Win uses cookies necessary for site functionality, as well as for personalization. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies as described in our Privacy Policy.
If they taxed you 100%, they'd have to feed, clothe, house, train, doctor, entertain (etc..) you. This would be a logistical nightmare. They tax you 30% and make you look after yourself. Not many people have much left after taking care of themselves. I'd say it's effectively closer to 100% than you think for most people. At least you get to choose which brand of cereal to eat in the morning.
I would disagree slightly with the sentiment "all taxation is theft". I would counter that all taxation at the federal, and even state level, is theft.
I do not think that a municipality or county taxing its citizens to pay for public works tgat the citizen directly uses and benefits from is stealing. I would not mind paying local taxes for the roads I drive on every day, or the firefighters that come to put out my house, or the ambulace team that treats and takes my grandfather to the hospital when he has a heart attack.
My issue is paying the social security of someone I don't even know when I could be using that money to save for my own retirement, or care for my own ailing parents. I dont want to pay for a dam in Wisconsin built using federal funds, or the health care of a non citizen(or amy citizen other than me). I don't want to pay for little Susie Slut to have her third abortion.
That's what they did in the USSR. Not 100%, but something like 90%+, by my estimation, with 10% left for some food, clothing, whatever goods. Everyone was equally poor, more or less, except the elites and the Managerial Class that was stealing from the whole.
Glad this was the first, highest comment. You pedes do me proud. This Twitter user should test this theory out in court. I only stole a 1/3, that's not theft!
Excellent point, I never thought about it that way. I have always associated Capitalism with the freedom to choose, but "capitalism = free market = freedom itself" has only clicked just now.
I would pin this to the top of the post if I could, as your last 3 paragraphs should honestly be taught in schools.
Free markets are the default for free people. All these ideologies that promise some ideal economic system are in violation of this simple fact. To control the economy is to control people.
Yes the market should be totally free within the borders of our country. But corporations are more than happy to close American factories for lower paid or slave labor in other countries with less regulations. Sadly “Libertarians” think this should not be discouraged by government policy.
the market should be totally free within the borders of our country
Only if antitrust actions are filed liberally and with great prejudice, otherwise you end up where we are now, with gigantic megacorps throwing their weight around in an effort to destroy all competition. They saw this problem developing over a century ago, that's why the Sherman act exists, and it is unfortunately necessary.
Minimal regulations on a market have become necessary as technology has increased our reach.
Those corporations did not become powerful as a result of capitalism. Please remember that they would never be where they are now if it wasn't for government protections and favors. The result of every antitrust lawsuit is the government issuing heavier regulations than already existed. It's the same story every time and it makes competition even harder than it was prior. A coercive monopoly can not exist without the force of the government behind it. The solution is to cut regulations and enforce laws in respect to freedom.
If you think US Steel and Standard Oil became monopolies because of government regulation, you need to do some reading, amigo.
The reason antitrust suits bring about the wrong regulation is because politicians are corrupt, not because the principle is wrong.
Completely unregulated markets allow large companies to engage in unbelievably unethical practices with no other purpose than to shut out competition. I'm sorry you can't see that, but it's true.
Please explain how a corporation can lawfully shut out competition without favorable policies (subsidies, land-grants, price-fixing) passed by government officials?
I understand the principle of antitrust, but it accomplishes the opposite, it stifles new competition from entering the marketplace.
The only regulations the marketplace needs is the protection of freedom, which in its full extent covers everything a monopoly would seek to accomplish.
Creating high barriers of entry. How are you going to start up your electric company? How are you going to start up your own telecom company?
Let’s say you start up a general store in your hometown. Then Walmart comes in and undercuts your prices severely because they can bleed a loss, while you can’t last three months at their price points. You have to sell your store now. Repeat, until Walmart is the only store available in the nation.
Why should we punish Walmart for bringing down prices for the consumer? I personally don’t shop at Walmart, but millions of people do because it’s affordable. Just because you opened a mom and pop doesn’t mean you deserve to stay in business, you have to comply with free market economics; even so, the example you provided isn’t based in reality because a lot of people make the free choice of paying a higher price for a better product.
