5 ms·

Funny, the federal income task pays for none of the items in your list. Roads are mostly state, airways are mostly private (and air transport is much cheaper an

Funny, the federal income task pays for none of the items in your list. Roads are mostly state, airways are mostly private (and air transport is much cheaper and safer since deregulation), doctors and hospitals are outrageously expensive, a lot of Americans wish their taxes went towards that, they don't in any beneficial way. And...the financial system? I'm not sure what that means in this context but yea, government regulations sure saved that one from going to the shitter. Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime is instantly expanded to AGAINST ALL TAXATION. I'm more than happy to pay taxes I feel are reasonable in amount and directly beneficial in some way. The federal income tax is not that. Not even close. It's a money black hole that goes towards god knows what, and is a huge drag on the middle class, the people Mr. IRS in the quote is supposedly helping.

wahern 8y ago
> Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime is instantly expanded to AGAINST ALL TAXATION You originally said that all Federal taxes were confiscatory. But in your reply above you hedged by saying that most roads, etc were state funded.
- furgooswft13 8y ago
  What are you reading exactly? Here's what I posted, it's short: > Oh yea? Stop stealing 30% of my income if you really want to be helpful. That means a ~30% levy on middle class income is pretty outrageous if that is the class of people you are intending to help. And the income tax is hardly the only federal tax. The state income tax is relatively minor compared to federal, and roads are funded via gas taxes and tolls, i.e. use taxes, which is far more direct in figuring out where your money is going. Sure the feds will kick in grants to assist with roads et al, but if that were all they were spending their income tax haul on they would not need such a high percentage to begin with. And to be clear, all taxes are confiscatory, by definition. If you don't pay you risk going to jail, and if you resist that it will be at gunpoint. Whether one thinks that confiscation is reasonable and beneficial overall is another issue. But it's not like you can just opt-out of taxes, or death.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    I certainly read "stop stealing 30% of my income" as saying that: - the government takes 30% of my income, and - that's stealing. To many of us, that was the plain meaning of your exact words. "All taxation is stealing" seemed the clear not-quite-stated implication. > And to be clear, all taxes are confiscatory, by definition. Which definition? dictionary.com says: > 1. to seize as forfeited to the public domain; appropriate, by way of penalty, for public use. > 2. to seize by or as if by authority; appropriate summarily. The first (primary) definition has an element of forfeiture or penalty; the second does not. All taxes are confiscatory by the second definition; not by the first. When you say "all taxes are confiscatory", people are apt to hear "confiscatory" in the first sense, which makes your statement wrong by definition. It also may make it claiming more than you intended it to claim.
    - wahern 8y ago
      A better alternative definition is provided by thefreedictionary.com: "2. Being or imposing an excessive or unreasonable tax or cost: confiscatory taxes; a confiscatory police." If you Google the terms "confiscatory taxation" this is the typical denotation.
    - furgooswft13 8y ago
      I really think you are splitting hairs with these definitions. Different dictionaries have different phrasings of definitions and different "primary" ones. Most talk about taking property or appropriation by authority/government, which is exactly what taxes are. This is all besides the point, because what I mean when I say "stealing" is "the government is taking a large portion of my income and I am receiving little to no benefit from it, and yet I am not allowed to stop paying for the lack of return for my money. In fact the first link for "confiscatory" on google provides the definition "Being or imposing an excessive or unreasonable tax or cost". That's what I see the federal income tax on the middle class as, excessive and unreasonable. Not that all taxes are necessarily bad, but that one, and the sheer amount it confiscates, certainly is.
      - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
AnimalMuppet 8y ago
> Roads are mostly state The Highway Trust Fund is still a thing, and (IIUC) pays for the federal highways. The states pay for the state highways. There are probably more state highways, but the most important ones (and the most used ones) are federal. > airways are mostly private The planes are mostly private. Airports aren't. Neither is the air traffic control system.
- furgooswft13 8y ago
  I wonder how much of the chunk of federal income tax goes towards airports, rather than state funds. Regardless, if they were just paying out infrastructure costs, they would not need to take such an absurd portion of the income of the people they are supposedly trying to help. In no way does the mere existence of roads and planes prove the need for the automatic confiscation of tens of thousands of dollars a year from the fruits of a middle class person's labor.
  - AnimalMuppet 8y ago
    Well, I said that airports weren't private. I didn't say that airports were federal; I'm not sure whether the majority are federal, state, or city. They sure aren't private, though.
kbenson 8y ago
> Funny, the federal income task pays for none of the items in your list. It is impossible to completely separate the functioning of the current system from the way it is funding. Every single thing in the United States benefits at least in part by functioning within the system as a whole, and that includes the legal and regulatory framework. > Roads are mostly state, A large amount of that state funding is from grants to the state by the federal government. Updated data from the Census Bureau's 2015 Annual Survey of State Government Finances published last week indicates that federal aid made up nearly a third of all states’ general fund revenues in fiscal year 2015. The single largest line items in states’ budgets include federal funding for transportation, Medicaid and other social assistance programs. ... The federal government distributed $41.6 billion in roadway infrastructure and highway safety funding to states in fiscal 2015.[1] The article also includes a handle by-state breakdown of funding received for transportation, and the percentage of that states transportation spending that results in. > airways are mostly private But the FAA regulates how planes fly, and what safety precautions must be taken. > doctors and hospitals are outrageously expensive But there are rules about what they must and must not do, and how drugs and treatments must be verified and what can be said about them. > I'm not sure what that means in this context but yea, government regulations sure saved that one from going to the shitter. It means some protections are better than none. There's a difference between being in the toilet and being flushed into the sewer. > Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime Classifying taxation as theft is not "any criticism". If you use extreme, and in my eyes unjustified rhetoric, expect it to be called out. > I'm more than happy to pay taxes I feel are reasonable in amount and directly beneficial in some way. ...and that's supposed to have been expressed by "Stop stealing 30% of my income"? 1: http://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-state-budgets-federal-funding-2015-2018-trump.html http://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-state-budgets-fe...
jessaustin 8y ago
Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime is instantly expanded to AGAINST ALL TAXATION. It's no surprise, for totalitarian arguments to be made in totalitarian fashion.
- furgooswft13 8y ago
  Crazy world we are living in when demanding the government confiscate less property is considered a totalitarian argument.
  - jessaustin 8y ago
    Peace, dude. That's not what I said. I agree with you on the topic of the federal income tax. I responded to your question about slippery slope arguments ("AGAINST ALL TAXATION"). These are similar to the "why don't you go and live in Somalia" stuff we get sometimes. Maybe I should have described such arguments as "totalizing" rather than "totalitarian"...
    - furgooswft13 8y ago
      Guess so, can't say I've ever seen the word "totalitarian" used in the way you are suggesting.
usrusr 8y ago
Even the very concept of ownership is merely a "service" provided by the state. Stop using that and you don't have to pay taxes anymore. It works!

