View Poll Results: Tax Reform

Voters
31. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes - Here is my suggestion

    20 64.52%
  • No -

    2 6.45%
  • The current system should be abolished

    9 29.03%
  • Other

    0 0%
Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast
Results 111 to 120 of 139

Thread: Revisit - Tax Reform

  1. #111
    Educator HumanBeing's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    745

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Your parents give your consent until you reach the age of consent - just like they're responsible for your rent until that time. Once you reach the age of consent you can leave if you wish, no one is stopping you.
    There are a few problems with that idea. The first is that your comparison falls apart, because the child of a tenant doesn't have the same legal responsibilities towards a landlord as the actual tenant. Another is the idea that I should have to leave, and that the government has complete monopoly over vast areas of public and private land. Remember, you had to sign a contract with your landlord, but the government claims jurisdiction over you and your landlord and his entire building and every other building within a radius of tens of thousands of square kilometers without you signing any sort of contract like you did with your landlord.

    It simply isn't even a relevant comparison.


    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor
    It's just like any other contract where you think the other side has broken the contract, you take them to court.
    Two issues with this:
    1. Any other contract, the court would be considered a third party. When you're suing the court, there is no third party, so there is no possibility of a fair, unbiased trial. This is one of the inherent failings of judicial systems that are based on monopoly of force by one organization/government. There is no third party to turn to for dispute resolution.

    2. It's not a contract, because by definition a contract is an agreement between two or more people, not just a unilateral declaration of intent to claim monopoly jurisdiction over a human being's life.
    If you hate capitalism so much, then just write everything in lower case. Problem solved.

  2. #112
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,010

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Your parents give your consent until you reach the age of consent - just like they're responsible for your rent until that time. Once you reach the age of consent you can leave if you wish, no one is stopping you.



    It's just like any other contract where you think the other side has broken the contract, you take them to court.
    Other countries are stopping you from moving out of the US. And how can you get a fair trial against the govt when the govt is the judge?

  3. #113
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    There are a few problems with that idea. The first is that your comparison falls apart, because the child of a tenant doesn't have the same legal responsibilities towards a landlord as the actual tenant. Another is the idea that I should have to leave, and that the government has complete monopoly over vast areas of public and private land. Remember, you had to sign a contract with your landlord, but the government claims jurisdiction over you and your landlord and his entire building and every other building within a radius of tens of thousands of square kilometers without you signing any sort of contract like you did with your landlord.

    It simply isn't even a relevant comparison.
    Of course it's a relevant comparison.

    A child does not have the same legal responsibilities toward society/country as an adult. In fact, there are a plethora of laws in most Western countries specifically there to protect children - so that's a fail.

    You don't have to leave the country any more than you have to leave the apartment on which you quit pay rent. If you decide you don't like the rent contract you move or the landlord will remove you from the property. If you decide you don't like the social contract you move or the landlord will remove you from society.



    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    Two issues with this:
    1. Any other contract, the court would be considered a third party. When you're suing the court, there is no third party, so there is no possibility of a fair, unbiased trial. This is one of the inherent failings of judicial systems that are based on monopoly of force by one organization/government. There is no third party to turn to for dispute resolution.
    Quote Originally Posted by jonny5 View Post
    Other countries are stopping you from moving out of the US. And how can you get a fair trial against the govt when the govt is the judge?
    You don't sue the court, you sue the city/county/state/Fed. There are hundreds and hundreds of examples of the courts deciding in favor of citizens over laws. If you would like to try to prove bias in the court system then start posting your evidence. Otherwise - another fail.


    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    2. It's not a contract, because by definition a contract is an agreement between two or more people, not just a unilateral declaration of intent to claim monopoly jurisdiction over a human being's life.
    You agree to the contract by being (or staying) in the country - and that works pretty much everywhere for everyone. When I visit Mexico or Canada I agree to their social contract the minute I step over the border. I'm not a citizen but I still have to follow their rules. If I don't like their rules then I shouldn't go there in the first place.

    Three strikes - you're out.
    Last edited by MoSurveyor; 06-02-13 at 12:02 PM.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  4. #114
    Educator HumanBeing's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2013
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    745

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Of course it's a relevant comparison.
    A child does not have the same legal responsibilities toward society/country as an adult. In fact, there are a plethora of laws in most Western countries specifically there to protect children - so that's a fail.
    You don't have to leave the country any more than you have to leave the apartment on which you quit pay rent. If you decide you don't like the rent contract you move or the landlord will remove you from the property. If you decide you don't like the social contract you move or the landlord will remove you from society
    You've twisted your initial comparison, though your twist isn't much better. You're still missing the point of government monopoly on massive geographical areas. You're deliberately choosing to ignore the fact that it's vastly easier to choose a different landlord than it is to find a nation that will grant you permanent residency. I'm wealthy by any standards, I can choose what house to live in, I can even be my own landlord, but I still can't choose where I want to live. My choices are severely limited, because unlike individual landlords, governments claim monopoly jurisdiction whether you actively sign anything or not. Pretending that it's as easy to choose your country as it is to choose your landlord is just silly, and the reason is government restrictions that violate basic natural human rights.