What’s an example of a law or policy that would regulate Walmart? They already have the cheapest prices because their model is extremely efficient. Is that something we should punish them for?
Company A sells widgets at retail. They buy widgets from widget suppliers all across the nation, millions of them each day. They nearly single-handedly keep the widget industry running.
Company B also sells widgets. They are growing quickly and looking to expand, so they start contacting widget suppliers to buy some widgets in new markets.
Company A sees Company B encroaching on their market share and calls up all the widget suppliers and says "We are responsible for 95% of your business. If you start selling to Company B, we are going to stop buying widgets from you and your business is going to die."
Widget suppliers proceed to refuse to sell to Company B and it is unable to grow due to to Company A using its influence to prevent access to supply.
In an unregulated market, this is entirely legal and is how monopolies leverage their power.
Can you cite a real life example of a market being cornered without government assistance?
Your example implies that every single widget supplier is spineless and as unprincipled as Company A, willing to discriminate at the cost of losing 5% of their business, as is their right to do so.
I’m also wondering why Company B would attempt to enter the widget market when 95% of it is already in control.
If Company B is eating into Company A’s market share that means they’re offering something the consumer isn’t getting with Company A, or they’re introducing widgets to people Company A hasn’t been able to reach
If Company A achieved its market dominance by being innovative and efficient, legally, without government favors, it deserves its share of the market
Company B is not entitled to widgets just because they decided to go into business
Company B has no right to use the power of government to force widget suppliers into doing business with them
If Company A bullies widget suppliers into conformity, Company B can stir up a campaign against Company A and convince consumers to boycott them
The free market would punish Company A if it tried to over extend, and it would punish Company B for trying to find success where there is little chance of it
We just think it's our responsibility to discriminate against such corporations. Not some politician. Vote with your wallets. The right understands this well, it's the left who don't care how their products are made.
My dad got taxed on the money his business brought in, taxed again if he moved the money to a personal account (i.e. income), taxed again when he spent the money, so the same money was taxed 3 times if he spent it for personal use.
The money he paid to his vendors and employees went into the same cycle.
Plus, you pay hidden taxes when you buy almost anything, and not just sales tax, gas tax, tire tax, liquor tax, tobacco tax, etc. Road taxes, use taxes, tolls (have become a big one), license fees, registration fees, water and sewer (both are effectively taxes at this point), transmission fees on electric, phone and cable, etc etc etc.
I would challenge any economist to accurately tally ALL of the taxes you pay.
It's 100%. Every dollar that moves through the system is eventually taxed in its entirety. You may not personally be the one paying it, just paying your particular portion of it, but every dollar belongs to the government eventually.
For that matter, all property belongs to the government. Private property is an illusion, and if you don't think so, try not paying your taxes and see how long it is before the IRS starts taking your stuff at the point of a gun.
Tell him to change the structure to an S-Corp pass through. Then he will only get taxed on the net income once. Of course there is no way around sales tax.
No, when you are the owner of an LLC (S-Corp) delegation the companies profits pass through to the 1040 of the owner. It is only once recognized as realized income, not twice like an incorporated entity.
I'm not sure if we are arguing the same thing here. A company with a Public Utility Company sales tax exemption doesn't pay sales tax.
And if your last name was Clinton you might be able to get away with buying personal items through the company credit card and reimburse the pretax cost back to your company. But this is probably very illegal.
The comment I replied to stated their dad owns a company and (1) pays tax on the company profits, (2) then he personally pays tax on the disbursements to himself (my assumption was dividends or members draw) and then (3) pays taxes on sales tax. So, (3) is not able to avoided (unless you have an exemption but that is not for personal use). What I was stating to the OP is that you can avert the double taxation that a standard incorporated entity encounters when disbursing profits in the aforementioned manner by: Structuring the entity in an LLC fashion and file as an S-Corp. In that manner, the profits of the entity pass right through to the owner(s) to be filed on their personal taxes (however, there is a quarterly filing requirement see(I hate citing wiki but..: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation). So, what I was stating is that (1) and (2) could effectively be combined into a single taxation that is only assumed by the individual(s) by 'pass-through' and the entity realizes no taxes on profits as it did before distributions in the prior scenario. I understand how this works, but I usually have my CPA(s) handle all the documentation and regulatory issues. The benefit is the savings on the corporate rate.
