I suppose I could volunteer to pay taxes not due, but I’ve never ever argued anyone should do that.
This is called voluntary socialism. The fact that it doesn't work and you aren't willing to do it tells you everything you need to know about why state socialism is theft and doesn't work.
Or you know, you could just donate to the poor and needy directly if you feel they need help instead of relying on the government to take 40% off the top.
Keep blaming "other people" though I guess.
Fun fact, Ancaps and Ansocs can actually live together in a free and tolerant society.
It's only because of the failure of socialism that socialists have to use the force of government to push their system on the rest of society.
The state just withers away under capitalism, of course. Dyslexic Maxr told me.
"capitalism"
one of those terms that gets thrown around a lot where everyone has a different idea as to what it means.
I suppose I could volunteer to pay taxes not due, but I’ve never ever argued anyone should do that.
This is called voluntary socialism. The fact that it doesn't work and you aren't willing to do it tells you everything you need to know about why state socialism is theft and doesn't work.
Or you know, you could just donate to the poor and needy directly if you feel they need help instead of relying on the government to take 40% off the top.
Keep blaming "other people" though I guess.
Fun fact, Ancaps and Ansocs can actually live together in a free and tolerant society.
It's only because of the failure of socialism that socialists have to use the force of government to push their system on the rest of society.
The state just withers away under capitalism(TU QUOQUE), of course. Dyslexic Maxr told me.
[Tu quoque "argument" follows the pattern:[2]
Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A's actions or past claims are inconsistent with the truth of claim X.
Therefore, X is false.
An example would be
Peter: "Bill is guilty of defrauding the government out of tax dollars." Bill: "How can you say that when you yourself have 20 outstanding parking tickets?" It is a fallacy because the moral character or actions of the opponent are generally irrelevant to the logic of the argument.[3] It is often used as a red herring tactic and is a special case of the ad hominem fallacy, which is a category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of facts about the person presenting or supporting the claim or argument.[4]
Example In the trial of Nazi criminal Klaus Barbie, the controversial lawyer Jacques Vergès tried to present what was defined as a Tu Quoque Defence—i.e., that during the Algerian War, French officers such as General Jacques Massu had committed war crimes similar to those with which Barbie was being charged, and therefore the French state had no moral right to try Barbie. This defense was rejected by the court, which convicted Barbie.[5]]
In keeping with your theme, this is also a fallacious argument. Be a better poaster.
I never understood the argument that if we lived in a stateless society that people would just reestablish the state or that some group of people would assume power. If we got serious enough about deconstructing centralized power to where we literally establish a stateless society, why would we be powerless to prevent a new one from forming?
What?
I don't know...What are you guys talking about? I'm just trying to fit in.
Start telling people to fuck off then
This could be the best advice I've seen given here. Ever.
Wealth inequality will decline when the stock market goes in the tank. More tax reform would help a little as well.
But to confiscate someone's property (assets) is crazy and would have loads of unintended consequences. Bezos would likely give up his American citizenship and move elsewhere instead of give up billions upon billions of his net worth each year.
Wealth inequality will decline when the stock market goes in the tank. More tax reform would help a little as well.
But to confiscate someone's property (assets) is crazy and would have loads of unintended consequences. Bezos would likely give up his American citizenship and move elsewhere instead of give up billions upon billions of his net worth each year.
I’d be concerned about the bill’s unintended consequences, if it had a prayer of being enacted. However, that maneuver was anticipated. It would would cost him 40% of his asset value in one swoop.
Wealth inequality will decline when the stock market goes in the tank. More tax reform would help a little as well.
But to confiscate someone's property (assets) is crazy and would have loads of unintended consequences. Bezos would likely give up his American citizenship and move elsewhere instead of give up billions upon billions of his net worth each year.
But! But! That $50 Million early exit fee will keep him here!!!!
I don't see how you can say it's raising or lowering anyone's taxes. Want to pay more taxes? Spend more money. Want to pay less? Spend less. Wow!!!
Disincentives to consume domestically are a really awful idea. Particularly now.
I’m hearing that people spend more domestically when they don’t have to pay as much tax.
IJWIHSDT
Unfortunately, our experience shows you’re incorrect, at least as to those who received significant tax cuts.
Significant by rate or amount paid?
Could be either, but I was referring to the comfortable and more than comfortable. Comfortable and better bank the tax cuts.
So you’re gonna discount the 99% that actually spend more money, day to day, that have more of it to spend instead giving it to the Gubment?
I get what you’re saying, but raising tax rates on the comfortable of the comfortableist won’t bring in more money. They just hide it somewhere else. Your answer isn’t in tax rates, it’s in a true flat tax reform.
I never understood the argument that if we lived in a stateless society that people would just reestablish the state or that some group of people would assume power. If we got serious enough about deconstructing centralized power to where we literally establish a stateless society, why would we be powerless to prevent a new one from forming?
What?
I don't know...What are you guys talking about? I'm just trying to fit in.
Start telling people to fuck off then
I will. I need to start wtfing Hondo's posts more often, too.
I never understood the argument that if we lived in a stateless society that people would just reestablish the state or that some group of people would assume power. If we got serious enough about deconstructing centralized power to where we literally establish a stateless society, why would we be powerless to prevent a new one from forming?
What?
I don't know...What are you guys talking about? I'm just trying to fit in.
Start telling people to fuck off then
I will. I need to start wtfing Hondo's posts more often, too.
Comments
"Fucking christ, who talks like this"
Sue Doe intellectuals.
Race Fucking Bannon, ladies and gentlemen.
IJWIHSDT
But to confiscate someone's property (assets) is crazy and would have loads of unintended consequences. Bezos would likely give up his American citizenship and move elsewhere instead of give up billions upon billions of his net worth each year.
But! But! That $50 Million early exit fee will keep him here!!!!
Politics of envy
I get what you’re saying, but raising tax rates on the comfortable of the comfortableist won’t bring in more money. They just hide it somewhere else. Your answer isn’t in tax rates, it’s in a true flat tax reform.