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor
    You don't sue the court, you sue the city/county/state/Fed. There are hundreds and hundreds of examples of the courts deciding in favor of citizens over laws. If you would like to try to prove bias in the court system then start posting your evidence.
    Court = Government. City = Government. County = Government. State = Government. Fed = Government.

    They are all funded by taking people's money under threat of violence and imprisonment, and if they were private companies they would be considered incestuous enough to have a clear conflict of interest in judging each other's actions.

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor
    You agree to the contract by being (or staying) in the country - and that works pretty much everywhere for everyone. When I visit Mexico or Canada I agree to their social contract the minute I step over the border. I'm not a citizen but I still have to follow their rules. If I don't like their rules then I shouldn't go there in the first place.
    Going to a foreign nation is slightly different (though not completely). However the idea that you "agree" to something by not doing anything, even if you don't know what it is you're agreeing to and don't have the financial means to go elsewhere, is just absurd.

    How do you even begin to justify forcing people into a "contract" that violates even the most basic natural rights like being allowed to live without being extorted under constant threat of violence and imprisonment? Don't you feel at all embarrassed defending such actions?

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor
    Three strikes - you're out.
    Dafuq is this, baseball? Your points are completely invalid and unethical and your initial comparison is about as relevant as baseball.....
    If you hate capitalism so much, then just write everything in lower case. Problem solved.

  5. #115
    Sage
    MoSurveyor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Last Seen
    04-13-17 @ 04:36 AM
    Gender
    Lean
    Undisclosed
    Posts
    9,985

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    You've twisted your initial comparison, though your twist isn't much better. You're still missing the point of government monopoly on massive geographical areas. You're deliberately choosing to ignore the fact that it's vastly easier to choose a different landlord than it is to find a nation that will grant you permanent residency. I'm wealthy by any standards, I can choose what house to live in, I can even be my own landlord, but I still can't choose where I want to live. My choices are severely limited, because unlike individual landlords, governments claim monopoly jurisdiction whether you actively sign anything or not. Pretending that it's as easy to choose your country as it is to choose your landlord is just silly, and the reason is government restrictions that violate basic natural human rights.
    The landlord has a monopoly over his geographic area as well. There is no qualitative difference between a landlord and a government.

    Your choices for living arrangements are the same as your choices for countries. Not everyone can afford the $10M Manhattan condo.

    Sorry, there is no basic right to live where you want to live. No landlord is required to enter into a contract with you. But thank you for pointing out an exception to the landlord rule - you actually do have ONE landlord that is required to enter into a contract with you, unlike the tenet-landlord situation where none are so required.


    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    Court = Government. City = Government. County = Government. State = Government. Fed = Government.
    Sorry, you can always appeal to the next highest authority in the case of city, county, and State. You are not required to take the decision of those three. The Fed is a special case because the Supreme Court is there - and they have ruled many laws unconstitutional. That's still a fail. You have as yet to present evidence of bias by the court.



    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    They are all funded by taking people's money under threat of violence and imprisonment, and if they were private companies they would be considered incestuous enough to have a clear conflict of interest in judging each other's actions.
    Non-sequitur. This has nothing to do with funding and it sure is not a fact showing bias.


    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    Going to a foreign nation is slightly different (though not completely). However the idea that you "agree" to something by not doing anything, even if you don't know what it is you're agreeing to and don't have the financial means to go elsewhere, is just absurd.
    The laws are freely available to access and read. If nothing else, the Library of Congress has all US federal laws and there's no entry fee. Most laws are now available on the Internet and most public libraries have free Internet access. If you don't read the contract that's not the landlord's fault.

    If you don't have the financial means to move away from the one landlord that is required to accept a contract with you, then that might me the reason the other landlords don't want you.


    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    How do you even begin to justify forcing people into a "contract" that violates even the most basic natural rights like being allowed to live without being extorted under constant threat of violence and imprisonment? Don't you feel at all embarrassed defending such actions?
    Nobody is forcing anyone into a contract. You can move.


