3 ms·

It absolutely is, I don't understand how someone gets so brainwashed to not understand such a simple concept. A nation has a finite set of costs, those costs ar

It absolutely is, I don't understand how someone gets so brainwashed to not understand such a simple concept. A nation has a finite set of costs, those costs are paid by taxes. If I pay less, someone else needs to pick up my slack.

bko 10y ago
I don't know how the European system works, but in the US taxes don't depend on proposed spending. The politicians don't get together and say we want to spend $X so let's see how much we get and then we'll adjust. I don't remember getting a tax rebate when the state pulled in billions from bank fees or some repatriation agreement. In fact, spending and revenue have diverged increasingly since the financial crisis. Around 50% of federal funds are either transfer payments to the elderly (Medicare or ss) and military. http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/fiscal-factcheck/ http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/fiscal-factcheck/
- cmdrfred 10y ago
  In the US, they overspend every single year. That is now debit, will Apple be paying a share of this debit at some point? Does Apple pay the interest on this debt? Of course not. Those costs are distributed to all the taxpayers. The cost of governance is X% of the economy. If Apple only pays X% - Y%, then the rest of the taxpayers must make up the difference in this year or down the road. If down the road, the costs are even greater than the savings Apple has received as interest must be paid to service the debit. Thus such a situation is wholly economically inefficient for everyone but Apple no matter how you slice it. Also understand, these taxes are not for nothing. Without highways Apple can not ship it's product, without a legal system anyone can produce Apple's designs and undercut them. We can decide what government services make sense to provide but everyone needs to pay their share or the system will fail. Rather violently, if history is any guide.

bko 10y ago

I don't know how the European system works, but in the US taxes don't depend on proposed spending. The politicians don't get together and say we want to spend $X so let's see how much we get and then we'll adjust. I don't remember getting a tax rebate when the state pulled in billions from bank fees or some repatriation agreement. In fact, spending and revenue have diverged increasingly since the financial crisis. Around 50% of federal funds are either transfer payments to the elderly (Medicare or ss) and military. http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/fiscal-factcheck/ http://www.factcheck.org/2011/07/fiscal-factcheck/

cmdrfred 10y ago
In the US, they overspend every single year. That is now debit, will Apple be paying a share of this debit at some point? Does Apple pay the interest on this debt? Of course not. Those costs are distributed to all the taxpayers. The cost of governance is X% of the economy. If Apple only pays X% - Y%, then the rest of the taxpayers must make up the difference in this year or down the road. If down the road, the costs are even greater than the savings Apple has received as interest must be paid to service the debit. Thus such a situation is wholly economically inefficient for everyone but Apple no matter how you slice it. Also understand, these taxes are not for nothing. Without highways Apple can not ship it's product, without a legal system anyone can produce Apple's designs and undercut them. We can decide what government services make sense to provide but everyone needs to pay their share or the system will fail. Rather violently, if history is any guide.