wahern 8y ago

> Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime is instantly expanded to AGAINST ALL TAXATION You originally said that all Federal taxes were confiscatory. But in your reply above you hedged by saying that most roads, etc were state funded.

furgooswft13 8y ago
What are you reading exactly? Here's what I posted, it's short: > Oh yea? Stop stealing 30% of my income if you really want to be helpful. That means a ~30% levy on middle class income is pretty outrageous if that is the class of people you are intending to help. And the income tax is hardly the only federal tax. The state income tax is relatively minor compared to federal, and roads are funded via gas taxes and tolls, i.e. use taxes, which is far more direct in figuring out where your money is going. Sure the feds will kick in grants to assist with roads et al, but if that were all they were spending their income tax haul on they would not need such a high percentage to begin with. And to be clear, all taxes are confiscatory, by definition. If you don't pay you risk going to jail, and if you resist that it will be at gunpoint. Whether one thinks that confiscation is reasonable and beneficial overall is another issue. But it's not like you can just opt-out of taxes, or death.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  I certainly read "stop stealing 30% of my income" as saying that: - the government takes 30% of my income, and - that's stealing. To many of us, that was the plain meaning of your exact words. "All taxation is stealing" seemed the clear not-quite-stated implication. > And to be clear, all taxes are confiscatory, by definition. Which definition? dictionary.com says: > 1. to seize as forfeited to the public domain; appropriate, by way of penalty, for public use. > 2. to seize by or as if by authority; appropriate summarily. The first (primary) definition has an element of forfeiture or penalty; the second does not. All taxes are confiscatory by the second definition; not by the first. When you say "all taxes are confiscatory", people are apt to hear "confiscatory" in the first sense, which makes your statement wrong by definition. It also may make it claiming more than you intended it to claim.
  - wahern 8y ago
    A better alternative definition is provided by thefreedictionary.com: "2. Being or imposing an excessive or unreasonable tax or cost: confiscatory taxes; a confiscatory police." If you Google the terms "confiscatory taxation" this is the typical denotation.
  - furgooswft13 8y ago
    I really think you are splitting hairs with these definitions. Different dictionaries have different phrasings of definitions and different "primary" ones. Most talk about taking property or appropriation by authority/government, which is exactly what taxes are. This is all besides the point, because what I mean when I say "stealing" is "the government is taking a large portion of my income and I am receiving little to no benefit from it, and yet I am not allowed to stop paying for the lack of return for my money. In fact the first link for "confiscatory" on google provides the definition "Being or imposing an excessive or unreasonable tax or cost". That's what I see the federal income tax on the middle class as, excessive and unreasonable. Not that all taxes are necessarily bad, but that one, and the sheer amount it confiscates, certainly is.
    - AnimalMuppet 8y ago