    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    Dafuq is this, baseball? Your points are completely invalid and unethical and your initial comparison is about as relevant as baseball.....
    My points are right on the mark --- and of all people, conservatives and Libertarians shouldn't be trying to tell a landlord what he can and cannot do with his property.
    Mt. Rushmore: Three surveyors and some other guy.
    Life goes on within you and without you. -Harrison
    Hear the echoes of the centuries, Power isn't all that money buys. -Peart
    After you learn quantum mechanics you're never really the same again. -Weinberg

  6. #116
    Banned
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Denio Junction
    Last Seen
    11-13-14 @ 12:09 AM
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    7,039
    Blog Entries
    4

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    We need the flat tax and the fair tax. Neither can work alone because we need about 24% of GDP just to pay our way. If you try to tax that much with one it will be so high people will turn into criminals to avoid it. Two different taxes shares the burden better and could average 12% of GDP each. Neither would be horribly avoided and we could get on with paying our way in this world.


    Quote Originally Posted by MaggieD View Post
    It most assuredly needs reform. Even the adviser experts on the IRS telephone help lines don't understand it, as evidenced by the disclaimer that nothing they tell you can be taken as "the law."

    Politicians use revisions in the tax code to garner political contributions, socially engineer behavior, and reward their cronies with tax breaks. Bad ideas keep getting worse: the Alternative Minimum Tax (AMT) was designed to target very wealthy taxpayers who, through use of legal loopholes, paid little or no income tax. It was enacted in 1969 to target 21 gazillionaires who, because of the legal loopholes and myriad deductions, paid no Federal income taxes. Today, it's estimated that 15% of taxpayers earning between $75K and $100K must pay AMT -- up from just 2% ten years ago.

    Want to know if you have to pay it? Read through 9 pages of IRS instructions and then call your accountant.

    Flat tax or fair tax or consumption tax. Easy-peasy.

  7. #117
    Sage

    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Republic of Florida
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:41 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian
    Posts
    14,010

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by MoSurveyor View Post
    Of


    You don't sue the court, you sue the city/county/state/Fed. There are hundreds and hundreds of examples of the courts deciding in favor of citizens over laws. If you would like to try to prove bias in the court system then start posting your evidence. Otherwise - another fail.
    And the court works for the city/county/state/fed.

  8. #118
    Sage
    samsmart's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Last Seen
    @
    Gender
    Lean
    Other
    Posts
    10,316
    Blog Entries
    37

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by TheGirlNextDoor View Post
    Does our taxation system need an overhaul - and if so - which system could realistically take its place.
    We do need a tax overhaul. Mostly, we need to abolish tax incentives, tax credits, tax exemptions and tax loopholes. If someone qualifies for paying a tax at a certain level then they pay it.

    I'd still maintain a progressive graduated tax system, though.
    Also, we need to legalize recreational drugs and prostitution.

  9. #119
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,842

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    States are committing theft by claiming a monopoly on economic and geographical jurisdiction over you.Your landlords aren't because they don't do that.
    That is incorrect. Landlords DO hold economic and geographical jurisdiction over their tenants. They make the rules/laws on their land. They also collect taxes (which they call rent). Just because they normally hold less land than a government does not mean they don't hold a monopoly over that space.

    A Landlord is a Government: The Libertarian Basis for Land Rights - Liberty Thinkers | Liberty Thinkers

    You either proactively enter into a contract with them or you don't.
    And what if one wanted to just work the common land? They cannot do that without being forced under duress to enter a contract with a landlord (ruler).

    The state assumes "social contract" and "consent of the governed" without anyone ever signing a contract or consenting to anything, it's fraudulent, unlike a voluntary contract that is subjected to competition and choice.
    You have 50 US states to choose from along with nearly 200 countries in the world. There is 'choice' in choosing a State ruler just as there is 'choice' in choosing a Landowner.


    There is a really big fundamental difference between the two, I'm surprised it isn't more obvious to you.
    I'm actually surprised you don't see how landlords are governments.
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

  10. #120
    Sage
    Geoist's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Last Seen
    Yesterday @ 05:46 PM
    Gender
    Lean
    Libertarian - Left
    Posts
    9,842

    Re: Revisit - Tax Reform

    Quote Originally Posted by HumanBeing View Post
    There are a few problems with that idea. The first is that your comparison falls apart, because the child of a tenant doesn't have the same legal responsibilities towards a landlord as the actual tenant.
    Doesn't the child of the tenant have to follow the rules of the landlord? If the tenant doesn't pay his taxes (rent) doesn't the child get kicked out along with the parent?
    "Men did not make the earth ... it is the value of the improvement only, and not the earth itself, that is individual property... Every proprietor owes to the community a ground rent for the land which he holds." -- Thomas Paine, Agrarian Justice
    http://www.wealthandwant.com/

Page 12 of 14 FirstFirst ... 21011121314 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •