Political Theory

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Matthew Graybosch — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 13:43:25 GMT

Torsten:
And if you don't pay your ticket at the entrance they kick out of the cinema.

Nobody held a sword to my throat and forced me to see Beowulf this weekend. If I do not want to pay taxes, then I have to abstain from all economic activity; emigration is not an option, as every allegedly civilized country on Earth levies taxes.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Parsidius — Wed, 21 Nov 2007 04:33:44 GMT

A good (and I use this term relatively) alternative to the income tax would be a subsidy from the citizens to the government. In the feudal ages, kings had to call an assembly of men respected in the community to basically beg them for money. They had no authority to tax by their own power but had to ask first, and the subsidizer had conditions to their giving of money (such as the king promising not to put impurities in the money supply.) While not perfect, this would put some serious restrictions on the power of the government.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Jason Dean — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 17:39:28 GMT

Matthew Graybosch:
I advocate the repeal of the 16th, but nobody listens to me. :) Frankly, instead of passing taxes to the states, I think the Federal government should be stripped of all authority to tax. If the politicians want money, let them get on TV and beg for it. Let 'em hold a telethon.

Well you know I like this idea, but I think mine is actually very similar. Right now you have these "Fair Taxers" who want to reform the tax code. I think the argument can be made to them -- "Hey, why have a national sales tax when we can let each state decide how its portion of taxes should be collected?" Signing on with something like the Fair Tax is a betrayal of libertarian principles, but stripping the federal government's power to lay direct taxes and decentralizing that authority is not. The outcome would be this: The states would re-emerge as sovereign entities, putting pressure on the feds to cut spending. There would be some classical tension between the feds and the states. The difference between my plan and yours is that my plan could potentially capitalize on the tax reform fervor that is quite sizeable.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Matthew Graybosch — Tue, 20 Nov 2007 14:42:25 GMT

Jason Dean:
Why is it that no one advocates the repeal of the 16th, with the government simply assessing tax liabilities to the states?

I advocate the repeal of the 16th, but nobody listens to me. :) Frankly, instead of passing taxes to the states, I think the Federal government should be stripped of all authority to tax. If the politicians want money, let them get on TV and beg for it. Let 'em hold a telethon.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Torsten — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 13:12:53 GMT

DBratton:
But with taxes I have to buy a ticket even if I own the cinema.

Guess what, you'd have to do that at most cinemas, even without taxes, if you are the owner. Same applies to a supermarket. Even the owners pay at the cashiers for goods the want.

DBratton:
Taxes are not fees like others.

That can be argued, in deed.

DBratton:
I don't have a choice to opt out.

As I said, you can emigrate. Alternatively try doing business without a bank account.

DBratton:
And I have to pay whether I benefit or not.

Same with many goods bought on markets.

Given the existing power relation in a current taxes are indeed a coerced means of income for the government and its employees as well as cronies...

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Jason Dean — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 02:04:24 GMT

Paul:
In fact, you have to pay in inverse relation to the benefit you get: people who benefit most from taxation don't pay taxes, the people who benefit the least (most negatively) from taxation pay the most.

That's pretty surprising coming from someone on this board. After all, when you factor in the hidden tax of inflation, those who pay the lowest amount of "taxes" are actually victimized the most, while many in the upper echelons of the economic ladder, who nominally pay high taxes, get much more benefits than they pay for.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Paul — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 01:53:39 GMT

In fact, you have to pay in inverse relation to the benefit you get: people who benefit most from taxation don't pay taxes, the people who benefit the least (most negatively) from taxation pay the most.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

DBratton — Sun, 18 Nov 2007 00:40:43 GMT

Torsten:
And if you don't pay your ticket at the entrance they kick out of the cinema.

But with taxes I have to buy a ticket even if I own the cinema.

Taxes are not fees like others. I don't have a choice to opt out. And I have to pay whether I benefit or not.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Goldenboy219 — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 21:21:56 GMT

The idea to have taxes in this structure is a little to communist for my liking. People are not the same, dont spend the same, bring in more, bring in less, and some dont bring in at all. What an income tax such as the current model throughout the world does is take your money from you before you even get to touch it. I am always amazed how in the US, it is common practice to say, "i make $100 thousand per year", yet after taxes, a person probably actually controls $60-$80 thousand. What is even more shocking is how people actually have to file for tax refunds to RECLAIM part of their own money (for paying out from a smaller % of total income) items this government has deemed either deductible or a credit. It gets even worse because people are actually forced to wait for their money. No interest is compiled on your behalf, but better believe interest is compiled on theirs. This is a very inferior way to tax a population. Not to mention a population that brings so much to the table in terms of prosperity and wealth creation. What we have now is nothing short of a form of "soft communism". Where a small group of people, get to spend a large % of your money on a bunch of programs and corporate welfare that would have resulted in you not even voting for them if you had far-sight that equals to your current hindsight. That there is a monopoly, but when its your own federal government doing it, i like to call that central planning. People will tell you subsidies are great for farmers, but they never will admit that marijuana is the highest valued cash crop in the United States. Think about this for a second, here is a plant that is grown, takes in more revenues than any other crop in the US, and probably 99.9% of the population has never seen a marijuana farm. Yet they have actually tricked farmers to believe that subsidizing their crops (corn, wheat, soy) will help them stay afloat. The only thing i correlate between the two are the farmers that receive 0 subsidies and pay 0 taxes have had a 1000% production increase since 1981. Wanna know a fool proof hedge against inflation, dont pay taxes! And this is just what our federal government will admit. Jason, a tax system appropriated by the states would mean for a totally free society. Let the free market supply the money, and you have a system guaranteed not to cheat anyone. But by cheat, you have to have the point of view that cheating a person is denying them of life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Cheat actually means allowing a person who is not exactly qualified, an opportunity based on a certain criteria that in no way improves their chances for success. Instead, it creates for hostility due to meritocracy being subjected by socialist welfare. People are not all the same. This is why i believe Americans are the strongest and most diligent people on the planet. We actually go around every day, and as a whole, try very hard to be prosperous and efficient. We do this even though we are being cheated three times (triple fvcked) by a system that requires us to transfer 30% of our earnings authority (while they still go over budget and tax us again in the form of inflation, then raise taxes to pay it off) and by requiring its population to go into debt buy continuous purchasing just to keep the economic confidence puttering. Our fiat money requires that we go into debt further and further on 3 fronts.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Torsten — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 18:30:16 GMT

... In a sense I compare them to a monopoly price. Or rather like a mark up cost of living, working and doing business in a country.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Brainpolice — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 14:31:01 GMT

Surely you are not seriously directly comparing taxes to a market price?

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Torsten — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 11:50:44 GMT

DBratton:
If I don't pay my property tax they take my property. If I don't pay my excise tax they take my goods. But if I don't pay my income tax they take me!

And if you don't pay your ticket at the entrance they kick out of the cinema. Taxes are fees like others, too. Just they can get more nasty and intrusive, while being more confusing and less transparent. If you don't like the price of the movie ticket or the performance, you can decide not to attend the cinema. If you don't like the taxes, you'd have to emigrate.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

DBratton — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 01:12:53 GMT

For anyone who hasn't read it yet I recommend Charles Adams book For Good and Evil, which is a history of taxation. One of the points he makes is that all types of taxes require invasions into the freedoms of the citizen. Adams concludes that the type of tax really doesn't matter. What matters according to him is that the rates should be low. I don't completely agree with this though. If I don't pay my property tax they take my property. If I don't pay my excise tax they take my goods. But if I don't pay my income tax they take me!

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Inquisitor — Sat, 17 Nov 2007 00:02:27 GMT

I thought the race to the bottom argument had to do with international trade rendering everyone poorer ultimately. Anyway, yes, welfare states do tend to attract immigrants, and in fact, they have to. This, of course, increases their tax burden, and further discourages investment. These countries stagnate and eventually melt down.

Re: Alternative to the income tax

Goldenboy219 — Fri, 16 Nov 2007 20:21:27 GMT

The theory speaks of people and industry indirectly racing (mass migration) towards the state (bottom) that employs the greatest social/corporate welfare. Since entitlements have to be paid for, and require a tax to accomplish that, wouldnt states of higher taxation have higher population of low income workers??? Or maybe im thinking way to much into it. http://oxrep.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/20/1/85 Search it and there are over a dozen pdf's that discuss this. There are also ways it is discussed in games such as "prisoners dilema". http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/prisoner-dilemma/