my view on Taxes

Post Reply New Topic

My view on taxes is very similar to many people's views on voting, do them or get out of the country. Whenever I hear of some fatcat trying to weasel his way to tax breaks to get more money than they would ever know what to do with, I vomit my guts out.

Taxes are what pay the cops to keep people from busting into your mansion, mugging you and taking everything you own. They pay the firemen who come by if for some reason your idiot prep kids cause a fire at a loser prep party. They pay to repair the roads your limo man drives you on. Oh, and don't forget they go to pay the military who are fighting your precious war in Iraq to get you more money you have no clue what to do with.

Bottom line, pay your taxes or get the hell out of the country. Nobody likes selfish people.

Think your confusing federal with state and local any?

Im irritated not with taxes, but with Who the tax burden gets placed upon. But if slightly higer taxes are necessary for a social safety net than Im all for it. I Also want higher taxes on Large corporations-PARTICULARLY insurrance companies.

Finally somebody gets that!

What do you want that to accomplish?

FYI or FYE:

For those of you who want to live in a very rich country and pay no taxes:

THE CAYMAN ISLANDS

All the better if you are a life extension scientist.

Then Nothing is certain, not even death and taxes, except HURRICANES.

Even unfair or unjust taxes?

I pay a substantial amount to local government for police/fire/garbage disposal and other such local mundanity. I accept that I pay for the police even though I may not call upon their services. I accept that I pay for the fire service, though I may not be on fire. I accept that areas do not run themselves, and that there are overheads..

However.. I pay tax to have my bin emptied. That rate has RISEN.. but the service has LAPSED. I do not feel I should pay premium rate for second rate services. Many agree. Should we still have to pay, or should said tax be adjusted to reflect the genuine service provided?

Give insurance companies an INCENTIVE to pay claims-especially when their custormers need it most.

Those people who have that view on voting are a waste. Not only that, but what if you view the taxes as being towards something that is unjust? Henry David Thoreau was known for resisting taxes because he thought that certain governmental actions were unjust and was not willing to support them. Not only that, but many anti-tax activists believe the government's collection of taxes is unjust by it's nature. Finally, some of this weaseling is somewhat legal based upon the complexity of certain tax laws.

Not really. Do you think most tax dollars *actually* go towards the causes that you put forward? The only one that has a highly significant amount of resources go towards it is the Iraq war, and viewing that as a good use of money seems questionable in the first place. Most of the money the rich pay though, isn't paid for things that benefit them, and even if they were, the taxes are out of proportion to use, so even if they pay less than they are told to, they are still supporting their own cause.

Most people are selfish, and some people do like selfish people. Take Objectivists for example. Objectivists are selfish, and they view that as a virtue. In any case, your conclusions do not follow from anything you have said.

They are also a very small possession of the UK. They don't pay taxes, because, in all likelihood, the mainland UK picks up the tab.

I don't see what taxing corporations in particular would be good for. If you live in the US, then our corporations already have one of the higher tax rates amongst the developed world. Not only that, but it isn't as if corporations really are people, taxing them is just passed on to others, such as their customers, or their stockholders, and neither is really that desirable, not only that, but corporations are very mobile. If anything, corporate taxes and capital gains taxes should be decreased or abolished, even if this means higher and more progressive income taxes. In any case, some of the social security problems would be solved also by increasing the retirement age, and the idea of doing so does not seem silly given that life expectancies have dramatically improved since the 30s and 40s when FDR was in power, and frankly, things such as medical care and such are goods, and as technology improves, I would expect the issue of health inequality to become worse.

Damn. I thought at first that your post title was "My view on Texas".

Can I ask another question to all these people trying to cut taxes on rich people and big buisnesses. Why do you have so much faith in a group of people that oppress you and pay you crap and treat you like garbage whenever you actually meet them?

The rich fatcats sitting in office sat back and let our economy f@#$ itself. Even after this happened, there are still people supporting trickle-down economics and denying a democratic canidate who would only increase taxes on families making over 250,000 dollars a year. Why are you still backing up the fatcats. What do you think they're going to do for you.

You ever wonder why innercity schools suck? Nonetheless why people get better educations at private schools than public schools? Maybe it's because people who could be putting in more tax dollars to public schools to make them better for everyone are a$$holing, you heard me a$$holing their kids into private schools and then whining about how they have to pay the public schools. WELL YOU KIDS SHOULD BE IN PUBLIC SCHOOL IN THE FIRST PLACE!

You don't want to be a part of the community than ship out. Pay your d@#^ taxes you big baby!

Who's oppressing me? I am paid what my work is worth (not much at the moment) and I make what I can of it. Maybe I want to cut taxes for everyone, including the rich. Maybe I don't think it's quite fair that the rich are expected to shoulder a burden that is so ridiculously disproportionate to the services received. Maybe I want businesses to operate here rather than through a mailbox in the Cayman Islands so we do at least get some tax receipts from them (instead of none when they relocate) and they bring jobs to our economy.


What were they supposed to do exactly? You do realize that those rich fatcats are being replaced soon by other rich fatcats? What's the difference again? Senator Obama, while undoubtedly an improvement over President Bush, is not the savior his more enraptured fans would describe him as. He's another politician.


You realize that inner-city schools have among the highest per-student expenditures? Much higher than the elite suburban districts. The issue isn't one of money, but of the organization of our educational system. Other countries spend a fraction of what we do on education and get better results. Frankly, putting children in private schools generally reduces the burden on public districts because that's fewer students to pay for, but the tax dollars still come in. No, it's not fair to force people to pay for crappy public schools if they're investing the extra money to put their children through private school. What if the child in question needs a special program that is not offered by the local public school? What if they would benefit from more advanced curriculum or a smaller environment? Why should everyone be forced to go to public school? My home state has a school funding system that was ruled unconstitutional in the 90s and still has not been changed, why should I be forced to support such a corrupt system?


This community is a democracy, right? So then I get to express my opinion and say it should be done differently. People disagree with you. Get the hell over it.

Believe it or not, the rich did not get that way by allowing themselves to be fleeced, and generally are not content to allow society to pick their pockets without putting up a fight. In the current system, class warriors attempt to tax higher earners at a disproportionate rate, and the wealthy retaliate by paying lawyers and lobbyists to write loopholes into the system and find ways to shelter their income from the tax man. The state would have collected more money for less effort if they simply charged a fair rate in the first place. Not allowing yourself to be robbed of your rightfully earned income is hardly anything to be ashamed of, whether the would be robber is a street thug or a senator, the principle is the same.

Hurricane tax?