3 ms·
IMO part of it is anti-gov libertarians who want any tax to be as painful and annoying as possible.
by lokar 3y ago
IMO part of it is anti-gov libertarians who want any tax to be as painful and annoying as possible.
- Eumenes 3y agoThis is an interesting take ... libertarians are responsible for hotels not including VAT in their totals? Hmm
- lokar 3y agoCertainly US republicans want to make people angry about taxes
- Eumenes 3y agoParent comment was talking about VAT taxes in the EU and you're harping on libertarians and republicans in the US? Strange
- lokar 3y agoI generally assume when people say VAT in a general context they also mean sales tax (and the reverse)
- balls187 3y agoI read the original comment as it didn’t make sense that prices in the US aren’t inclusive of taxes. It’s less about harping on political ideologies and instead provided rationale as to why US prices aren’t transparent. The commenter who brought up Sales tax variations is partially correct, and the lack of political will to adopt a progressive consumption tax is also partially to blame.
- mozman 3y agoEveryone should be angry about taxes. We work our ass off and. so much of it is eaten up by taxes.
- lokar 3y agoExactly
- balls187 3y agoI agree tangentially with the sentiment—specifically in the US, we should be judicious about how our money is taken and used. Not because we work our asses off, rather because it’s our duty as electorates (not to mention general good practice to watch your finances).
- Retric 3y agoSpending is the issue, complaining about taxes in isolation is just silly. The focus on taxes is just a smoke screen so you don’t need to offend anyone by suggesting you actually cut spending on say national defense, GPS, weather forecasting, etc etc. If you actually want lower taxes propose specific spending cuts. Let’s get rid of police and prisons and then see what happens, or no how about…
- losteric 3y agoThe recent surge of inflation is in the double digits, exceeding most state taxes while solely funneling money to the rich.
- Retric 3y agoTaxes and the governments they support are still a huge net benefit. You can quibble about kinds of spending but then you’re going to offend someone who wants that spending thus the silly focus on taxes. Can’t cut police because people want that, can’t remove GPS, can’t cut veterans benefits, can’t… But hey leaching off other people is a time honored tradition.
- batch12 3y agoI think both can be good. We should know how much of a purchase is tax. We should also know upfront. I also think it's okay to question if a tax rate is appropriate and if the money already being taken for tax purposes is being spent well.
- calmoo 3y agoA much, much simpler explanation is that not including taxes in an items price increases the likelyhood of a consumer buying the product. Once a consumer goes to pay for a product, either online at checkout or at the cashier, they're much less likely to back down from a purchase.
- alisson_dover 3y agoThis is a conspiracy level explanation. Do you really think middle aged Americans are surprised by taxes every time they buy groceries? "Oh, darn, the total cost is unexpectedly higher, how could I forget about the sales tax... that I see on every check every day for 50 years."
- profile53 3y agoI mean it is inconsistent and there is really no way for an average American to know how much they will pay in tax at the grocery store. A prepared sandwich has tax, but sandwich ingredients do not. Depending on which side of the county line the store you’re shopping at is, a bottle of soda could have tax or be tax free. Sunny D might have tax while concentrated orange juice does not. Etc.