The jabber about how poor people are actually paying for the successful is beyond belief. All sorts of arguments are being made about how poor people somehow pay for the infrastructure the wealthy exploit. And the chestnut about how tax breaks aid the wealth disproportionately is once again brought out. (Yeah, if Alice was paying $50K in taxes and the taxes are cut to $40K she "benefits more" than Bob the Wino who got no tax benefits because he paid no taxes. Which misses the point about Alice's high taxes in the first place.) This is why the "Tax Freedom Day" approach is more useful. Tax freedom day is of course the day when the average American or Brit or whatever has stopped working for the government and has the rest of his income for himself. For most years, this is estimated to around May-June. That is, for almost half of a year a typical taxpayer is working for the government. Not a perfect measure, as it averages together folks of various tax brackets, including the many in America who pay nothing (but it doesn't assign a negative number to those who receive "net net" money from the government). And it fails to take into account the double taxation which a business owner faces: roughly a 50% tax on his profits, then when the profits are disbursed to the owners of the corporation, another 35-45% tax bite. For a business owner, he is effectively working for the government for the first 70% of every year. Which means only October-December is he working for his own interests. Jabber about how poor people are actually receiving fewer tax benefits than rich people misses the point of who's working for whom. Alice, an engineer or pharmacist or perhaps a small business owner, works between 40% and 70% of her time to pay money into government. Bob, a crack addict collecting "disability" or welfare or other government freebies, works 0% of his time for the government/society. ("Dat not true. I gots to stands in line to get my check increased!") Alice is a source, Bob is a sink. Talk about how Alice gets benefits ignores the fact that she's working for the government for a big chunk of her life. Bob is not. Alice is a slave for the government, and "society," so that Bob can lounge in his mobile home watching ESPN and collecting a monthly check. (I'd like to know why all of the folks here in California who are getting "benefits" and "services" are not at my door on Saturday morning to help me with my yard work. I'd like to know why finding reliable yard workers has become nearly impossible in the past couple of decades. "Will work for food" signs are a fucking joke...try hiring one of those layabouts to actually do some work for food and watch the sneers, or watch them threatening to fake a work injury if a shakedown fee is not given to them. These people should be put in lime pits.) When you hear John Young and Tyler Durden nattering about the "persons of privilege" are reaping the rewards of a benificent government, think about Alice and Bob and ask yourself who'se doing the real work. Ask who're the sources and who're the sinks. "From each according to his ability, to each according to his need...and I've got a game to watch on satellite...and where's my check?" --Tim May "The only purpose for which power can be rightfully exercised over any member of a civilized community, against his will, is to prevent harm to others. His own good, either physical or moral, is not a sufficient warrant." --John Stuart Mill
Tim May (2004-01-02 02:42Z) wrote:
Bob, a crack addict collecting "disability" or welfare or other government freebies, works 0% of his time for the government/society. ("Dat not true. I gots to stands in line to get my check increased!")
Do those who have previously been in the workforce, in your opinion, have the right to reclaim through welfare any amount up to that they've paid through taxes to the entity providing welfare/unemployment? Or is all unemployment money Pluto's fruit?
On Jan 1, 2004, at 8:26 PM, Justin wrote:
Tim May (2004-01-02 02:42Z) wrote:
Bob, a crack addict collecting "disability" or welfare or other government freebies, works 0% of his time for the government/society. ("Dat not true. I gots to stands in line to get my check increased!")
Do those who have previously been in the workforce, in your opinion, have the right to reclaim through welfare any amount up to that they've paid through taxes to the entity providing welfare/unemployment? Or is all unemployment money Pluto's fruit?
No, as there is no "fund" that this money is in. Once taxes are paid in, the money has gone out to crack addicts, Halliburton, welfare whores (excuse me, "hoes"), foreign dictators like Mubarek and Sharon, and so on. In fact, the estimated overall debt is something like $30-40 trillion. I've outlined how this number is arrived at a few times in the past. As there are about 100 million tax filers in the U.S.--the other 175 million being children, spouses, prisoners, welfare recipients, illegal aliens, non-filers, etc.--a simple calculation shows the average indebtedness per tax filer is around $300,000 or more. This is far, far beyond what the average household owns in total. Because the U.S. has been "charging it" for the past 40 years. Quibblers will say we can reduce this indebtedness by selling off government-owned lands, which would be a good start. Or be taxing corporations more, but this still ends up with the individual tax filers, ultimately. Or by devaluing the dollar dramatically, which is the likeliest strategy the kleptocrats will follow, after gettting enough advance warning to get their own assets out of dollar-denominated vehicles. So, you see, there IS NO FUND one can withdraw money from. Anyone claiming new welfare benefits requires even more thefts from those still working. Just because money was stolen from you doesn't give you any right to steal from me. --Tim May
Tim May (2004-01-02 05:46Z) wrote:
On Jan 1, 2004, at 8:26 PM, Justin wrote:
Do those who have previously been in the workforce, in your opinion, have the right to reclaim through welfare any amount up to that they've paid through taxes to the entity providing welfare/unemployment? Or is all unemployment money Pluto's fruit?
No, as there is no "fund" that this money is in. Once taxes are paid in, the money has gone out to crack addicts, Halliburton, welfare whores (excuse me, "hoes"), foreign dictators like Mubarek and Sharon, and so on.
