Politicians Push for New Internet Sales Taxes

[Emission]

"THE LAW SAYS I HAVE TO PAY MY TAXES?! ARRGHGH THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP AND GONE TO THE GAS CHAMBERS!!!"

"THE LAW SAYS I CAN'T DRIVE 200MPH ON THE HIGHWAY?! ARRGHGH THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP AND GONE TO THE GAS CHAMBERS!!!"

"THE LAW SAYS I CAN'T RAPE THIS WOMAN?! ARRGHGH THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP AND GONE TO THE GAS CHAMBERS!!!"

"THE LAW SAYS I CAN'T ROB THIS BANK?! ARRGHGH THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP AND GONE TO THE GAS CHAMBERS!!!"

"THE LAW SAYS I CAN'T BREAK INTO YOUR HOUSE?! ARRGHGH THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP AND GONE TO THE GAS CHAMBERS!!!"

"THE LAW SAYS I CAN'T MURDER YOUR KIDS?! ARRGHGH THE JEWS SHOULD HAVE JUST SHUT UP AND GONE TO THE GAS CHAMBERS!!!"

Take a break, will you? This rant and pointless mockery will not further this discussion.

 

[SirKronan]

This argument is flawed and disproved at least once in this giant debate. The fact of the matter is, we ARE being stolen from, there's no ifs, no buts, no "if you wanna call it," there's straight up stealing. How many examples of abused government spending does it take to get you to realize that we're being stolen from? What is putting a sales tax on internet sales going to do for US? We're paying them to tell us "okay you can do your sale" ??? What kind of crap is that? We already pay out the ass for taxes, we already overpay and receive a lot less than what we've put it. Politicians like to claim our taxes and put them in their pockets, the good ones that aren't greedy like this are few and far between, very few and far between.

Look at how much money we've wasted in bailouts, look at how much money has been deliberately wasted by corporations who received bailouts, taking vacations and giving out ridiculous bonuses. Those people should have been fired, not given more money, that is clearly no way to solve a problem.

And guess where that money came from? Our pockets! We just gave away money to people who almost put our country into the ground and aren't making any kind of substantial progress. I want you to read that statement and tell me, straight up, that we aren't being stolen from.

That's exactly what's got me so worried about where things are headed and how things are handled. And if new taxes hit the small business sector, and small businesses are forced to provide insurance benefits, how are they going to continue to expand and hire new workers? I believe small businesses were the largest source of new jobs last year.

 

[jiminator]

they don't need new taxes. the bush tax cuts are expiring next year. tax rates are going to jump a few percent. the lowest income bracket will see their taxes jump 50%, from 10% to 15%

 

[Hamish Campbell]

Take a break, will you? This rant and pointless mockery will not further this discussion.

The point is that his ideas deserve mockery. I'm willing to listen to a reasoned argument, even one about anarcho-capitalism... but have you read any of what he was saying? It basically boils down to "nuh-uh I don't like having to abide by a system of laws! so I'm not gonna!".

 

[Hamish Campbell]

This argument is flawed and disproved at least once in this giant debate. The fact of the matter is, we ARE being stolen from, there's no ifs, no buts, no "if you wanna call it," there's straight up stealing. How many examples of abused government spending does it take to get you to realize that we're being stolen from? What is putting a sales tax on internet sales going to do for US? We're paying them to tell us "okay you can do your sale" ??? What kind of crap is that? We already pay out the ass for taxes, we already overpay and receive a lot less than what we've put it. Politicians like to claim our taxes and put them in their pockets, the good ones that aren't greedy like this are few and far between, very few and far between.

Look at how much money we've wasted in bailouts, look at how much money has been deliberately wasted by corporations who received bailouts, taking vacations and giving out ridiculous bonuses. Those people should have been fired, not given more money, that is clearly no way to solve a problem.

And guess where that money came from? Our pockets! We just gave away money to people who almost put our country into the ground and aren't making any kind of substantial progress. I want you to read that statement and tell me, straight up, that we aren't being stolen from.

I've never argued that our tax money is always spent in the best way, or for the most useful purposes. We can all point to examples of what we believe is wasteful spending. Personally, I would have never voted to bail out a finance company. My elected representative did however, and while I may disagree with that vote I'm not about to run around screaming "theft, THEFT!".

What I will argue is you cannot equate paying taxes to being stolen from. This is a system that collectively we (this nation) have put into place through our democratic process. It is our law. The requirement of paying taxes is one of the very few social contracts that free citizens are still required to uphold in order to enjoy the fruits of our collective labors and the prosperity this nation has achieved.

No individual is above this. No one in this country (especially none alive today) has ever achieved personal success without the help and support or ability granted to him by our society. In order to participate in and share in the wealth of our nation we only require 3 things. Obey the law, vote when able, and pay your taxes. If you don't like a law, you're free to work to change it. If you don't want to vote, it isn't compulsory. If you don't like a tax or don't want to pay them, you're free to work to change that also.

 

[Gorankar]

If much of the base of our taxation system itself had not been created by threats, playing on the citizen's fears during times of war and financial crisis, and back room dealing I might be inclined to consider them something a little less similar to racketeering.

If the bulk our taxes were actually spent legitimately on infrastructure, or paying our polimen/military/firemen/etc., and not wasted on both the absolute dregs of our society, and the ridiculously wealthy, I would be less inclined to consider taxation to be little more than legalized theft.

 

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

The point is that his ideas deserve mockery.

Except that it was your cognitive dissonance which deserved mockery. And so I mocked it. And it's so much fun to watch you post strawman after strawman because you are unwilling to look at the coercive monopolies for what they are. Look:

It basically boils down to "nuh-uh I don't like having to abide by a system of laws! so I'm not gonna!".