What I was stating to the OP is that you can avert the double taxation that a standard incorporated entity encounters when disbursing profits in the aforementioned manner by: Structuring the entity in an LLC fashion and file as an S-Corp.
And you're absolutely correct. I'm just getting at something else. Merry Christmas!
The government doesn’t actually print and use money. It borrows short term from the federal reserve, paying interest (the federal reserve creates the credit out of thin air) and then the federal reserve sells that debt to institutions and individuals in the form of government bonds. So banks and individuals (Usually American though a small fraction are foreign) fund deficit spending.
Unless you’re saying the Fed isn’t the government, you described a system of the government printing money and setting interest rates independent of the free market.
The Fed isn't government. It is a state-granted monopoly on central banking as a privately run sort of "public utility". Personally, I'm fine with it because I think fiat currency is a useful technology, and a more stable currency that inflates at a somewhat predictable rate is beneficial. I do however wish the interest paid to the fed was donated to the federal budget instead of distributed to share holders (all banks in the USA own shares of the federal reserve, at least I think so).
The Fed is 100% a government bureaucracy, and it operates independently of free market principles. It seems like double-think to say it isn't just because it says it isn't.
No free market principles because no competition. Other monopolies enjoy the same. Sure it is most accurate to conceptualize them as deep state, but I personally don't think they're malicious actors. Their power is great, but it is narrowly defined and easily monitored. They provide a financial service and get paid interest by the government as well as private banks.
Do we even 'own' property any more? After paying off the mortgage we still have to pay property taxes, lest the govermnet seize the land back for an unpaid tax bill..
Sales tax on used goods is totally outrageous. The government already got a spiff when the thing was first sold! They want another 4~10% every time it changes hands!?
Are we talking free market "profit" (buy for 5k sell for 10k) or commie "profit" (buy for 5k sell for 4k)
I would not put it past our government to tax you on selling something as a private individual even when you're not getting more money than what you put in
Don't forget about property taxes. You paid for the land, you pay utilities for the land, you follow law and keep the property in compliance. And you get taxed (in certain states) simply because you own land. And the state has the decides how much the land is worth, and there's little you can do.
I'm in Canada... I pay 42% income tax, 13% sales tax to buy anything, $5000 per year in property tax, about a 60% tax on gasoline and tobacco and liquor, nearly 50% capital gains tax, land transfer tax to buy or sell property, and now our minister of finance is talking about a set tax on all investments and savings.
I’ve thought about this a lot lately. The left constantly wants to tax us for their pet projects, bullshit like gender reassignment surgeries, reparations, etc. Nowadays we have so many easy ways to donate to causes that you are passionate about. If you want to support a cause, donate! Don’t force me to pay for something that I don’t believe in. Going out and drumming up enough support for people to donate to a cause you believe in is virtuous. Voting for someone to tax me at gunpoint for a cause YOU believe in is not virtuous. Get your hands out of my pocket!
I'm not an economist, but I believe there's a "rule"/math proof that 17% is the "ideal" number for taxes anyways. Just below the threshold to really be detrimental, but below the threshold where paying huge sums to lawyers and accountants to get you out of paying becomes less ideal. Therefore, collection becomes cheaper and there's more collected versus wasted in overhead. Personally, I think 0 is the ideal number followed closely by the Godfather Pizza 9-9-9 plan.
I don't like being robbed either, but I can understand the motivation. No that's not what you said nor what you meant. Though perhaps the robber could choose a path of being lawful and our local governments if they do "need" the money could charge a tax based on whether you joined their jurisdiction or not.
No taxation without representation nor representation without taxation, right? So if you don't pay into a jurisdiction you don't get access to their utilities but you'd also get to choose which jurisdiction you want to live in without having to physically move every year. My hope is that then local governments would then have to treat residents as customers and not as tax cattle.