I don't think money is as easily traceable as you'd like it to be. Say Bob is self-employed and hasn't payed quarterly or is employed by others and simply doesn't withhold. If Bob's loses his job March 31, he'd pay his last year of income taxes at approximately the same time he became eligible for unemployment. Is there no time neighborhood after payment of taxes (State taxes for this discussion) within which the collection of unemployment is justified as "collection of stolen money"? (Assume Bob earned plenty of money last year and didn't withhold, so that the portion of his taxes allocated to unemployment covers at least one unemployment check. Then consider the ethics of Bob claiming just one unemployment check.)
Just because money was stolen from you doesn't give you any right to steal from me.
Suppose Bob screws up his taxes and pays too much (2003-04), and upon discovering his mistake the next year he refiles (2004-04). Does he not have any right to a refund because that money will end up being stolen from you (2005-04, presumably)? As for your 30-40 trillion estimate, It seems to me that including SS payouts would make the debt unbounded. Regardless, SS payments aren't guaranteed so considering them as debt is faulty.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
This is why the "Tax Freedom Day" approach is more useful. Tax freedom day is of course the day when the average American or Brit or whatever has stopped working for the government and has the rest of his income for himself. For most years, this is estimated to around May-June. That is, for almost half of a year a typical taxpayer is working for the government.
Replace "Government" with "Society" and you're getting somewhere. Where will your brand new sports car go when you don't have a road to drive on? Who will pay the cops when there are no taxes being collected?
Not a perfect measure, as it averages together folks of various tax brackets, including the many in America who pay nothing (but it doesn't assign a negative number to those who receive "net net" money from the government). And it fails to take into account the double taxation which a business owner faces: roughly a 50% tax on his profits, then when the profits are disbursed to the owners of the corporation, another 35-45% tax bite. For a business owner, he is effectively working for the government for the first 70% of every year. Which means only October-December is he working for his own interests.
The business though benefits extremly from the infrastructure that is build with taxes. Plus a lot of companies can exempt even more money, so in essence a lot of companies don't pay a dime in taxes.
Jabber about how poor people are actually receiving fewer tax benefits than rich people misses the point of who's working for whom.
Yes, the poorer are working and contributing to the Riches. Always Remember: YOU stand on the backs of those who you despise so much.
Alice, an engineer or pharmacist or perhaps a small business owner, works between 40% and 70% of her time to pay money into government.
And how much money does she get back by services? Say: Homelandsecurity? Say: Roadconstruction? etc.?
Bob, a crack addict collecting "disability" or welfare or other government freebies, works 0% of his time for the government/society. ("Dat not true. I gots to stands in line to get my check increased!")
Well, why don't you just take him out and shoot him then?
Alice is a source, Bob is a sink. Talk about how Alice gets benefits ignores the fact that she's working for the government for a big chunk of her life. Bob is not. Alice is a slave for the government, and "society," so that Bob can lounge in his mobile home watching ESPN and collecting a monthly check.
And how many Bobs are out there? Also, you forgot Fred. Fred is the guy who works for Alice, supposly only 40 hours a week, but they are short staffed as Alice needs to make sure that her investors get a "good bang for the buck" so Fred has been in reality working more to 70 hours a week and hasn't really seen his kids anymore. He is only paid for 40 hours though as Alice explained to Fred that she just doesn't have the money to pay for overtime. Then Fred gets sick, but Alice didn't provide any benefits (after all she needs to make a profit for the shareholders), thus Fred has to get by what he has saved up while hoping that the government would give him some money.
(I'd like to know why all of the folks here in California who are getting "benefits" and "services" are not at my door on Saturday morning to help me with my yard work. I'd like to know why finding reliable yard workers has become nearly impossible in the past couple of decades. "Will work for food" signs are a fucking joke...try hiring one of those layabouts to actually do some work for food and watch the sneers, or watch them threatening to fake a work injury if a shakedown fee is not given to them. These people should be put in lime pits.)
blah blah blah. The world is so unfair to you. You just can't get a good slave anymore these days for nothing.
When you hear John Young and Tyler Durden nattering about the "persons of privilege" are reaping the rewards of a benificent government, think about Alice and Bob and ask yourself who'se doing the real work. Ask who're the sources and who're the sinks.
Fred is doing the real work, and gets a kick in the butt by Alice the moment he is not "worth" enough anymore. You, of course, still carry the idea that everybody has the right to be rich. That the World doesn't have infinite resources nor that the money is an infinite resources is ignored by the likes of you. After all you have made it on the backs of all the Freds out there. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP 8.0.3 iQA/AwUBP/VtHGlCnxcrW2uuEQJHawCgpIcaR+lRC2MwqFJzebr+XxEshzMAoKPP yRgG7Q1OLgzfcOzTFHbOqGP6 =HPPh -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Fri, Jan 02, 2004 at 08:07:37AM -0500, Michael Kalus wrote:
Replace "Government" with "Society" and you're getting somewhere. Where will your brand new sports car go when you don't have a road to drive on? Who will pay the cops when there are no taxes being collected?
These questions have been asked and answered decades ago, before many list members were born. Take a look at Machinery of Freedom and Anarchy, State, and Utopia, which offer different conclusions. -Declan
participants (4)
-
Declan McCullagh -
Justin -
Michael Kalus -
Tim May