4 ms·

> Taxes are a membership fee for society If only you could appreciate that the US was founded protesting a 5% GDP tax rate.

sachdevap 7y ago
And what of appreciating that? Was that 5% taxation being spent on US infrastructure?
munk-a 7y ago
And then proceeded to exceed that 5% tax rate as it built the society we all live in today. Only since the 80s have things gotten really perverse and has this extremist libretarianism gotten any real traction.
groby_b 7y ago
If only you could appreciate that it was * founded by wealthy landowners interested in protecting their interests * that 5% tax wasn't going towards US infrastructure * 200+ years have passed since, and we've gone past horse-drawn carriages
- dsfyu404ed 7y ago
  > founded by wealthy landowners interested in protecting their interests This meme needs to die. Nobody was sitting around saying "You know what will make me richer, a decade of war with England and if we win followed up with several decades of poor trade relations". The wealthy landowners who founded this country were very much going all in on a bet where the possible outcomes were lose everything or break even. They didn't do it for the money, not that there was any money in it to do it for. Edit: Is my statement factually incorrect or ideologically inconvenient?
  - salawat 7y ago
    I second this. Also, read the Declaration of Independence. It is quite succinctly stated the long list of grievances that led to the founding. Of course, actually taking that into context takes away some of the dopamine hit from trying to spread the elite hatred that is currently in vogue. I'm not even saying there is anything wrong with disliking the elite now; just keep in mind then is then, and now is now. The issues are of course going to be different, even if there may be a shred of commonality to them.
    - TheBranca18 7y ago
      It's not hatred to ask people that are hoarding almost all the wealth in a country to spend more in taxes. That's just a progressive tax system. There isn't anything controversial about it even if not everyone thinks it's the right thing to do. Also if you're going to talk about context, the US tax system at the time of its founding isn't relevant at all. I know you didn't bring it up, but you are still defending something largely irrelevant. It'd be like a candidate for President of the United States defending a tithe system because it's mentioned in the Bible.
  - munk-a 7y ago
    > "You know what will make me richer, a decade of war with England and if we win followed up with several decades of poor trade relations" Yea, that'd be silly, instead it was "You know what, the crown isn't listening to us and we're ineligible to be lords like those fat cats in england proper, let's throw a big to-do and get invited back in at a proper rank with representation."
- conanbatt 7y ago
  > that 5% tax wasn't going towards US infrastructure This is incorrect as England was providing military services to the American colony. Adam smith implies that the cost of the military was actually higher than the taxes collected.
  - groby_b 7y ago
    That's... an interesting definition of infrastructure.
    - conanbatt 7y ago
      What a specific part of the government budget to focus on to justify faxes. Its not even 4% of the expenditures of the federal government.

sachdevap 7y ago

And what of appreciating that? Was that 5% taxation being spent on US infrastructure?

munk-a 7y ago

And then proceeded to exceed that 5% tax rate as it built the society we all live in today. Only since the 80s have things gotten really perverse and has this extremist libretarianism gotten any real traction.

groby_b 7y ago

If only you could appreciate that it was * founded by wealthy landowners interested in protecting their interests * that 5% tax wasn't going towards US infrastructure * 200+ years have passed since, and we've gone past horse-drawn carriages

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
> founded by wealthy landowners interested in protecting their interests This meme needs to die. Nobody was sitting around saying "You know what will make me richer, a decade of war with England and if we win followed up with several decades of poor trade relations". The wealthy landowners who founded this country were very much going all in on a bet where the possible outcomes were lose everything or break even. They didn't do it for the money, not that there was any money in it to do it for. Edit: Is my statement factually incorrect or ideologically inconvenient?
- salawat 7y ago
  I second this. Also, read the Declaration of Independence. It is quite succinctly stated the long list of grievances that led to the founding. Of course, actually taking that into context takes away some of the dopamine hit from trying to spread the elite hatred that is currently in vogue. I'm not even saying there is anything wrong with disliking the elite now; just keep in mind then is then, and now is now. The issues are of course going to be different, even if there may be a shred of commonality to them.
  - TheBranca18 7y ago
    It's not hatred to ask people that are hoarding almost all the wealth in a country to spend more in taxes. That's just a progressive tax system. There isn't anything controversial about it even if not everyone thinks it's the right thing to do. Also if you're going to talk about context, the US tax system at the time of its founding isn't relevant at all. I know you didn't bring it up, but you are still defending something largely irrelevant. It'd be like a candidate for President of the United States defending a tithe system because it's mentioned in the Bible.
- munk-a 7y ago
  > "You know what will make me richer, a decade of war with England and if we win followed up with several decades of poor trade relations" Yea, that'd be silly, instead it was "You know what, the crown isn't listening to us and we're ineligible to be lords like those fat cats in england proper, let's throw a big to-do and get invited back in at a proper rank with representation."
conanbatt 7y ago
> that 5% tax wasn't going towards US infrastructure This is incorrect as England was providing military services to the American colony. Adam smith implies that the cost of the military was actually higher than the taxes collected.
- groby_b 7y ago
  That's... an interesting definition of infrastructure.
  - conanbatt 7y ago
    What a specific part of the government budget to focus on to justify faxes. Its not even 4% of the expenditures of the federal government.