Is there an argument to be made for individual Wealth Tax instead of individual income tax? Warren Buffet pays himself $1 a year, but the dude has phenomenal wealth which he doesn't pay taxes on.
Communism is the Marxist parody of Heaven. It is not a place that exists on this Earth. It will never exist. So what you get when you aim towards Communism (the cruel Marxist parody of Heaven) is Socialism, which is Hell on Earth. It's universal class warfare, universal poverty, universal slavery, universal injustice, the universal presence of everything bad in government and society.
It’s unbelievable what people are willing to tolerate...if I bill my clients extra I get questioned no one ever really questions a government expense. Shameful.
How about a 10% sales tax on everything except food and shelter (homes, apts, etc.), 0% income tax, 0% savings tax, 0% investment tax, and eliminate half of the government, including 90% of the IRS?
There are plenty of other ways to raise enough taxes in legitimate ways to pay for everything we need. We can start by eliminating spending on things we DON'T need.
Counting all taxes not just fed income tax people are paying way over 33%. Income tax and capital gains should be 0% taxes. Not even 33% is need it used to be 0%, and we had all the stuff because they have many other kinds of taxes what pays for all that.
Police fire schools so on you have property taxes paying for that. What they steal a lot for buying vote with social programs. Roads a tax for that gas tax. What they also steal a lot for buying vote with social programs.
The truth is when you look into it. The high taxes are about funding the base stuff that people want government to do that can be done with low taxes. But a mix of using it to buy vote, get to say your hurting the evil rich people that your voter are envious of, and you get to use a lot of it for yourself and friends with no bid contracts.
We can cancel every tax mentioned in the post and all other personal taxes as well. We have the biggest economy and market in the world. We can sell access to our market in the form of tariffs.
Above 0% is theft. Hypothetically saying that A THIRD OF YOUR LABOR should be given to the government is absurd.
Clearly untrue. 32.999% isn't theft, twitter guy told me so.
If they taxed you 100%, they'd have to feed, clothe, house, train, doctor, entertain (etc..) you. This would be a logistical nightmare. They tax you 30% and make you look after yourself. Not many people have much left after taking care of themselves. I'd say it's effectively closer to 100% than you think for most people. At least you get to choose which brand of cereal to eat in the morning.
I agree, all taxation is theft and the only reason they never tried to go higher is they don't actually want to work hard executing their weird plans
I would disagree slightly with the sentiment "all taxation is theft". I would counter that all taxation at the federal, and even state level, is theft.
I do not think that a municipality or county taxing its citizens to pay for public works tgat the citizen directly uses and benefits from is stealing. I would not mind paying local taxes for the roads I drive on every day, or the firefighters that come to put out my house, or the ambulace team that treats and takes my grandfather to the hospital when he has a heart attack.
My issue is paying the social security of someone I don't even know when I could be using that money to save for my own retirement, or care for my own ailing parents. I dont want to pay for a dam in Wisconsin built using federal funds, or the health care of a non citizen(or amy citizen other than me). I don't want to pay for little Susie Slut to have her third abortion.
You could pay private companies a much lower rate to provide those local services.
That 33% is easily closer to 100% than people think. The cost of living in this country makes having at least 90% of that 33% back a requirement.
That's what they did in the USSR. Not 100%, but something like 90%+, by my estimation, with 10% left for some food, clothing, whatever goods. Everyone was equally poor, more or less, except the elites and the Managerial Class that was stealing from the whole.
Glad this was the first, highest comment. You pedes do me proud. This Twitter user should test this theory out in court. I only stole a 1/3, that's not theft!
Like the dems and the 2020 election?
Thats the answer I was looking for
Four months of every year.
BUT MUH SOCIAL CONTRACT
Excellent point, I never thought about it that way. I have always associated Capitalism with the freedom to choose, but "capitalism = free market = freedom itself" has only clicked just now.
I would pin this to the top of the post if I could, as your last 3 paragraphs should honestly be taught in schools.
Free markets are the default for free people. All these ideologies that promise some ideal economic system are in violation of this simple fact. To control the economy is to control people.
Freedomism!
Agreed 100%. WHO IS THIS INSIGHTFUL PEDE, GIVE US MORE.
Yes the market should be totally free within the borders of our country. But corporations are more than happy to close American factories for lower paid or slave labor in other countries with less regulations. Sadly “Libertarians” think this should not be discouraged by government policy.
Only if antitrust actions are filed liberally and with great prejudice, otherwise you end up where we are now, with gigantic megacorps throwing their weight around in an effort to destroy all competition. They saw this problem developing over a century ago, that's why the Sherman act exists, and it is unfortunately necessary.
Minimal regulations on a market have become necessary as technology has increased our reach.
Those corporations did not become powerful as a result of capitalism. Please remember that they would never be where they are now if it wasn't for government protections and favors. The result of every antitrust lawsuit is the government issuing heavier regulations than already existed. It's the same story every time and it makes competition even harder than it was prior. A coercive monopoly can not exist without the force of the government behind it. The solution is to cut regulations and enforce laws in respect to freedom.
If you think US Steel and Standard Oil became monopolies because of government regulation, you need to do some reading, amigo.
The reason antitrust suits bring about the wrong regulation is because politicians are corrupt, not because the principle is wrong.
Completely unregulated markets allow large companies to engage in unbelievably unethical practices with no other purpose than to shut out competition. I'm sorry you can't see that, but it's true.
Please explain how a corporation can lawfully shut out competition without favorable policies (subsidies, land-grants, price-fixing) passed by government officials?
I understand the principle of antitrust, but it accomplishes the opposite, it stifles new competition from entering the marketplace.
The only regulations the marketplace needs is the protection of freedom, which in its full extent covers everything a monopoly would seek to accomplish.
Creating high barriers of entry. How are you going to start up your electric company? How are you going to start up your own telecom company?
Let’s say you start up a general store in your hometown. Then Walmart comes in and undercuts your prices severely because they can bleed a loss, while you can’t last three months at their price points. You have to sell your store now. Repeat, until Walmart is the only store available in the nation.
Why should we punish Walmart for bringing down prices for the consumer? I personally don’t shop at Walmart, but millions of people do because it’s affordable. Just because you opened a mom and pop doesn’t mean you deserve to stay in business, you have to comply with free market economics; even so, the example you provided isn’t based in reality because a lot of people make the free choice of paying a higher price for a better product.
What’s an example of a law or policy that would regulate Walmart? They already have the cheapest prices because their model is extremely efficient. Is that something we should punish them for?
Company A sells widgets at retail. They buy widgets from widget suppliers all across the nation, millions of them each day. They nearly single-handedly keep the widget industry running.
Company B also sells widgets. They are growing quickly and looking to expand, so they start contacting widget suppliers to buy some widgets in new markets.
Company A sees Company B encroaching on their market share and calls up all the widget suppliers and says "We are responsible for 95% of your business. If you start selling to Company B, we are going to stop buying widgets from you and your business is going to die."
Widget suppliers proceed to refuse to sell to Company B and it is unable to grow due to to Company A using its influence to prevent access to supply.
In an unregulated market, this is entirely legal and is how monopolies leverage their power.
Can you cite a real life example of a market being cornered without government assistance?
Your example implies that every single widget supplier is spineless and as unprincipled as Company A, willing to discriminate at the cost of losing 5% of their business, as is their right to do so.
I’m also wondering why Company B would attempt to enter the widget market when 95% of it is already in control.
If Company B is eating into Company A’s market share that means they’re offering something the consumer isn’t getting with Company A, or they’re introducing widgets to people Company A hasn’t been able to reach
If Company A achieved its market dominance by being innovative and efficient, legally, without government favors, it deserves its share of the market
Company B is not entitled to widgets just because they decided to go into business
Company B has no right to use the power of government to force widget suppliers into doing business with them
If Company A bullies widget suppliers into conformity, Company B can stir up a campaign against Company A and convince consumers to boycott them
The free market would punish Company A if it tried to over extend, and it would punish Company B for trying to find success where there is little chance of it
Agreed.
We just think it's our responsibility to discriminate against such corporations. Not some politician. Vote with your wallets. The right understands this well, it's the left who don't care how their products are made.
If private discrimination against such corporations was effective Trump would have had no reason to run for office.
Unfair government protection is a forcefield against private discrimination. The answer is not more government, it's less.
How does the government prevent you from discriminating against a corporation?
Franchising, price-fixing, school-zones, rent-control, property taxes, general red-tape, etc.
edit: Everything you blame on capitalism is a result of government regulations.
I don’t see how any of those (with the exception of your tax dollars going to a corporation) would prevent you from, for example, boycotting Google.
Spot-on!
Thete are very few free markets anymore.
Incredibly well stated and saving for future reference. Love it.
25% is theft
Well God is happy with 10%. If that is good enuff for Him, should be good enough for government.
Government has gotten bigger than God. The founding fathers would not be pleased with what we've let occur.
That's one of the best responses I've ever heard. Going to use it from now on.
The real interesting take is in the comments.
I'll give 5 for the big guy
Government can go to hell if they think they can take at or above the rate of God. They can have 1%, no more
My dad got taxed on the money his business brought in, taxed again if he moved the money to a personal account (i.e. income), taxed again when he spent the money, so the same money was taxed 3 times if he spent it for personal use.
What a great system.
The money he paid to his vendors and employees went into the same cycle.
Plus, you pay hidden taxes when you buy almost anything, and not just sales tax, gas tax, tire tax, liquor tax, tobacco tax, etc. Road taxes, use taxes, tolls (have become a big one), license fees, registration fees, water and sewer (both are effectively taxes at this point), transmission fees on electric, phone and cable, etc etc etc.
I would challenge any economist to accurately tally ALL of the taxes you pay.
I can do it, very simply.
It's 100%. Every dollar that moves through the system is eventually taxed in its entirety. You may not personally be the one paying it, just paying your particular portion of it, but every dollar belongs to the government eventually.
For that matter, all property belongs to the government. Private property is an illusion, and if you don't think so, try not paying your taxes and see how long it is before the IRS starts taking your stuff at the point of a gun.
Well said!
I wish too, it’s such a ridiculously high number
Oh, and 9% tax on leasing a new vehicle!
Tell him to change the structure to an S-Corp pass through. Then he will only get taxed on the net income once. Of course there is no way around sales tax.
PUC Sales tax exemption?
Then have the company buy everything and then reimburse the company?
Probably can’t do the second part
No, when you are the owner of an LLC (S-Corp) delegation the companies profits pass through to the 1040 of the owner. It is only once recognized as realized income, not twice like an incorporated entity.
I'm not sure if we are arguing the same thing here. A company with a Public Utility Company sales tax exemption doesn't pay sales tax.
And if your last name was Clinton you might be able to get away with buying personal items through the company credit card and reimburse the pretax cost back to your company. But this is probably very illegal.
The comment I replied to stated their dad owns a company and (1) pays tax on the company profits, (2) then he personally pays tax on the disbursements to himself (my assumption was dividends or members draw) and then (3) pays taxes on sales tax. So, (3) is not able to avoided (unless you have an exemption but that is not for personal use). What I was stating to the OP is that you can avert the double taxation that a standard incorporated entity encounters when disbursing profits in the aforementioned manner by: Structuring the entity in an LLC fashion and file as an S-Corp. In that manner, the profits of the entity pass right through to the owner(s) to be filed on their personal taxes (however, there is a quarterly filing requirement see(I hate citing wiki but..: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S_corporation). So, what I was stating is that (1) and (2) could effectively be combined into a single taxation that is only assumed by the individual(s) by 'pass-through' and the entity realizes no taxes on profits as it did before distributions in the prior scenario. I understand how this works, but I usually have my CPA(s) handle all the documentation and regulatory issues. The benefit is the savings on the corporate rate.
And you're absolutely correct. I'm just getting at something else. Merry Christmas!
Roses are red, violets are blue. Taxation is theft, inflation is too.
Very few people understand that printing money is theft, too.
The government doesn’t actually print and use money. It borrows short term from the federal reserve, paying interest (the federal reserve creates the credit out of thin air) and then the federal reserve sells that debt to institutions and individuals in the form of government bonds. So banks and individuals (Usually American though a small fraction are foreign) fund deficit spending.
Unless you’re saying the Fed isn’t the government, you described a system of the government printing money and setting interest rates independent of the free market.
The Fed isn't government. It is a state-granted monopoly on central banking as a privately run sort of "public utility". Personally, I'm fine with it because I think fiat currency is a useful technology, and a more stable currency that inflates at a somewhat predictable rate is beneficial. I do however wish the interest paid to the fed was donated to the federal budget instead of distributed to share holders (all banks in the USA own shares of the federal reserve, at least I think so).
The Fed is 100% a government bureaucracy, and it operates independently of free market principles. It seems like double-think to say it isn't just because it says it isn't.
No free market principles because no competition. Other monopolies enjoy the same. Sure it is most accurate to conceptualize them as deep state, but I personally don't think they're malicious actors. Their power is great, but it is narrowly defined and easily monitored. They provide a financial service and get paid interest by the government as well as private banks.
Do we even 'own' property any more? After paying off the mortgage we still have to pay property taxes, lest the govermnet seize the land back for an unpaid tax bill..
We are all still serfs they just told us we are free
Flat Tax please. The U.S tax code should be 1 page long.
Sales tax on used goods is totally outrageous. The government already got a spiff when the thing was first sold! They want another 4~10% every time it changes hands!?
How about when you sell your used car? Aren’t people taxed on that “profit” too?
Are we talking free market "profit" (buy for 5k sell for 10k) or commie "profit" (buy for 5k sell for 4k)
I would not put it past our government to tax you on selling something as a private individual even when you're not getting more money than what you put in
Hey man like-kind exchanges are even taxed infinitely! (Currency trading, crypto to crypto trading)
Don't forget about property taxes. You paid for the land, you pay utilities for the land, you follow law and keep the property in compliance. And you get taxed (in certain states) simply because you own land. And the state has the decides how much the land is worth, and there's little you can do.
I'm in Canada... I pay 42% income tax, 13% sales tax to buy anything, $5000 per year in property tax, about a 60% tax on gasoline and tobacco and liquor, nearly 50% capital gains tax, land transfer tax to buy or sell property, and now our minister of finance is talking about a set tax on all investments and savings.
Please annex us.
It didn't used to be like this... :( the Canada I grew up in no longer exists.
I’ve thought about this a lot lately. The left constantly wants to tax us for their pet projects, bullshit like gender reassignment surgeries, reparations, etc. Nowadays we have so many easy ways to donate to causes that you are passionate about. If you want to support a cause, donate! Don’t force me to pay for something that I don’t believe in. Going out and drumming up enough support for people to donate to a cause you believe in is virtuous. Voting for someone to tax me at gunpoint for a cause YOU believe in is not virtuous. Get your hands out of my pocket!
All taxes are theft, period.
Came to say this.
I'm not an economist, but I believe there's a "rule"/math proof that 17% is the "ideal" number for taxes anyways. Just below the threshold to really be detrimental, but below the threshold where paying huge sums to lawyers and accountants to get you out of paying becomes less ideal. Therefore, collection becomes cheaper and there's more collected versus wasted in overhead. Personally, I think 0 is the ideal number followed closely by the Godfather Pizza 9-9-9 plan.
Property taxes are no good, you never own land if you pay taxes at the threat of confiscation.
Textbook protection racket
I don't like being robbed either, but I can understand the motivation. No that's not what you said nor what you meant. Though perhaps the robber could choose a path of being lawful and our local governments if they do "need" the money could charge a tax based on whether you joined their jurisdiction or not.
No taxation without representation nor representation without taxation, right? So if you don't pay into a jurisdiction you don't get access to their utilities but you'd also get to choose which jurisdiction you want to live in without having to physically move every year. My hope is that then local governments would then have to treat residents as customers and not as tax cattle.
