Or, at the very least, extortion. Millions of people being duped over 100 years ago to ratify a crap amendment doesn't mean I consent to having money taken from my paycheck by a federal government that has no concept of fiscal restraint or responsibility. Talk about the Constitutionality all you want, but the Constitution is not infallible, and taxing my labor directly is a violation of my natural rights. People don't pay taxes because they want to. People pay taxes because if they don't, in the end, men with guns are going to show up and put them in a cage for not complying.

Change my mind...

brb, moving to Somalia...

We were in Florida this past weekend.  Their highways all have toll booths and crazy enough the roads are always pave/cleaned.  I thought we needed taxes for this to be done?

Meanwhile in DC it takes over 6 months to get a pot hole filled or true story I tried to get a sidewalk repaired for 2.5 years.  I went thru two council members asking them where our taxes were going if it wasn't for muh roads.

I’d be interested in reading BoatShoes’ hot take here again, minus the terrible memes. They were distracting. 

Oh, and taxation is theft. So there. 

Somehow the taking of property via force or threat of force is somehow acceptable because they call themselves "government" but operate identically to organized crime? Boatie's legal arguments are the snake eating itself. I'd prefer to see a moral justification.

To me the idea that we are taxed for about 40 things is unconstitutional.  

I get certain taxation, and it is necessary (sales tax, gas tax, etc). Income tax gets questionable, and things like the Estate tax are straight lunacy/ extortion/ unconstitutional. 

posted by justincredible

brb, moving to Somalia...

Been there, done that.   You don't wanna go there.

I didn't appreciate taxes until going to countries where the govt doesn't do dick for their people.   Shotty roads,  mostly dirt, gravel, rock, no infrastructure, no schools.....just complete garbage.   When tAlking to locals and they cannot believe how much we pay in taxes......as they pay little to none, and I'd rather pay what I do and have schools, roads, police, etc.  Is here waste.......sure...but better than the govt providing nothing.

posted by thavoice

Been there, done that.   You don't wanna go there.

I didn't appreciate taxes until going to countries where the govt doesn't do dick for their people.   Shotty roads,  mostly dirt, gravel, rock, no infrastructure, no schools.....just complete garbage.   When tAlking to locals and they cannot believe how much we pay in taxes......as they pay little to none, and I'd rather pay what I do and have schools, roads, police, etc.  Is here waste.......sure...but better than the govt providing nothing.

Which countries specifically are you talking about? If the government didn't provide certain things, your assumption is that the richest country the world has ever seen would not voluntarily provide necessary services and infrastructure? Also, have you been paying attention to our public education system and how apparently shitty our government-funded roads and bridges are? A lot of campaigning going on to fix our "crumbling" infrastructure.

posted by justincredible

by a federal government that has no concept of fiscal restraint or responsibility. 

This is my issue. I have no problem paying taxes if it was used responsibly but so much is wasted and they just want more.

The dumb asses,  with either no or every level jobs, on Facebook that say they wouldn't mind paying more in taxes if it meant everyone could have health care... I have no interest in funneling more money to hospitals when they charge $8 for aspirin and $700 bags of saline. 

posted by FatHobbit

This is my issue. I have no problem paying taxes if it was used responsibly but so much is wasted and they just want more.

That's a big issue for me. Failure at the government level typically means they get more money. They essentially pay no price for failure.

posted by justincredible

Which countries specifically are you talking about? If the government didn't provide certain things, your assumption is that the richest country the world has ever seen would not voluntarily provide necessary services and infrastructure? Also, have you been paying attention to our public education system and how apparently shitty our government-funded roads and bridges are? A lot of campaigning going on to fix our "crumbling" infrastructure.

I always lol when people in DC bring up schools when it comes to taxes. Uhhh DC spends the most per student in the entire country and their graduation rate is below 50%. Not a strong argument.

The only defense for taxation is the notion of implied consent or social contract.

"You live here.  Therefore, you automatically agree."

The notion that a small segment of people a couple hundred years ago ratifying a document constitutes the entire population throughout the subsequent time consenting is ludicrous.

posted by justincredible

Which countries specifically are you talking about? If the government didn't provide certain things, your assumption is that the richest country the world has ever seen would not voluntarily provide necessary services and infrastructure? Also, have you been paying attention to our public education system and how apparently shitty our government-funded roads and bridges are? A lot of campaigning going on to fix our "crumbling" infrastructure.

Somalia, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Uganda.

Schools I'm Uganda were plentisome but so far behind with zero technology.

Other countries mostly just some guy who took an abandoned build in and would teach to whomever showed up, usually just to age 8 to 10.  With little to no supplies. 

30 to 40 kids crammed into a room meant for 12 to 15 kids.

Roads so bad ,any times you avg less than 10 mph on hours long trips.

Running water?  Maybe if some other country built something do them.   No infrastructure for clean water........nasty brackish water from wells.

Police and medical?   We came upon a w4eck.  The police. ....tending no aid..just directing traffics and no communications to get medical attentions there.   Luckily we had a sat phone to call.   90 min later an ambulance shows....1 likely died others probably made it.   No govt control whatsover.   Police and military so bad and do little and routinely go unpaid by th govt.   That's how terrorists start as They control an area and become the law.

posted by thavoice

Somalia, Djibouti, Ethiopia, Uganda.

Not sure comparing America to 4 of the least developed countries in the world is a fair comparison.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries

posted by justincredible

Not sure comparing America to 4 of the least developed countries in the world is a fair comparison.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Least_Developed_Countries

I am just giving my opinion.    When I saw what happens when a country does nothing form their people I appreciate much more what ours do for us.

posted by O-Trap

The only defense for taxation is the notion of implied consent or social contract.