AnimalMuppet 8y ago

> Roads are mostly state The Highway Trust Fund is still a thing, and (IIUC) pays for the federal highways. The states pay for the state highways. There are probably more state highways, but the most important ones (and the most used ones) are federal. > airways are mostly private The planes are mostly private. Airports aren't. Neither is the air traffic control system.

furgooswft13 8y ago
I wonder how much of the chunk of federal income tax goes towards airports, rather than state funds. Regardless, if they were just paying out infrastructure costs, they would not need to take such an absurd portion of the income of the people they are supposedly trying to help. In no way does the mere existence of roads and planes prove the need for the automatic confiscation of tens of thousands of dollars a year from the fruits of a middle class person's labor.
- AnimalMuppet 8y ago
  Well, I said that airports weren't private. I didn't say that airports were federal; I'm not sure whether the majority are federal, state, or city. They sure aren't private, though.

kbenson 8y ago

> Funny, the federal income task pays for none of the items in your list. It is impossible to completely separate the functioning of the current system from the way it is funding. Every single thing in the United States benefits at least in part by functioning within the system as a whole, and that includes the legal and regulatory framework. > Roads are mostly state, A large amount of that state funding is from grants to the state by the federal government. Updated data from the Census Bureau's 2015 Annual Survey of State Government Finances published last week indicates that federal aid made up nearly a third of all states’ general fund revenues in fiscal year 2015. The single largest line items in states’ budgets include federal funding for transportation, Medicaid and other social assistance programs. ... The federal government distributed $41.6 billion in roadway infrastructure and highway safety funding to states in fiscal 2015.[1] The article also includes a handle by-state breakdown of funding received for transportation, and the percentage of that states transportation spending that results in. > airways are mostly private But the FAA regulates how planes fly, and what safety precautions must be taken. > doctors and hospitals are outrageously expensive But there are rules about what they must and must not do, and how drugs and treatments must be verified and what can be said about them. > I'm not sure what that means in this context but yea, government regulations sure saved that one from going to the shitter. It means some protections are better than none. There's a difference between being in the toilet and being flushed into the sewer. > Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime Classifying taxation as theft is not "any criticism". If you use extreme, and in my eyes unjustified rhetoric, expect it to be called out. > I'm more than happy to pay taxes I feel are reasonable in amount and directly beneficial in some way. ...and that's supposed to have been expressed by "Stop stealing 30% of my income"? 1: http://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-state-budgets-federal-funding-2015-2018-trump.html http://www.governing.com/topics/finance/gov-state-budgets-fe...

jessaustin 8y ago

Why is it that any criticism of our current tax regime is instantly expanded to AGAINST ALL TAXATION. It's no surprise, for totalitarian arguments to be made in totalitarian fashion.

furgooswft13 8y ago
Crazy world we are living in when demanding the government confiscate less property is considered a totalitarian argument.
- jessaustin 8y ago
  Peace, dude. That's not what I said. I agree with you on the topic of the federal income tax. I responded to your question about slippery slope arguments ("AGAINST ALL TAXATION"). These are similar to the "why don't you go and live in Somalia" stuff we get sometimes. Maybe I should have described such arguments as "totalizing" rather than "totalitarian"...
  - furgooswft13 8y ago
    Guess so, can't say I've ever seen the word "totalitarian" used in the way you are suggesting.

usrusr 8y ago

Even the very concept of ownership is merely a "service" provided by the state. Stop using that and you don't have to pay taxes anymore. It works!