Anti-Tax Protesters Just Don`t Get It [Pic]

Submitted by: fancylad 7 years ago in

Yeah, we"re all for ""zero taxes" too, but uh... there"s something they"re forgetting...
There are 193 comments:
Male 97
2 things to disprove all counter arguments.

1) confederate states of america. cotton economy, no taxation. failure.
2) articles of confederation. states are sovereign, no taxation. failure.

i`m sure there are many more examples.
0
Reply
Male 602
Somehowfunny, I love your warlock picture, I can`t for the life of me remember the name of that comic.

So we should punish people for building wealth and tax them more than people who are ok signing a W-2 every year and working for someone else other than themselves?

Let`s look at it this way, one of my businesses grosses about 220,000/yr. Now thanks to new taxing of income above 250,000/yr there is no incentive for me to grow or expand my business anymore, because if I was making 255k/yr I still would be making under 220k after taxes. So why not keep my business where it is, keep playing the tax game like I do (i.e. not paying for cars, or houses, cell phones, but having my company do it for tax write offs) so that I can take home more money, instead of making an additional 50k/yr just to rape myself into a higher tax bracket?

I would rather open three businesses that were under 250k than one business that grossed a million, and probably take more home.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"Tax the wealthy"

Yeah, `cause they didn`t earn it the same way Joe Bob down at the rock quarry did.

Everyone should pay the SAME TAX! Percentage-wise I mean.

The rich already pay more of a percentage in taxes than everyone else. As a matter of fact, 49% of ALL taxable Americans pay NO income tax.

This is why a fair tax would bring in more money, and it`s FAIR.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
"Like the 2.5 million honest Americans who`ve lost their jobs within the past few years due to conservative negligence and fiscal abuse?"

What conservative negligence?

Oh you mean in 2006 when the liberal congress pigeonholed Bush into signing the bailout?
0
Reply
Female 40
These people are just dumb. You have to have taxes if you are living in a society larger than a small thorpe if you want to maintain roads, education, and postal services. But the middle class has born the brunt of taxation since it came about. There was a time where it was the lower class...but they were called serfs.

Tax the wealthy, ya know the people who earn more that the state of Alabama`s yearly education fund. Take 20% of their gross income, cut the military and congressional spending in half and invest that back into road work, expanding schools and helping the homeless. Not hand outs, but shelter as in housing. We would see jobs all over the place. It worked during the Great Depression, it could work now.
0
Reply
Male 89
@wizardofcum Are you a truther too?
0
Reply
Male 155
"Most people who aren`t a deadbeat already have healthcare why should we pay more for the welfare people?"

Brilliant. Like the 2.5 million honest Americans who`ve lost their jobs within the past few years due to conservative negligence and fiscal abuse? Or did you mean those "other" citizens who have indebted themselves to privatized pharmaceutical companies and insurance agencies for their hospital bills and prescriptions? Or perhaps you mean the senior citizens on fixed incomes losing out on what Medicare doesn`t cover?
Oh - you meant the infinitesimal amount of actual "freeloaders" on the welfare program that somehow consistently elude social worker checkups? Yeah, we gotta watch out for those people - they`re as abundant as headless corpses in an Arizona desert. :\
0
Reply
Male 11
That`s not the tax they`re complaining about, It`s the raise in tax for the stupid Obama Care lol. Most people who aren`t a deadbeat already have healthcare why should we pay more for the welfare people?
0
Reply
Male 602
Codejockey, more tax would not have to be levied because more people would be paying in to the tax pool. This coupled with the elimination of 90% of the IRS would more than make up for any perceived drop in tax revenue. That is why the logic is sound.

Goods that were imported would still be taxed at the point of sale, unless you were buying business to business (e.g. for your start up). It would make used more attractive, but is that a surprise or any different from now? You can buy better cars used than you can afford new right now. Video games, DVD`s, and CD`s are already more attractive to buy used or wait for the price to drop unless you really want something.

Used goods wouldn`t be completely safe either, if you bought them from a store like games for less you are still paying sales tax, even if the total price would still be less than new. The only way to really "get around it" would be buying from individuals, much like buying a pistol.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
@sfcg:

He didn`t say we would all buy mansions ans sportscars.

He was quoting someone.
0
Reply
Male 6,693
What a bunch of stupids.
0
Reply
Male 795
Wow Froggy. Spoken like a true entitled teenager who hasn`t really seen much of the world....

You know your gross generalizations really are insightful.....
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Epic gif mcgovern.

@musuko:

The more money you make, the more you tend to save.

At first, there would be a shock effect, and the poorer parts of society would spend out the ass. They do that anyway. After this period, more savings would occur, because everyone would have more money to begin with.

EVERYONE would pay the same tax on new goods they buy. If a single mom wants a toaster, she would pay the tax. If a CEO of a fortune 500 company wants a toaster, they would pay the tax.

Businesses would no longer be required to pay income tax, therefore their payroll budgets would grow, making room for more hiring, and increased wages.

NOW, politicians would probably find a way to distort it and screw it up, or States would freak out and raise their own income taxes too high because of fear (especially Blue ones.), but I think education before implementation would combat that.

0
Reply
Male 14,331
@Froggybuster

Ahem it`s spelt Yankees there Corky.

0
Reply
Male 1
What people don`t realize is that, yes, income taxes do pay for those services pointed out in the picture.

What these same ignorant people don`t realize is that the fight for "no taxes" is not just about "no income taxes", but rather for a higher sales tax.

The point is that all matters of business, legal or not and regardless of income, will be taxed equally. With a 23% sales tax, you still get your funding for regular services and then-some (since the people who were finding the loop-holes in the current tax system will now be paying the tax they were skipping out on) AND - as a bonus - you can actually CHOOSE to save your money and only spend it when you see fit instead of it being taken from you before you get the chance to use it.

Ron Paul for Prez! lol
0
Reply
Male 122
You Yankies really are drating retarded.

When someone says ""Plus, a fair tax will make business owners richer, which = the ability to hire more people."

Yeah, because the first thing that people think when they become rich is "I`m going to hire some employees!"

