006
Posts: 7937
Posted: #35
Hate to steer the conversation back on topic... 

I thought this article was relevant to the conversation me and kapono were having on the first page and I thought I should share: 

The Economy vs. Environment Myth


 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2006
Posts: 15433
Posted: #36


Holy crap, i leave and i'm being reamed yet again for suggesting it's time people look into the LVT, and i come back after a grueling week of work, and everyone is in here arguing for the LVT. GOod job guys, glad to see y'all coming around
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2006
Posts: 15433
Posted: #37
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:

There is already property tax based on land value.  Such a capital tax is among the worst taxes because it ignores ability to pay.  Carbon tax is better because it targets fuel consumption and is based on ability to pay.  . 



This post is so wrong on so many levels, i'm not sure where to start

Land value tax and property taxes are two separate things, entirely. Property taxes are on the structures that we build on top of the land, land value taxes are on the values we place on the site itself. The only thing even remotely true, is that in some places on some levels, the value of the land is taxes, ever so lightly that no one ever even notices it.

Such a capital tax is amongst the worst taxes

capital tax? So you are claiming that land and capital are one in the same?  Please, do explain.

Carbon tax is better,,,,,,ok, i'm back from throwing up. carbon tax is not better then any tax, it is as evil and nonsensical a concept ever dreampt by any fool or foe.  Everyone knows that taxing something at it's base is infinitely more efficient then at it's end use






 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2006
Posts: 15433
Posted: #38
I recently heard a conservative say 'we should be taxing what we don't want (pollution/carbon) and not taxing what we do want (income ie productivity).'


Disco! buddy, you're finally coming around to my side. If only you hadn't held such personal grudges, you could have been here a year ago. Welcome

What we don't want, is monopolistic rents being funneled to private persons.

I think that anyone that finds interest in these conversations, needs to first educate themselves on the difference between TAXES and RENTS



 
Banned
Participation Meter
Joined: Jul, 2003
Posts: 27850
Posted: #39
Quote Originally Posted by wallstreetcappers:

BE,

You could start a thread about what is the best flavor of ice cream and twist it to be about the LVT.



or "rent seeking"


This guy's repetition of the same talking points is both refreshing (because it is not partisan rhetoric) and redundant....

There is third talking point however that he seems to be get caught up in
 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2006
Posts: 15433
Posted: #40
Quote Originally Posted by dl36:



or "rent seeking"


This guy's repetition of the same talking points is both refreshing (because it is not partisan rhetoric) and redundant....

There is third talking point however that he seems to be get caught up in


talking point? you don't even understand the terminology

stick to your usual routine rather then cluttering my threads with your post count padding nonsense
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2006
Posts: 14715
Posted: #41
We all know that the carbon tax scams were fraud that were thought up by the crooks that brought us Enron (Republicans if it makes you hate them more).  All of the energy schemes and the blackouts and yet we still have fucktarded ideas about letting them not only create an entire new set of derivatives that will rape the common man, but we want to institutionalize these awful ideas into law, so that the Governments gun thugs can back up the robbery. 

The heaviest burden will be upon the poor, they will not be able to heat their homes in the winter, and cool their homes in the summer.  They will not be able to drive to work (especially bad for the rural poor).  

Carbon taxing is an awful fraud wrapped in green intentions.  

The entire "green" movement has been co-opted by BP, Chevron, and the energy cartels. 


 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Jun, 2007
Posts: 10909
Posted: #42

Quote Originally Posted by be easy:



talking point? you don't even understand the terminology

stick to your usual routine rather then cluttering my threads with your post count padding nonsense

the rent is high and so am i

 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Feb, 2005
Posts: 7094
Posted: #43

Land value tax is a component of property tax based on values from a combination of land, buildings and improvements.  Property tax is a capital tax because buildings are capital. 

Impractical to replace all taxes with single land tax.  Powerful lobby group of owners would never allow that.  Property tax is flawed because rich and poor owners pay same tax regardless of income.  Not as limited by ability to pay, income tax is a superior source of revenue for governments.  Also fairer and progressive in that the rich pay more while the poor pay less. 

 Furthermore, sin taxes such as tobacco are more effective in targeting sins than land tax.  Idea for land value tax has existed for centuries.  But  property tax is mostly at municipal level and not federal level. 

 

 
MVP
Participation Meter
Joined: Oct, 2006
Posts: 15433
Posted: #44
Quote Originally Posted by thirdperson:

Land value tax is a component of property tax based on values from a combination of land, buildings and improvements.  Property tax is a capital tax because buildings are capital. 

Impractical to replace all taxes with single land tax.  Powerful lobby group of owners would never allow that.  Property tax is flawed because rich and poor owners pay same tax regardless of income.  Not as limited by ability to pay, income tax is a superior source of revenue for governments.  Also fairer and progressive in that the rich pay more while the poor pay less. 

 Furthermore, sin taxes such as tobacco are more effective in targeting sins than land tax.  Idea for land value tax has existed for centuries.  But  property tax is mostly at municipal level and not federal level. 

 



This is simply false. Land value tax is a tax upon the inherent value of the land itself, absent any improvements. land cannot be capital by definition, hence a tax on land values is not a capital tax


income tax is a superior source of revenue for governments.  Also fairer and progressive in that the rich pay more while the poor pay less.

ALso false. Income tax impedes economic activity, because it penalizes the 50% of the population that does the labor that produces the income(civilian workforce). Taxes are penalties, why would we want to penalize people for producing goods and services?

In 2010 the federal government collected $2.2 trillion, an amount equal to 14.9 percent of GDP

910 billion coming from personal income taxes
880 billion coming from payroll taxes

This puts the responsibility of funding government almost entirely on working class individuals. Productive activity. Bidding up land values makes us all poorer, and land speculation is unproductive activity. If we tax that as a sin, not only is it an immense amount of wealth that can be tapped to fund the commons, but it also would drive down land values which is beneficial to the economy, and the citizenry as a whole
 
All-Star
Participation Meter
Joined: Sep, 2005
Posts: 14428
Posted: #45
heat sucks
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2006
Posts: 7937
Posted: #46
Quote Originally Posted by be easy:

I recently heard a conservative say 'we should be taxing what we don't want (pollution/carbon) and not taxing what we do want (income ie productivity).'


Disco! buddy, you're finally coming around to my side. If only you hadn't held such personal grudges, you could have been here a year ago. Welcome

What we don't want, is monopolistic rents being funneled to private persons.

I think that anyone that finds interest in these conversations, needs to first educate themselves on the difference between TAXES and RENTS




Let's not get carried away.  Please remember I just put forward somebody else's opinion.

However, assuming one is in favour of environmental conservation and increasing productivity, then it makes sense to lessen (not necessarily eliminate) income tax, where lost revenue can be offset by a carbon tax. I support this notion as well as any conservative in favour of this type of approach. It's an idea. We all want lower taxes, it's a matter of taking a responsible approach. I believe this idea has merit and logically would achieve it's intended results.

Also, I do not hold a grudge against you. We just don't really speak the same language and hence we've had a bit of trouble communicating in the past. Which is why I generally think it's a good idea that we continue to stay out of each other's way. I'll do my best to maintain civility on the rare occasion we do interact, such as this. 

No beef easy.

 
 
Hall of Fame
Participation Meter
Joined: May, 2003
Posts: 28196
Posted: #47
Quote Originally Posted by rick3117:

 

The entire "green" movement has been co-opted by BP, Chevron, and the energy cartels. 




same as it always was.  what doesn't get manipulated and co-opted.  so everything the government touches turns to shit, at least for the rest of us.  so remove the government from the equation.  let the private sector, let the banks, run free. so the banks rape us.  but what could the government really do to stop them.  or, what would they do since it's impossible to distinguish the banks from the government.  government means money now and how do candidates get there without the banks.  how do the banks get free reign without the government.  so what do we do about all of this?
 
 
Captain
Participation Meter
Joined: Mar, 2006
Posts: 7937
Posted: #48
Club, the problem is that there should be a very clear distinction between the government and the banks.

That's what #OWS is all about. 
All Forums | Politics
About Us
Contact Us
Careers
Our Team
Brand
Testimonials
Betting Guides
Sportsbook Reviews
Sports Betting News
Podcasts
Responsible Gaming
Sports Betting
US Betting Sites
Canada Betting Sites
Canada Casinos
Best Betting Apps
Contests
Streak Survivor
King of Covers
Ultimate Race
Office Pools
The Covers community has
618,670
lifetime members worldwide
Covers 25 Years Logo Established in 1995,
Covers is the world
leader in sports
betting information.
Site Map Help Privacy Terms of Service youtube logo facebook logo twitter logo instagram logo linkedin logo google news logo
Covers is verified safe by: Evalon Logo GPWA Logo GDPR Logo GeoTrust Logo Evalon Logo
Copyright © 1995 - 2024 CS Media Limited All Rights Reserved.

If you choose to make use of any information on this website including online sports betting services from any websites that may be featured on this website, we strongly recommend that you carefully check your local laws before doing so.It is your sole responsibility to understand your local laws and observe them strictly.Covers does not provide any advice or guidance as to the legality of online sports betting or other online gambling activities within your jurisdiction and you are responsible for complying with laws that are applicable to you in your relevant locality.Covers disclaims all liability associated with your use of this website and use of any information contained on it.As a condition of using this website, you agree to hold the owner of this website harmless from any claims arising from your use of any services on any third party website that may be featured by Covers.