"You live here.  Therefore, you automatically agree."

The notion that a small segment of people a couple hundred years ago ratifying a document constitutes the entire population throughout the subsequent time consenting is ludicrous.

"The Only Defense" is you know - the revolutionary political idea that gave birth to the liberal republican governments in the western world that generated unparalleled liberty and prosperity! 

The first law firm I became a partner at was founded in the 1890's and it's original partnership agreement - with amendments - continued on from its founding. Do I not assent to the original terms that remain in said partnership agreement when I accept a franchise from the same? Do I like it if I don't get to eat everything that I kill and that some of it is shared? Perhaps not - but in any case - I accepted those terms - even if I did so begrudgingly and believing it could be different or better. Nevertheless, it is not "theft" because the terms of the partnership agreement are not ideal. 

The Constitution is the same as an old private, partnership agreement that we all receive interests in by virtue of being born on land covered by said agreement. That is to say that the covenants in the Constitution run with the land and jurisdiction that is the United States. Posterity receives the franchise at birth - just like new partners may receive a share of an old partnership - and is free to accept, amend or abolish those terms. 

Even if you want to abolish the terms - you still begrudgingly assent to the terms when accept the rights and protections and benefits conferred onto you by the Constitution. If you enjoy the blessing of liberty conferred by the Constitution you're manifesting your assent to its terms - even if you think the terms could be better. 

posted by justincredible

Which countries specifically are you talking about? If the government didn't provide certain things, your assumption is that the richest country the world has ever seen would not voluntarily provide necessary services and infrastructure? Also, have you been paying attention to our public education system and how apparently shitty our government-funded roads and bridges are? A lot of campaigning going on to fix our "crumbling" infrastructure.

What if the United States became the richest country in the world in part because it had a good civil government and countries like Haiti (which was once the richest country in the western hemisphere) failed to become rich or became less rich because they did not have good civil government?

Or, what if it was because we had the freest economy in the world for so long?

My main gripe with taxation is income and property tax. You basically do not own the fruits of your labor, you're just leasing them from the government, and you can never actually own your home/land. We can argue back and forth about the necessary levels of taxation, but I will never be convinced that these two forms of taxation are anything other than pure theft and have no place in a free society.

posted by thavoice

I am just giving my opinion.    When I saw what happens when a country does nothing form their people I appreciate much more what ours do for us.

Not to nitpick, because it really isn't, but "country" != "government". Not by a long shot.

posted by BoatShoes

"The Only Defense" is you know - the revolutionary political idea that gave birth to the liberal republican governments in the western world that generated unparalleled liberty and prosperity! 

The first law firm I became a partner at was founded in the 1890's and it's original partnership agreement - with amendments - continued on from its founding. Do I not assent to the original terms that remain in said partnership agreement when I accept a franchise from the same? Do I like it if I don't get to eat everything that I kill and that some of it is shared? Perhaps not - but in any case - I accepted those terms - even if I did so begrudgingly and believing it could be different or better. Nevertheless, it is not "theft" because the terms of the partnership agreement are not ideal. 

The Constitution is the same as an old private, partnership agreement that we all receive interests in by virtue of being born on land covered by said agreement. That is to say that the covenants in the Constitution run with the land and jurisdiction that is the United States. Posterity receives the franchise at birth - just like new partners may receive a share of an old partnership - and is free to accept, amend or abolish those terms. 

Even if you want to abolish the terms - you still begrudgingly assent to the terms when accept the rights and protections and benefits conferred onto you by the Constitution. If you enjoy the blessing of liberty conferred by the Constitution you're manifesting your assent to its terms - even if you think the terms could be better. 

 

Nonsense. You entered into your agreement with the firm voluntarily. I accepted nothing as those who were here before me are not "owners". Or if we must use your terrible non-analogy, I was BORN a partner in this firm, Scooter.

Back in the day the colonists said, "No taxation without representation".  Therefore, they were agreeable that taxation was proper, provided they had duly-elected representatives, and did not view it as theft - either before or after defeating the British.  Correct?

posted by Zunardo

Back in the day the colonists said, "No taxation without representation".  Therefore, they were agreeable that taxation was proper, provided they had duly-elected representatives, and did not view it as theft - either before or after defeating the British.  Correct?

Noooo.

They did not want taxation and voiced their opposition that they did not have any voice or say so in the manner. If they had a voice, they would have voted no taxes at all. 

I get the annoyance with the federal income tax. If you can find a better way to pay for the U.S Military, I am all ears. 

Property taxes goes more into the local community, is that right? So, if you are pissed about that, shouldn't that be more of a local community issue, at the most the state? 

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I get the annoyance with the federal income tax. If you can find a better way to pay for the U.S Military, I am all ears. 

Start by using the military for its intended purpose, and only via the channels provided for by the constitution. We have no business in a bunch of places, and certainly none as a decade-long occupier without a declaration of war.

IOW, it's not a revenue issue, or at least it shouldn't be.

posted by ptown_trojans_1

I get the annoyance with the federal income tax. If you can find a better way to pay for the U.S Military, I am all ears. 

Boatshoes would say we just print the money and the cost would be free.

But, technically, if the govt printed money instead of taxing then the hidden tax would be much higher inflation.  Boat thinks inflation is dead, and so it would be free for the govt to print and spend however much money it desired.