You know damn well that if any of us became rich, the only parts of the economy we`d be enriching are those that make mansions and sports cars", you know theres a problem with your understanding of the world.
0
Reply
Male 5,626
"...jobless and homeless with no unemployment money. Or amish..."
"If you don`t want to pay tax, don`t use money. You don`t HAVE to use money."
A) Even Hamish collectives have to use money. They have simply chosen to limit the amount of convenience in their lives. You can find some that carry cell phones.
B) You DO have to use money. People that don`t use money are called `vagrants` and vagrancy isn`t legal. You can lower the amount of money you use which tends to increase the difficulty in your existence.
0
Reply
Female 177
umm you have to pay taxes even if you don`t spend money...unless of course your jobless and homeless with no unemployment money. Or amish.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
@OldSmelly

"Tax= Robbery. Regardless of what it`s spent on"

If you don`t want to pay tax, don`t use money. You don`t HAVE to use money.
0
Reply
Male 2,850
"Plus, a fair tax will make business owners richer, which = the ability to hire more people."

Yeah, because the first thing that people think when they become rich is "I`m going to hire some employees!"

You know damn well that if any of us became rich, the only parts of the economy we`d be enriching are those that make mansions and sports cars.
0
Reply
Male 5,626
"ll US debt would be wiped out in 5 to 7 years with NO CUTS IN THE BUDGET!"
Auburn, that logic is not sound.
In order for a consumption tax to exceed the accumulation of income tax, more effective tax would be levied.

So, I may not be paying income tax but, I would be paying more for materials and locally manufactured goods. This makes imports even more attractive, the very thing I`m trying to combat.

On top of that, you also pointed out that buying used equipment would have increased attraction.

It`s also strikes me that some would try to cheat by using a higher percentage of recycled material. That has another double-edged affect.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Analysts have confirmed, that if a fair tax were put into place at the beginning of next year, and we totally eliminated the income tax, all US debt would be wiped out in 5 to 7 years with NO CUTS IN THE BUDGET!

Now imagine what would happen if we did this, AND cut useless federal programs?

That`s extraordinary.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Exactly TMarley.

PLUS...

If you are poor, buy used. Fair Tax only applies taxes to NEW goods. Not used goods. Once the fair tax has been paid on an item, it cannot be taxed again. That`s double taxation, and it`s illegal.
0
Reply
Male 10,338
People will stop consuming?

Americans will NEVER stop consuming.

Plus, a fair tax will make business owners richer, which = the ability to hire more people.

American dollars will be more free to flow throughout the economy.

Read up on stuff before you critique.
0
Reply
Male 602
And Jason, that`s why the Pentagon needs to go back to its older and more accurate name. The Department of War. People change it to defense to make it sound prettier, but it still smells like sh*t.
0
Reply
Male 602
People can`t stop consuming Rman. You have to eat, buy clothes, and maintain necessities.

What you are also missing is the fact that the consumer would be taking more money home, which would offset the raise in prices.

Taxing consumption doesn`t work in combination with taxing income, but it would work standing alone.

Considering exemption for poverty and the way percentages work, you aren`t going to disproportionately tax the poor. Since you aren`t taxing business to business, you aren`t using a true VAT which would not work. The taxes on a Ferrari are going to be greater than the taxes on a Civic, but if you can afford a ferrari, a few extra grand isn`t going to make you bat an eye if you want it.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
I never call it defense if it`s happening in another country, Jason, even if we were attacked. Defense would be keeping our soldiers in New York.
0
Reply
Male 1,598
Yes, by all means send MORE money to the Middle East... Still, if we cut taxes, how are we even supposed to fund THAT?

And can you even call it defense anymore when we haven`t been attacked since 2001?
0
Reply
Male 22
Robbery is defined as the taking of another`s property under intimidation, threat or violence.

Tax is the taking of another`s property (money) under intimidation, treat or violence.

Tax= Robbery. Regardless of what it`s spent on, it`s immoral and by their own rules- a crime. However, in legal land it isn`t a crime. It`s good to be King! =D Kaching-ching!!!
0
Reply
Male 2,868
Cut taxes, not defense? We`re already borrowing money for defense as it is. These people don`t fcuking know how money works.
0
Reply
Male 246
Yes... Fair Tax. Because there are no foreseeable negative consequences to putting all the taxes on consumption...
C`mon, economics 101. You tax the crap out consumption and guess what, people stop consuming. No more jobs.
0
Reply
Male 5,626
Nitro, while the maintenance of those things is
supposed to be paid locally, the origination and
full replacement of large amounts of that infrastructure
is impossible without federal grants.

Speaking of which, do you think Louisiana alone
had enough money to rebuild that infrastructure
after the disaster?
0
Reply
Male 5,626
Auburn, that looks like it`s adding "Federal Sales Tax" to goods directly.

I`m trying to build manufacturing in the US that is so inexpensive,
the goods can be exported to compete with SE Asia.

Wouldn`t the Fair Tax cause increases in the prices
of the periphery goods I use in my startup?
Local consumers would be able to afford the prices but,
that sounds like it would crush my already difficult
export scenario.
0
Reply
Male 1,625
=)
0
Reply
Male 10,338
Just pay for things with a fair tax, and this would all be moot.

Fair tax explained.
0
Reply
Male 758
There`s one thing the poster of this pic is forgetting-all those things are taken care of by LOCAL and STATE taxes. Not federal.
0
Reply
Male 211
that`s very true
0
Reply
Female 19
AmberMichele, I wish you were my daughter. There is hope for the future.
0
Reply
Male 19
Some states get federal handouts for infrastructure projects, but everything in that pictures is almost exclusively funded from state and local taxes, mostly property and sales taxes.

Just admit that you want the government to be your mommy. Mommy will take care of even the laziest, most ignorant and otherwise completely indifferent of her children.
0
Reply
Male 65
@Kiwigirl2: Too Right!
0
Reply
Male 997
T Marley Do you understand economics at all? VAT in this country or Federal Sales Tax in your country is regressive Tax. That means it disproportionately affects the poor over the rich. Have fun giving a Tax break to the rich.

You cannot continue to tax the rich until poverty is gone. If working hard (yes takes a lot of time and hard work to get those high paying jobs) or working hard another way (a minimum wage job) put you in same position as someone unable or can`t find work. Why work? You need to stop listening to the bash the rich mentality of Gov. to avert attention away from their failed policies...
0
Reply
Male 314
Cutting taxes would require cutting defense spending also, where does she think the defense money comes from?
0
Reply
Male 759
You make the assumption that they want those things in the picture.
0
Reply
Female 68
Seriously. C`mon, now! Our nation as a whole is effing retarded. I don`t think that half of them know what our tax dollars even GO towards.
Idiots.
0
Reply
Female 1,048
It`s funny that people who don`t want to pay taxes are usually the first to complain when the public services they think come from the magic elves aren`t working! What they should be asking for is more accountability for where the money goes.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
So... now that the moron Altaru is out of the way...

Yes, it is POSSIBLE for a economic system to exist that has zero taxes. No, that does not mean we in the US can put a "zero tax proposition" on the ballot and expect the economy to improve. Because the US economy isn`t a zero tax economy.
0
Reply
Female 1,798
finally, a flame i wasn`t involved in :D
0
Reply
Male 1,184
...Except that my argument was never about not wanting to know soldiers... so... umm... irrelevant much?

I honestly thought you were starting to understand. I guess I was wrong.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]i have that video for you now. [/quote]
Thanks. I`ll watch it when I have time. Hopefully it won`t turn into a "You rage, you lose" for me, lol. I don`t have the money for new speakers right now (yes, I tend to throw my speakers rather than doing things to the monitor. After all, I can deal with WATCHING something stupid, it`s HEARING it that sets me off...)

And Siyanor...

At the time, I was replying to your statement of not wanting to know any soldiers. That should have let you know, in context, that "near to you," or whatever variation of that I said, meant people you know.

I honestly have run out of ways to deal with you and your stupidity. You just go ahead and remember it how you will. I`m done here. I`m gonna go play some Touhou, then go to bed.

Enjoy your night.
0
Reply
Female 654
i have that video for you now.
in youtube it will be JBSdollarsandsense
his website is jbs.org
mind you...he rattles on, but he is the reason for half of your annoyance tonight
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"you started arguing that what I said before and after had different, and even contrasting, meanings..."

I wasn`t arguing that. I was merely STATING that. It wasn`t an argument at all, so when you said that my argument was a semantic argument, you were saying that "I do not wish to be within 5 feet of a soldier" is a semantic argument. I realized this, and stated this, and you ignored me.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I never argued that you were wrong because I did not understand you the first time. You argued that my argument was a semantic argument because I stated that I did not understand you the first time.[/quote]

I argued that yours was a semantic argument because, after I stated what my point was in terms you were able to understand, you started arguing that what I said before and after had different, and even contrasting, meanings...

Because of three words.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
No.

I never argued that you were wrong because I did not understand you the first time. You argued that my argument was a semantic argument because I stated that I did not understand you the first time.
0
Reply
Female 654
im assuming that it has to do with a publication called dollars and sense. they had a hour or so long video, if you can ever get your hands on it, take it with a grain of sand, it has a lot info taken from the reserve, mint, the national debt, and historical data concerning the gold the dollar used to represent. im almost sure they made the video now.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Yes, Altaru, and stated that I agreed with you on that.

However, it is not possible for me to wish to be within 5 feet of an active soldier.[/quote]
So you added a completely separate and pointless argument based on a misconception based on three words...?
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Hot troll on troll action?[/quote]
You know what, I like that one.

And I`m pretty sure I`ve seen your name in the credits of a sizable portion of the Troll series, so I don`t know how you feel you can condemn us for it...
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]i understand you are frustrated, for whatever reason people dont care about your opinion and are not listening to it..i get it, i do, but taking it out on other people will do you no justice. if i knew the name of the video, id give it to you, honestly, but i dont. honey im just telling you, the video said the reserve was ordering the printing of money, i personaly dont give a poo whos doing it, its wrong regardless. that was not my words, it was thiers[/quote]
I apologize. I didn`t realize there was a video at fault for this.

Suman, ore ga warukatta.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
There`s a difference between trolling and pedantry, 5Cats. I`m merely being pedantic.

"Like I said before, it`s entirely possible to know a soldier and not even realize it. Reserve or otherwise."

Yes, Altaru, and stated that I agreed with you on that.

However, it is not possible for me to wish to be within 5 feet of an active soldier.
0
Reply
Male 40,762
Is there a term for when two trolls are trolling each other?
(Siyanor and Altaru to be specific)
Twin trolling? Doubletroll? Hot troll on troll action??
0
Reply
Female 654
i am aware that the majority of people when it comes to post like this have no idea what they are talking about. being irritated is never a valid excuse, you come off looking like a child, which im sure your not being the 18-29 yr old you are.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I do not wish to be within 5 feet of a soldier. [/quote]
*facepalm*

Here we go again...

Do I have to go through the process of explaining, ONCE AGAIN, the fact that not every soldier walks around screaming about his training and flashing his battle scars?

Like I said before, it`s entirely possible to know a soldier and not even realize it. Reserve or otherwise.

I tried to be polite about it when I first said that. Even with our previous arguments, I was being nice, and using casual language. It wasn`t supposed to be a "debate," or whatever you consider it. Then you, being the retard you are, somehow took a completely different meaning from what I said.

I`m going to start using smaller words with you. I guess, from here on out, I`ll just have to start treating you like a child.

So here, have a lolipop and STFU.
0
Reply
Female 654
i understand you are frustrated, for whatever reason people dont care about your opinion and are not listening to it..i get it, i do, but taking it out on other people will do you no justice. if i knew the name of the video, id give it to you, honestly, but i dont. honey im just telling you, the video said the reserve was ordering the printing of money, i personaly dont give a poo whos doing it, its wrong regardless. that was not my words, it was thiers
0
Reply
Male 170
cut taxes not defense.... These people are reproducing at alarming rates....
0
Reply
Male 1,184
My argument had to do with distance. In the context of my argument, assuming a meaning relating to distance is completely natural.

In any case, whatever your meaning of "near to," your argument is incorrect. I do not wish to be within 5 feet of a soldier. I may wish to be within 5 feet of a reserve soldier, which is why I originally thought your point related to the reserve, since that would be the most logical counter to my argument. It`s also irrelevant, though, since I never stated otherwise.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]what the drat did i do to you. you need to calm yourself, it the god dam internet, not a missle crisis. i know who is responsible for making what decisions babe..im not a child, nor do i take lessons from them.[/quote]
Ignorance. That`s what you did wrong.

Not only that, but irritating me when I`m already irritated at Siyanor. I tend to bite when he`s around.
0
Reply
Female 654
what the drat did i do to you. you need to calm yourself, it the god dam internet, not a missle crisis. i know who is responsible for making what decisions babe..im not a child, nor do i take lessons from them.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]But I`m obviously not going to assume that that`s what you mean when my entire argument is about people being within 5 feet of me, which it was.[/quote]
Before you interpreted my post that way, it had nothing to do with distance. It had to do with people you knew. You said that you couldn`t possibly be friends or know a soldier.

I said that you never know, the people close to you could be soldiers and you might not even know it.

In other words, the people close to your heart, as in your friends, etc.

It`s natural to assume a CONTEXTUAL meaning. Assuming a literal meaning is what makes you look like a retard so often.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
@rakoonhat

GRAHHHHH... I wanna punch you right now, so bad. Can I pull a Chuck Norris and send you an e-roundhouse kick?

Do we have to go through the same process we went through with Siyanor? The Federal Reserve DOES NOT print money, the US Department of Treasury does, and SELLS the money to the Federal Reserve to distribute.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
But I`m obviously not going to assume that that`s what you mean when my entire argument is about people being within 5 feet of me, which it was. It`s much more natural assume the most relevant meaning. It`s also natural to assume a literal meaning.
0
Reply
Female 654
yea, i remeber seeing a video about that. the federal reserve is just printing money out of thin air. basicaly pulling a reichsmark on us. its scary to believe the dollar will mean nothing in 100 yrs...it almost means nothing now
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I don`t understand that when you say "near to you" you mean "that you know well," because, umm, that isn`t literal.[/quote]
Here I was thinking that was one of those obvious evolutions of the English language.

I would think that everyone would know the concept of "Close to your heart," and by extension, "Close to you," or "someone you`re close to," in this day and age. It`s one of the biggest Cliches in all of romance and virtually any other genre of entertainment...
0
Reply
Male 1,184
I always understand that perfectly.

I don`t understand that when you say "near to you" you mean "that you know well," because, umm, that isn`t literal.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I have already told you to be literal when you argue with me. Your meanings are almost never literal. Mine always are. And yet you continue to believe I`m sarcastic half the time.[/quote]
I don`t think I can get much more literal than "You`re retarded, because X..." which is usually what I say. It`s you who can somehow take a million meanings out of three words in a sentence, and always pick the wrong one.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
I have already told you to be literal when you argue with me. Your meanings are almost never literal. Mine always are. And yet you continue to believe I`m sarcastic half the time.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Actually, I`ve done that exactly once,[/quote]
Then it`s funny how, every time we argue you seem to take a different meaning away from what I say in contrast to what I actually mean...

And what I actually, usually, mean is, you`re retarded. End of story.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
skater, not only have I ALREADY accepted that BECAUSE you have relieved me of my ignorance, but it`s ENTIRELY IRRELEVANT to my argument, which you`d know if you weren`t as retarded as Altaru. I have explicitly stated what my point is. Read it.
0
Reply
Male 296
Siyanor, the belief that a bank can print money at it`s own will is either a) ignorance at not accepting the facts that we`re pointing out are true, or b) just plain stupidity. Take your pick. You can`t sit here and debate on issues while not accepting the facts and truths and/or being totally uneducated and unprepared to take 30 seconds to research your argument and realize that it`s completely false.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Actually, I`ve done that exactly once, and it was only because you stated what your point was twice, and your two sentences had entirely different meanings. You then proceeded to state that it was a "semantic argument" because I informed you of the fact that words have meaning.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]You seem to have an extraordinary talent for not being able to figure out what my point is, even when I explicitly state: "My point is..."[/quote]
Maybe I`ve taken it upon myself to take a leaf out of your book, and think that, even when the point is explicitly stated, it`s not the point.

As you`ve done nearly every time we`ve argued.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
You seem to have an extraordinary talent for not being able to figure out what my point is, even when I explicitly state: "My point is..."
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Also, I was never taught that in any class at any point in time. Maybe you were, but not me.[/quote]
Ah, the glorious American education system.

See also, Skaterboy`s 30 second google search...
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Ah, so you finally, finally, admit that you were confused, even though you constantly tell me "No, idiot, I understood you perfectly."[/quote]
No, I wasn`t admitting to being confused, I was stating that, in the incident that you were, in fact, correct in your post, than the reason I was confused is because you seem to have a talent for having no point whatsoever half the time.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"I think it`s pretty stupid to assume something after being taught the exact opposite."

That is what you do pretty much every single time we argue.

Also, I was never taught that in any class at any point in time. Maybe you were, but not me.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Ah, so money is distributed, but not printed, by banks.

I`m supposed to know that how, exactly? [/quote]
Because I was taught that in my sophomore history class and my junior half-year government class both.

I think it`s pretty stupid to assume something after being taught the exact opposite. In most cases, at least.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Ah, so you finally, finally, admit that you were confused, even though you constantly tell me "No, idiot, I understood you perfectly."
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]No, Altaru, you have explicitly stated on three separate occasions a specific belief which is entirely counter to mine, stating that I am free to believe it.

In fact, on one such occasion, it was the belief that YOU had earlier professed to believe which you stated I am free to believe, but you do not.[/quote]
Specifics? I don`t ever remember telling you you could believe anything, just calling you retarded because you did.

And maybe if more of your posts HAD A VALID POINT, I wouldn`t get confused as often about what you were saying.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Ah, so money is distributed, but not printed, by banks.

I`m supposed to know that how, exactly?

You think ignorance is stupidity. It isn`t.

I think a native English speaker being incapable of understanding written English is stupidity. It is.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]But I was pretty certain that all mints in the US were owned by banks.[/quote]
I could get a tan in the shine from your stupidity.

The U.S. Department of Treasury owns and runs both the Bureau of Engraving and Printing (which prints paper currency) and the US Mint (which produces coins).

The money is then SOLD to banks, who distribute it.

More often than not, anymore, currency is only produced to replace old, worn out currency that`s too worn or damaged to continue being used.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
No, Altaru, you have explicitly stated on three separate occasions a specific belief which is entirely counter to mine, stating that I am free to believe it.

In fact, on one such occasion, it was the belief that YOU had earlier professed to believe which you stated I am free to believe, but you do not.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Also, it`s quite obvious that mints print money. But I was pretty certain that all mints in the US were owned by banks.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]Altaru, you are the one who consistently tells me "You are free to believe X, but I don`t" when X is quite clearly the exact opposite of my beliefs. I don`t think you have any right to judge my intelligence.[/quote]
You`re free to believe that, but I don`t.

I tell you "You`re free to be retarded, but I`m gonna point it out when you are."

And, like I said, you`re entire scenario went from stupid to begin with, to retarded, and all the while so nearly impossible it`s pretty much just a margin of error, not a valid possibility.
0
Reply
Male 2
CrakrJak is here to troll again!!!

"Americans enjoy higher average disposable (after tax) AND gross (before tax) income than scandinavian countries do and enjoy a significantly lower cost of living than do scandinavian."

@crakrjak Aaaaand Sweden and Norway enjoy a better Education (except for Norway in Science) and Health.

To be fair: the US enjoys more Prison Incarceration.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Um, skater, what happens in the US and Canada is entirely irrelevant. I`m NOT talking about any system that does exist or ever has existed or ever probably will exist anywhere in the world. My scenario is PURELY theoretical. My point is that when people say "X is impossible," they mean "X is impossible in my country," but they NEVER SAY THAT, so they`re essentially completely wrong.

Altaru, you are the one who consistently tells me "You are free to believe X, but I don`t" when X is quite clearly the exact opposite of my beliefs. I don`t think you have any right to judge my intelligence.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
@skaterboy17

That`s even worse, lol.

A 30 second google search knows more about our country than people who live here... Sad, sad world...
0
Reply
Male 296
Altaru, I honestly had no idea what the breakdown was on who is technically responsible for printing your money. I knew that the government was overall responsible, which should be common sense, but spending about 30 seconds on Google found me that answer pretty quick.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
@skaterboy17

I always have to laugh when a Canadian knows more about our country than someone who lives here.

So much for our public school system... No wonder the national average IQ is going down...
0
Reply
Male 296
Defiythelie and Siyanor,

The Canadian Mint prints our money, which is run by the government.
The US Bureau of Engraving and Printing, which is part of the Department of the Treasury (government), prints your money.
0
Reply
Male 296
""everyone can agree that taxes are needed to run the business of government."

I disagree."

Siyanor, if taxes don`t run the business of the government, then who does? Private companies that fund the government? If I understand correctly, when private corporations give money to government officials or parties, it leads to corruption, the individual or the party working to pass laws in favor of the companies that help fund them (largely oil companies), and/or protect them. This is one of the reasons that it is highly illegal in Canada for government officials or parties to accept donations from private corporations to fund their election campaigns.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
@defiythelie

Wrong... On so many accounts...
0
Reply
Male 230
@skaterboy17
I see your from Canada, I dont know who prints your money but in the states the federal reserve does. Although the word federal is in the name they are not a part of the government and are in fact a privately owned corporation. The US at one point in time did print its own money but for some reason they changed that fact. Also the great depression followed a few years after the switch. The difference is when the government printed money there was gold or silver to back up every dollar, now there is nothing backing up, so the federal reserve is neither federal nor does it have any reserves.
0
Reply
Male 296
Makes sense, I`m not even sure anymore of what his original point was.
0
Reply
Male 1,378
derp
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]I`m confused. Siyanor, could you please explain? You seem like a pretty smart fellow,[/quote]
Oooohhhh... I feel sorry for you.

You really are confused if you think he seems like a smart fellow...

Here`s the thing about Siyanor. Just when it seems like he`s said something intelligent, it`s like someone else gets on his computer and says something on the polar opposite end of the intelligence spectrum.

And in the process, completely undermines his original point.
0
Reply
Male 2,402
I don`t have a problem with paying for taxes if it goes toward infrastructure and defense (note: not offense)and Justice division, Dept of Commerce. However I do have a problem with tax raises to pay off corporate bailouts such as banks, insurance companies, mortgage credit default swaps, ponzi schemes pay raises to congress etc.....
0
Reply
Male 296
Thank you, Altaru. If the government didn`t print money, then obviously a business would have to, and the government would have to pay them...or maybe a bank would...or they pay themselves seeing as they have the power to create money?

I`m confused. Siyanor, could you please explain? You seem like a pretty smart fellow, maybe you can figure this one out, seeing as you`ve said the government doesn`t print money, but haven`t said who does.
0
Reply
Male 3,482
[quote]skater, you do realize that THE ENTIRE SCENARIO IS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT FUNDED BY TAXES? Since apparently the government prints money, (which I have never heard of happening in my entire life, but whatever) the government is funding itself by printing money. Also, since this scenario is by no means based on reality, I don`t see how banks can`t print money in this scenario.[/quote]
Okay, seriously, you`re scenario just went from stupid to straight up retarded. Not that I expected anything different out of you to begin with.

And I seriously hope you`re being sarcastic when you say that you`ve never heard of the government printing money... Who do you think runs the US. Department of Treasury, the ones who print money?
0
Reply
Male 285
cut taxes not defense? So where does the military`s budget come from? These people have such petty existences.
0
Reply
Female 1,963
CrakrJak, yes, but we have a much higher standard of living considering things like education and health care.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"everyone can agree that taxes are needed to run the business of government."

I disagree.
0
Reply
Female 4,376
@gatorade

You do know the majority of taxes don`t even go to welfare right? and getting on welfare is NOT easy, it is NOT fun, and most people on it wish they weren`t and are only on it as a last resort. I`ve talked to many people who use food stamos and medicaid (and up until a few months ago I was one of them) and they are ashamed and humiliated. they hate pulling out theuir EBT card and they feel like a leech when in reality most of them are doing the best they can on hard times. Unfortunately their are people out there who abuse the system and crap out kids like crazy to get more benefits then go and get their "hair and nails did" while they`re kids are eating generic fruit loops for dinner. Those are the dumbasses who are seen the most and therefore give those quiet ones who are in thew shadows minding their own business and doing the best they can with a bad situation a bad name.

0
Reply
Female 4,084
everyone can agree that taxes are needed to run the business of government. however with that said, why not spend some of those taxes investigating things like medicare/medicaid fraud? the return on that could potentially fund something positive like V.A. benefits and job training for veterans and their spouses. and seriously, why not tax churches? if the going income tax rate is somewhere around 25% or more, why not tax the church 2%? some of these mega-churches are bigger and better than anything i`ve ever seen, so why not spread that wealth around to everyone, not just their members? just a thought....
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"If you arbitrarily printed it what is to stop you from making yourself a trillionaire"

Perhaps...anti-fraud laws?
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"the government knows best what we want and can provide it for us"

I`m pretty sure that`s a basic assumption of every economic theory.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Glad you understood him, unmercyfuldu. I just ignored him because I had no clue what he was saying. Now I realize he meant they`re, not their, and it makes sense now. I mean, as much sense as idiocy can make.
0
Reply
Male 602
Siyanor, paper money is like a share in stock. If you split your shares you may double them, but each share is worth half as much. Without standards there is no meaning to paper money. If you arbitrarily printed it what is to stop you from making yourself a trillionaire off of a few bales of cotton and linens and ink.

Another way to look at it is to research the relative price for oil and gold, and over time you will see it is not that oil has so much gotten more expensive, but that the value of our money has decreased over time, thus making us use more of it.

Secondly, "you`re describing a system of backed assets, which obv. wouldn`t work in a zero tax system." is ridiculous. Even in a zero tax world, money based on assets would still have value, that is senseless. People would still work and be paid and buy the things they want. Unless of course you are of the mind that the government knows best what we want and can provide it for us.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
intrigid: The main reasons for Sweden and Norway`s riches are Petroleum, Natural gas, and Hydro electric power.

Americans enjoy higher average disposable (after tax) AND gross (before tax) income than scandinavian countries do and enjoy a significantly lower cost of living than do scandinavian. America also has over 400 billionaires, The last I checked Sweden had 8, and Norway had 4.
0
Reply
Male 762
@gatorade777

Because people love being on welfare. It is a lifestyle overflowing with fulfillment. None of that money goes to help families down on their luck, especially in an economy like this, nah! They are all just lazy people! They didn`t have the good sense to inherit a bunch of money from their rich parents. Hip Hip Horray for more families out on the streets and less welfare!

You are a spoiled idiot. Must be nice to have the luxury of being such a moron.
0
Reply
Male 1,193
its about welfare taxes. and their right, go get a job and stop mooching off the hard working people.
0
Reply
Female 1,963
High, proportional taxation all the way.
0
Reply
Male 313
We all should pay far more in taxes. Don`t you think? We don`t pay enough now. And isn`t all the money really the governments anyway?

Here is something to think about.
Roads are paid using our gasoline taxes approaching $0.45 a gallon. Do the math on that.

Oh and the best stat of all " 95% of all income tax is paid by only he top 3% of income earners", so that 3% needs to step up an pay more for the rest of us. I read somewhere that as far as income tax, only about 50% of us pay any at all, so let`s tax business, they are rich and evil anyway. Although if you tax business it raises their costs, and business simply adds that increased cost to the goods we buy, so.... we pay it anyway.
Wait I know how to pay more.... vote Democrat!
0
Reply
Male 1,184
T-Marley, I cannot understand that in the slightest, so apparently I have no business talking economics. I don`t see how $10 being worth $20 means $1 is worth 50 cents. I`d think the $1 would be worth $2. Also, you`re describing a system of backed assets, which obv. wouldn`t work in a zero tax system. So.. it`s completely irrelevant.

skater, you do realize that THE ENTIRE SCENARIO IS BASED ON THE ASSUMPTION THAT THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT FUNDED BY TAXES? Since apparently the government prints money, (which I have never heard of happening in my entire life, but whatever) the government is funding itself by printing money. Also, since this scenario is by no means based on reality, I don`t see how banks can`t print money in this scenario.
0
Reply
Female 1,593
Pfft, who needs stop lights, street lights, sidewalks, nicely paved roads, traffic signs, street signs, AND the power to said stop and street lights? And let`s let 9 year olds get licenses, too.

poo! While we`re at it, lower the drinking age to 14!
0
Reply
Female 4,376
Uhh yeah we DO need stoplights and street signs and roads.
0
Reply
Male 296
The government is funded by taxes, therefor taxes are paying Mr. Road.
0
Reply
Male 296
Siyanor,

The government prints money. Anybody other than the government that prints money is printing counterfeit currency. As Yaezakura said, banks are businesses. They can`t just say, "Hey, Mr. President of our bank, this guy needs a $5 million loan. Go print off a bunch of money, eh?"
So, in your scenario, the government is paying Mr. Road.
0
Reply
Male 602
If the recession has shown us anything about these "rich people" they will make millions of dollars even as they are riding a sinking ship.

There is no solution that is not drastic. The best option in my opinion would be to do away with the IRS altogether, and have no income tax. Instead apply a higher Federal Sales Tax at the point of purchase. This stops anyone dodging their taxes. This also solves the problem of Illegal Immigrants not paying any taxes but receiving government benefits.

That`s just a rough overview, the full plan would include tax exempt vouchers for the extremely poor, and would retain some business tax systems. However you have eliminated an entire arm of government (or most of it) and the money spent on it, you have removed the burden of April tax season and the average citizen would no longer have to deal with any tax problems, saving tons of money in court costs, auditing, etc.

Vote for me in 2020!
0
Reply
Male 602
Siyanor, inflation devaluing money has absolutely nothing to do with the greed of vendors. If you have 10 dollars, and suddenly people tell you it`s worth 20 dollars, you have turned 1.00 into .50 cents, because money is theoretically backed by other assets. Money is worth so little now because we left behind the gold standard. If you fail to grasp that, then you have no business talking economics.

Taxes could be done away with ala Ayn Rand style objectivist libertarianism, but that is too drastic of a change for there to be any real chance of possibility.

Taxing the rich is not the answer because the rich are smart, and they aren`t going to make less just because you raise their taxes. They will eliminate a job or delay its creation, they will hold back on raises, or they will charge higher prices. They aren`t selfless. No matter who you tax, it effects the poor/middle class.
0
Reply
Male 85
@Ripper, streets are repaired on a need to repair basis based on the frequency the road is used on that town. Consequently a road that is used often needs frequent maintenance.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Leo, that`s called corporatism, not communism. They aren`t even in the same taxonomic level.
0
Reply
Male 5,194
Somebody shop this and show just a muddy dirt road with open sewage.
0
Reply
Male 767
whats funny is i bet they paid sales tax to buy markers and poster boards ^_^
0
Reply
Male 1,834
lame
0
Reply
Male 1,313
The street is a bad example.. as we pay taxes to get streets that don`t need repaired, repaired over and over again, while the ones that need it go unfixed.. because if all the streets were eventually fixed, the government (not the tax payers) would not be giving the state as much money, as the only way to get more, is to use more.

And it all doesn`t go to that street.
0
Reply
Male 25,416
Silly!
0
Reply
Male 30
@siyanor

Wow, why didn`t I think of that. Of course Mr.Road will do it for free... maybe because he thinks first of the community instead of himself right?. I think we should name this new, great ideology!! oh wait it`s communism... enough said.
0
Reply
Male 1,196
this is stupid. not a very good post. not the worst post ever though
0
Reply
Male 1,219
I don`t get it...it`s not like they need any of that. What is the picture trying to prove?
0
Reply
Female 2,352
Yeah someone didn`t think that through.
0
Reply
Female 901
taxes are good, just not really high taxes :| zero taxes would mess everything up...
0
Reply
Female 1,236
Clear w/out having to be hateful. Really good post IAB!
0
Reply
Male 1,184
I completely agree, I-IS-BORED.
0
Reply
Male 2,419
@siyanor
if we just print money to pay for every expense, money is meaningless, might as well be a barter system where the government is attempting to trade for things with pieces of paper
0
Reply
Male 106
It`s almost worth letting them keep every penny of what I`m sure is close to minimum wage, in their case, to shut them up.
0
Reply
Male 40,762
VV @mvangild FTW! That`s a fantastic, accurate AND concise post! (better than I could have conjured up, lolz!)
0
Reply
Male 3,482
I don`t like the idea of having to pay anyone, even the government, to bust my ass working every day...

However, these people are just straight up retarded.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Eric, unlike you, I`m not incapable of reading. I know what you meant, and it`s irrelevant.

Then who prints money, Yaezakura? Whoever it is, THAT is who is paying Mr. Road in my scenario. Also, how can you possibly say what the price of building a road is? You don`t even know how long or wide the road is or what people charge for materials or labor, because it doesn`t say in this scenario. Perhaps Mr. Road only wants $50. Perhaps he IS willing to build a road for free. You don`t know. You can`t possibly base prices on the US system at all, because I`m not describing a capitalist system.
0
Reply
Male 58
I think it`s hilarious. CUT TAXES NOT DEFENSE. How do you expect to cut taxes and continue spending the absurd amount we`re spending on defense. THIS IS WHY THE ECONOMY IS IN THE pooTER! PEOPLE DO NOT GET HOW MONEY WORKS! We are THIRTEEN TRILLION and a HALF dollars in debt as a country, we have to cut something, why not the currently pointless defense budget?
0
Reply
Male 590
Yaez: some of the hugest projects in the country were independently funded projects. And privately funded anything almost always works better/ faster/ harder/ smarter across the board.
0
Reply
Female 385
Siyanor... banks don`t print money. They never have. Banks are businesses. They make money through fees and by investing the money customers trust them with.

This totally disregards the fact that, if there are no taxes, who`s paying the guy talking to Mr. Road? That guy isn`t going to plan roads and talk to people for free. Where`s his check come from?

Money doesn`t just magically appear from thin air. And building modern roads is a massive investment that costs millions of dollars and hundreds of thousands of man-hours. All the stuff around you doesn`t just happen. It`s expensive, time-consuming, and vital. And no one`s going to do all of that for free.
0
Reply
Male 590
Siyanor: My fault for making two separate statements and not clarifying. My comment to you was simply in regards to your scenario about the government printing money and causing inflation and devaluing our currency (AKA: stealing from us)
0
Reply
Male 527
Not just the U.S. There`s Soviet Russia, how well the Chinese government treats people who look for democratic freedom (same way with Cuba), Ahdmenijad "winning" his election, it doesn`t matter. The government is like a church, except instead of placing your total faith into a perfect being that may or may not exist, you`re putting it into imperfect, existing beings.
0
Reply
Male 590
madest: why is that ironic?
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Eric, it`s you that is ignorant of the quite obvious fact that I am not describing capitalism, therefore "the fed" can`t be proud of anything.
0
Reply
Male 591
TeaTards. They`re just not smart.
0
Reply
Male 590
Siyanor: wow... that was an incredible display of ignorance although i`m sure the fed would be proud that people really believe printing money and inflation are that benign

So yes, that is a poorly made sign, but they are clearly protesting federal taxes, none of which paid for anything in that picture. People really have no clue how taxes and spending and the federal government work and how much we`re being lied to and stolen from.
0
Reply
Male 120
madest
Male, 40-49, Eastern US
2816 Posts Saturday, September 25, 2010 11:42:23 AM
"Anyone else notice the van turning on the red light?"
-----
It`s called: "Right turn on red after stop" Needed the government to study the impact of such a change.

Hate to say this but, it`s right turn on red unless otherwise stated and there is a sign that clearly says no turn on red...they`ll ticket you for that(another non-tax revenue)
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"The government is like any other institution: looking out for its own interests."

In the US, yes, because the US government sucks.
0
Reply
Male 527
Intrigid, that line of thinking scares the hell out of me. What makes you think the government is thinking of your best interests? The government is like any other institution: looking out for its own interests. It just so happens that what is best for you briefly coincide with what they are interested in.

Oh, and your comment about how the lower taxes worked? Well they did. What royally hosed over the U.S. is when the government decided that everyone should be able to buy a house, regardless of whether they could afford it. Some were called NINJAs (No income, no job applicants). All of a sudden, guess what? They couldn`t keep up on their payments. This trashed the subprime mortgage market, which is what caused the recession. Somewhat simplified, but accurate, nonetheless.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
Intrigid, high taxes isn`t exactly big government. In fact, the highest taxes are in the smallest governments. Ex. dictatorships.
0
Reply
Male 275
yes damn those socialists, are you with me crakrjak! damn them all and their faulty beyond any proof ways. USA USA!
0
Reply
Male 1,184
OK. I`m simplifying to a single object (a road). You should be able to extrapolate.

Imagine this scenario:

Gov wants a road. They asks Mr. Road to build a road in exchange for money, with the provision that the road will not be the private property of Mr. Road (check for #2). Mr. Road builds said road (check for #1). Gov asks the bank to print money to give to Mr. Road, and gives it to him. Gov decides not to charge for it (check for #3).