Is there an argument to be made for individual Wealth Tax instead of individual income tax? Warren Buffet pays himself $1 a year, but the dude has phenomenal wealth which he doesn't pay taxes on.
Why should anyone accept a tax rate as high as 33% ?
He's talking about 33% as an absolute whole, not just a singular rate
We should be aiming for the overall tax rate that existed when George Washington left office.
Communism is the Marxist parody of Heaven. It is not a place that exists on this Earth. It will never exist. So what you get when you aim towards Communism (the cruel Marxist parody of Heaven) is Socialism, which is Hell on Earth. It's universal class warfare, universal poverty, universal slavery, universal injustice, the universal presence of everything bad in government and society.
NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION
And also, taxes are unconstitutional. You can't ever truly own your home after it's "paid off" when taxes are involved.
Please dont get me going on taxes! It infuriates me to no end how bad we get robbed daily.
You pay more for a good to pay for the taxes taken out of the manufactures and truck drivers wage/tax on fuel.
He's 67% correct. Taxation is theft PERIOD
It’s unbelievable what people are willing to tolerate...if I bill my clients extra I get questioned no one ever really questions a government expense. Shameful.
Just an FYI, this guy interviews a lot of very interesting people on his Youtube channel https://www.youtube.com/user/patrickbetdavid
God only asked 10%, why does the government need more?
Where's he getting this 33% figure? Income tax is theft. If you want to levy a tax, do it as a duty, toll, or ad valorem.
if by 'interesting' you mean GREAT!!!
LOL..sounds like controlled opposition.
my grandpa used to say "zero is fair"
How about a 10% sales tax on everything except food and shelter (homes, apts, etc.), 0% income tax, 0% savings tax, 0% investment tax, and eliminate half of the government, including 90% of the IRS?
That's a bit of an oversimplified take. He's leaving out the key ingredients of socialism and communism: you're not allowed to own anything.
It should be no more than 10%.
His channel is one of the best youtube channels for business. You all should check it out. Valuetainment. He's super popular and conservative.
My province in Canada:
Federal + Provincial Tax = up to 54%
Pension: 9%
Off the top, then:
6% of my salary for a property tax 1.5% for the fuel tax
Then 15% on any goods and services. Then the death tax.
Little known secret.. taxes are collected to pay central banks for loaning us their fiat money with interest rate attached.
Don't tell anyone.
33% is way too high
Literally watching valuetainment right now. This dude gets it
33% is waayyyy too high. And when my husband gets a bonus it’s taxed over 50%. Absolutely ridiculous.
If 10% is enough for God in tithing then man's government ought to be able to suffice with half that.
0-33% tax on your labor is STILL THEFT.
There are plenty of other ways to raise enough taxes in legitimate ways to pay for everything we need. We can start by eliminating spending on things we DON'T need.
its been a long time since ive heard the fairtax championed or even mentioned but i still want that.
Counting all taxes not just fed income tax people are paying way over 33%. Income tax and capital gains should be 0% taxes. Not even 33% is need it used to be 0%, and we had all the stuff because they have many other kinds of taxes what pays for all that.
Police fire schools so on you have property taxes paying for that. What they steal a lot for buying vote with social programs. Roads a tax for that gas tax. What they also steal a lot for buying vote with social programs.
The truth is when you look into it. The high taxes are about funding the base stuff that people want government to do that can be done with low taxes. But a mix of using it to buy vote, get to say your hurting the evil rich people that your voter are envious of, and you get to use a lot of it for yourself and friends with no bid contracts.
Why 33%? Is it in the Bible?
I would want something under 20% around 10% is ideal, but if you wanna be libby with it then sure 33%
Government employment is currently a huge source of inefficiency. It’s just a handout expecting very little contribution to the public good in return.
And check out the phenotype of the people in government employment. They don’t look like me!
American can and should be run on tariffs.
We can cancel every tax mentioned in the post and all other personal taxes as well. We have the biggest economy and market in the world. We can sell access to our market in the form of tariffs.