3 ms·

> Sewage systems are built under permit virtually everywhere and the pipe size or drain units is documented. You’re just repeating what I’ve already said. This

> Sewage systems are built under permit virtually everywhere and the pipe size or drain units is documented. You’re just repeating what I’ve already said. This already happens, but where it doesn’t you must add a bunch of overhead to make it work. > You tax this in pieces, you can 'tax' at consumption in pieces without each consumer building their own billion dollars in infrastructure. That is easy to say when you _already have_ tax payer funded infrastructure to start with. If you include the costs of building all the roads, ports, rail, as well as all the tax payer services that make it reasonable for employees to live in cities near the factories this stuff is made. What I’m trying to point out here is that your $5,000 shitter is going to be significantly more expensive once that’s taken into account. You are freeloading on work already paid for by others in order to make your libertarian idea remotely feasible. > Apartment owners mortgage the cost of their sewage pipe yes, as well as the toilet they sit on. Not talking about owners, I’m talking about renters. I’m talking about people who really ought not to have to make the decision to go into thousands of dollars of debt in order to shit just so you can say you didn’t have to contribute. > If you want shitters for the homeless why don't you buy them some? Because I couldn’t afford to. I’m not rich. However, society can. > Taxes haven't been very successful at solving the problem This is, at best, wild speculation. We do pay taxes, taxes are used to assist and shelter the homeless. You’re saying that because it hasn’t completely solved homelessness then it’s worthless and your little libertarian faction should be able to reap all the benefits of the things paid for by cities and pay nothing back into it. The good news is that will never happen because it is so popular to provide social benefits through tax payer funds. Most people are unwilling to be such ardent boot lickers of the wealthy.

beaglesss 2y ago
>t where it doesn’t you must add a bunch of overhead to make it work. Unmetered water/sewage access is not popular with taxpayers and likely would be a regressive tax in favor of wealthy/corps. > You are freeloading on work already paid for by others in order to make your libertarian idea remotely feasible. If companies selling septic system materials rural people buy are freeloaders, this is something your jurisdiction is going to have to deal with and hopefully fix, as making out sewers public is still going to result in our people buying PVC and Portland cement from your businesses. Your issue here is not with our sewers but that you've failed to control externalities of your businesses. >Because I couldn’t afford to. I’m not rich. However, society can. Many taxpayers can't either. Yet you want to force them to when even you won't do it! >. You’re saying that because it hasn’t completely solved homelessness then it’s worthless and your little libertarian faction should be able to reap all I've said exactly what I've said. Sure you could use taxes and build a shitter next to every homeless tent (of course you admit you taxpayer have no money for that). The problem is in part housing is unaffordable, in large part due to regulations, zoning, codes, TAXES, and of course in the case of public sewers the difficult task of convincing a bunch of NIMBYs to allow their tax funded homeless bathroom to be built next to them. I'm empowering you, since people are so willing to go along with it that they'll vote for the taxes, by all means go ahead and start a private charity and fulfill your dream. Better than what you're doing now, which is complaining to people like me who've actually personally funded and built sewage systems about how I'm a freeloader and if you could just steal enough money from others you could fulfill your goals without expending any efforts or your own money.
- baseballdork 2y ago
  > Unmetered water/sewage access is not popular with taxpayers and likely would be a regressive tax in favor of wealthy/corps. And is already extremely rare. However, what you are advocating for is retrofitting these systems in order to support your pay-for-shit plan. > Your issue here is not with our sewers but that you've failed to control externalities of your businesses. You are missing the point. The issue is that this system you want to move to will be built upon a system that uses taxation to fund infrastructure. Your assertion that this is a better system falls apart if you don't use any infrastructure that was funded by tax money. In other words, if everything was taxed at use from the get-go, your septic tank would _not_ cost $5k. It would be much more expensive as the costs of building/maintaining all the things we currently have would be built directly into the septic system cost instead of from tax revenue largely pulled from the wealthy. > Many taxpayers can't either. Yet you want to force them to when even you won't do it! This is so disingenuous as to border on lying. What you're saying is that everyone, even the desperately poor, need pay for anything they use so that you don't have to help anyone. What I'm saying is that progressive taxation is the way to pay for public goods so the poor are spared burdens the rest of us can handle. > I've said exactly what I've said. Indeed, and it's the typical nonsense said by libertarians who benefit from public funds and are too ignorant or simply refuse to recognize it. So self centered that they can't even recognize the massive disparity between how little they pay in taxes and how much more they receive when compared to people who live in large cities. > if you could just steal enough money from others There it is! "Taxation is theft". You live in a republic, suck it up, and enjoy the sewage system you were able to personally fund on the backs of everyone else.

beaglesss 2y ago

>t where it doesn’t you must add a bunch of overhead to make it work. Unmetered water/sewage access is not popular with taxpayers and likely would be a regressive tax in favor of wealthy/corps. > You are freeloading on work already paid for by others in order to make your libertarian idea remotely feasible. If companies selling septic system materials rural people buy are freeloaders, this is something your jurisdiction is going to have to deal with and hopefully fix, as making out sewers public is still going to result in our people buying PVC and Portland cement from your businesses. Your issue here is not with our sewers but that you've failed to control externalities of your businesses. >Because I couldn’t afford to. I’m not rich. However, society can. Many taxpayers can't either. Yet you want to force them to when even you won't do it! >. You’re saying that because it hasn’t completely solved homelessness then it’s worthless and your little libertarian faction should be able to reap all I've said exactly what I've said. Sure you could use taxes and build a shitter next to every homeless tent (of course you admit you taxpayer have no money for that). The problem is in part housing is unaffordable, in large part due to regulations, zoning, codes, TAXES, and of course in the case of public sewers the difficult task of convincing a bunch of NIMBYs to allow their tax funded homeless bathroom to be built next to them. I'm empowering you, since people are so willing to go along with it that they'll vote for the taxes, by all means go ahead and start a private charity and fulfill your dream. Better than what you're doing now, which is complaining to people like me who've actually personally funded and built sewage systems about how I'm a freeloader and if you could just steal enough money from others you could fulfill your goals without expending any efforts or your own money.

baseballdork 2y ago
> Unmetered water/sewage access is not popular with taxpayers and likely would be a regressive tax in favor of wealthy/corps. And is already extremely rare. However, what you are advocating for is retrofitting these systems in order to support your pay-for-shit plan. > Your issue here is not with our sewers but that you've failed to control externalities of your businesses. You are missing the point. The issue is that this system you want to move to will be built upon a system that uses taxation to fund infrastructure. Your assertion that this is a better system falls apart if you don't use any infrastructure that was funded by tax money. In other words, if everything was taxed at use from the get-go, your septic tank would _not_ cost $5k. It would be much more expensive as the costs of building/maintaining all the things we currently have would be built directly into the septic system cost instead of from tax revenue largely pulled from the wealthy. > Many taxpayers can't either. Yet you want to force them to when even you won't do it! This is so disingenuous as to border on lying. What you're saying is that everyone, even the desperately poor, need pay for anything they use so that you don't have to help anyone. What I'm saying is that progressive taxation is the way to pay for public goods so the poor are spared burdens the rest of us can handle. > I've said exactly what I've said. Indeed, and it's the typical nonsense said by libertarians who benefit from public funds and are too ignorant or simply refuse to recognize it. So self centered that they can't even recognize the massive disparity between how little they pay in taxes and how much more they receive when compared to people who live in large cities. > if you could just steal enough money from others There it is! "Taxation is theft". You live in a republic, suck it up, and enjoy the sewage system you were able to personally fund on the backs of everyone else.