For those people going OMG PRINTING MORE MONEY WILL LEAD TO [email protected][email protected] Yeah. IF the vendors decide they want to charge more merely because there`s more money going around. Highly likely, yes, but again, not necessarily true.
0
Reply
Female 536
I don`t want to cut those taxes that pay for public infrastructure and police and firefighters and all that stuff....I want to cut the taxes that pay for politicians bloated salaries and the taxes that get poured endlessly into "defense" and the taxes that pay for worthless "studies" of nonexistent problems. Waste is waste no matter where you find it, and our tax system in the US needs a massive overhaul. I think everyone can agree on that.
0
Reply
Male 394
Siyanor, please elaborate.
0
Reply
Male 1,184
"You seem to be forgetting that without taxes, those things wouldn`t exist at all."

False.

"And if they did, they would be private property, paid for by citizens,"

Most likely, but not necessarily.

"and you would be charged every time you drove on a road or walked on a sidewalk."

Not necessarily.
0
Reply
Male 9,305
YES! YES! ARGUE! COMPLAIN! DEBATE! MUAHAHAHA!
0
Reply
Male 362
wont ever be done right when run by people
0
Reply
Male 914
(continued)

When done right, big government is best for everyone.
0
Reply
Male 914
@CrakrJak

"Lower taxes mean more capital, Which leads to more investment and entrepreneurship, That in turn leads to more jobs, Which leads to more purchases."

Yeah. Just look at how well THAT worked out for the U.S. :rolleyes:

"No country has ever taxed itself into prosperity."

Actually, countries can and do make themselves more prosperous through taxes. Scandinavian countries have pretty much THE highest taxes, best standard of living, best education, and lowest crime rate in the world. The government support system attacks the problem of poverty which in turn makes crime go away, makes the population healthy which saves money on healthcare.

Canada has the same situation to a lesser degree. Higher taxes than the U.S., but far lower crime rates despite having many many times fewer prisoners than the U.S. This is what happens when you have a government "safety net" for the poor.

When done right, big gov
0
Reply
Male 12
`cut taxes not defense`

hella dumb. if she realized the numbers on military spending vs. tax dollars she`d think otherwise.
0
Reply
Male 4,431
Xh8FYHnGm, if you`re talking about the defense budget, the most bloated line in the federal budget, by all means, you`re are correct!
0
Reply
Male 7,378
"Anyone else notice the van turning on the red light?"
-----
It`s called: "Right turn on red after stop" Needed the government to study the impact of such a change.

Also, I find it ironic that two of the nations wealthiest people (tied for 5th place with $21.5billion each) the Koch brothers are funding the Tea Party.
0
Reply
Male 394
"@Intaresting or you know...the UAE...
not saying it is perfect and they do have all that oil money but still...no taxes there..."

So who paid for the traffic lights?
0
Reply
Male 233
@Intaresting or you know...the UAE...
not saying it is perfect and they do have all that oil money but still...no taxes there...
0
Reply
Male 394
Lower taxes isn`t zero taxes, stop changing the argument.
0
Reply
Male 113
here is a clue for you Obama sheep... If you spend $2 for every $1 you have, you go bankrupt. Look at Greece if you think it can`t happen to a country. Taking from the productive people and giving it to the leeches is not the way to a prosperity.
0
Reply
Male 17,511
Lower taxes mean more capital, Which leads to more investment and entrepreneurship, That in turn leads to more jobs, Which leads to more purchases.

Each of those are, In turn, Taxed, Which leads to more revenue.

No country has ever taxed itself into prosperity.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
"What you`re forgetting, or never knew, is that (a) most government programs not only do not achieve their alleged aims but are destructive"

Evidence please.

"and consist of of taking away wealth from those who earned it"

Prove they earned it, rather than acquired it by subjugating others.

"and giving it in some form to those who haven`t "

Prove they have not earned it.

"that every single thing pointed to in the photo the government should not be running."

Prove it. Then get off the internet, and give your computer away, since both were/are the result of tax money well spent.

Are you sure you live in Canada - I`d have guessed Alabama, Florida or some other 3rd world state.
0
Reply
Male 220
@Xh8FYHnG
Via Kung Fu Monkey blog:
"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old`s life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs."

Thank you for being the poster child, @Xh8FYHnG. :-)
0
Reply
Male 812
You`d like no taxes? Why don`t you just move to the north pole or sumtin?
0
Reply
Male 2,893
Yeah, you kind of need taxes to have stuff.
0
Reply
Male 98
Anyone else notice the van turning on the red light?
0
Reply
Male 7,378
v He says on government implemented internet. With language he learned at a public school. v
0
Reply
Male 36
What you`re forgetting, or never knew, is that (a) most government programs not only do not achieve their alleged aims but are destructive and consist of of taking away wealth from those who earned it and giving it in some form to those who haven`t and (b) that every single thing pointed to in the photo the government should not be running. Government should confine itself to police, military, and the law courts--all the areas that involve fighting the use of force.
0
Reply
Male 599
needs more arrows that say medicare.
0
Reply
Female 385
[quote]fancy, you seem to be forgetting that taxes are entirely unnecessary to pay for those things if there are zero taxes.[/quote]
You seem to be forgetting that without taxes, those things wouldn`t exist at all. And if they did, they would be private property, paid for by citizens, and you would be charged every time you drove on a road or walked on a sidewalk.
0
Reply
Male 417
Haha the irony.
0
Reply
Male 394
The question should be about what to use the taxes on, not whether to have them or not. These people are mentally deficient.
0
Reply
Female 3,001
hah this is so true
0
Reply
Male 2,441
Good point, but how do we know they aren`t talking about the tanning tax? jk jk
0
Reply
Male 1,184
fancy, you seem to be forgetting that taxes are entirely unnecessary to pay for those things if there are zero taxes.

Which isn`t likely to happen, at least not in the US.
0
Reply
Female 385
I bet every one of them was a public school graduate, too.

Also, I wonder how they expect to keep paying our heavily bloated defense budget without paying taxes. The US defense budget costs more than the defense budgets of the entire rest of the world combined. The money`s got to come from somewhere.
0
Reply
Male 15,510
Lol, touche?
0
Reply
Male 20,916
Link: Anti-Tax Protesters Just Don`t Get It [Pic] [Rate Link] - Yeah, we`re all for ``zero taxes` too, but uh... there`s something they`re forgetting...
0
Reply