That's what we who understand logical debate call a "strawman". And it makes me laugh uproariously that you even consider it to be valid.

Please: go to your local community college and take Phil 101 or Logic 101.

 

[Hamish Campbell]

If the bulk our taxes were actually spent legitimately on infrastructure, or paying our polimen/military/firemen/etc., and not wasted on both the absolute dregs of our society, and the ridiculously wealthy, I would be less inclined to consider taxation to be little more than legalized theft.

The argument some of you are making boils down to: "My taxes paid for something I would not have, therefore taxes are theft!" The anarchist in this thread is at least consistently crazy enough to say "All taxes are theft no matter what".

 

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

What I will argue is you cannot equate paying taxes to being stolen from.

Of course you can. What do you call it when your property is taken from you by force and without your consent? And don't give me that lie that I consented by living here, because that doesn't work. If it does work, then I consented to having that knife put to my throat because I went to the grocery store, or the jews consented to going to the gas chambers because they were in Germany or Poland or wherever. You need to deal with your cognitive dissonance. Don't blame me for your failings.

This is a system that collectively we (this nation) have put into place through our democratic process.

So the law used to be that blacks and whites couldn't marry each other. Used to be that slavery was the law. Used to be that blacks had to sit at the back of the bus. Are you really going to tell us that such was ok just because it's the law? Let's find out:

It is our law.

Yep, you're going to say that blacks having to sit at the back of the bus was ok because it was the law. Good luck with that. Oh--if you don't actually believe that: you're a hypocrite. Your stance logically leads to what I've said it does. Failure to believe that which is the logical end is your problem. Don't blame me.

The requirement of paying taxes is one of the very few social contracts that free citizens are still required to uphold in order to enjoy the fruits of our collective labors and the prosperity this nation has achieved.

Ipse dixit.

No individual is above this. No one in this country (especially none alive today) has ever achieved personal success without the help and support or ability granted to him by our society.

Society doesn't grant anything. Stop reifying. And stop thinking that all must be enslaved to all just because one person helps another. Helping voluntarily is fine. Being told to give up your money or go to jail is no different from some guy sticking a gun in your face and saying "your money or your life". Theft is theft, no matter how you try to couch it.

 

[Fendrix]

The argument some of you are making boils down to: "My taxes paid for something I would not have, therefore taxes are theft!" The anarchist in this thread is at least consistently crazy enough to say "All taxes are theft no matter what".

I think if you had your way we would be taxed on everything. You like taxes, you said so earlier. You don't even think the "wealthy" are paying enough taxes.

Would you be okay with everyone being taxed 50% of every paycheck? 60%? 70%? Then the government would spend everything for us. All the roads, infrastructures, public school systems, entitlement programs, healthcare, defense, etc. would just be taken care of, and we could use that 30% to buy some food and play games.

Or would that 70% only be for wealthy people?

I'm just throwing numbers out there - what in your mind is a utopia? Like if you had total control to implement whatever tax system you like on Americans, what would you do?

 

[Hamish Campbell]

Except that it was your cognitive dissonance which deserved mockery. And so I mocked it. And it's so much fun to watch you post strawman after strawman because you are unwilling to look at the coercive monopolies for what they are. Look:



That's what we who understand logical debate call a "strawman". And it makes me laugh uproariously that you even consider it to be valid.

Please: go to your local community college and take Phil 101 or Logic 101.

Someone espousing anarcho-capitalism is in no position to suggest to anyone they understand logical debate, philosophy, economics or how to tie their own shoes.

 

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

Someone espousing anarcho-capitalism is in no position to suggest to anyone they understand logical debate, philosophy, economics or how to tie their own shoes.

Perfect example of the ad hominem fallacy.

So: do you have any justification for an uninvolved 3rd party demanding money of people who trade for the utterly bull reason of "we allowed this to happen"? Anything? Notice how I'm trying to wind this back toward the topic somehow (might make Kyle or Steve happy).

 

[Hamish Campbell]

I'm just throwing numbers out there - what in your mind is a utopia? Like if you had total control to implement whatever tax system you like on Americans, what would you do?

There is no utopia.

Anyway I advocate a highly progressive income tax structure. Capital gains tax reformation (some people pay effectively 0%) . Sales and consumption taxes on luxury items increased dramatically. Not a whole lot different from what we have now, except I would close tax loopholes for corporations and the rich wherever possible. Regulated free markets work well obviously, though I'm in favor of tighter control and stricter enforcements.

 

[TexUs]

Anyway I advocate a highly progressive income tax structure.

Even though it's failed time and time again, we just keep trying again? Yep. Makes sense to me! I seem to recall someone rather brilliant saying something about insanity...

Personally, I would have never voted to bail out a finance company. My elected representative did however, and while I may disagree with that vote I'm not about to run around screaming "theft, THEFT!".

So we don't keep our representatives accountable. Got it.
No wonder we're in the state we're in.

 

[Hamish Campbell]

Perfect example of the ad hominem fallacy.

So: do you have any justification for an uninvolved 3rd party demanding money of people who trade for the utterly bull reason of "we allowed this to happen"? Anything? Notice how I'm trying to wind this back toward the topic somehow (might make Kyle or Steve happy).

Government is not an uninvolved 3rd party. What you fail to grasp is that you are not some island on which your universe operates differently or independent of the rest of your fellow countrymen, or species for that matter. Ultimately you are indirectly invested in the success or failure of everyone else in our struggle to produce a functioning civilization. Taxes are one way in which we spread the risk in order to work towards that goal. I understand you feel as though you shouldn't contribute to anyone or anything except your own selfish goals, but the majority of the rest of the human race has evolved a conscience and moved away from barbarism and chaos. I'm sorry you were left behind.

Anyway, I'm not here to debate the validity of anarchism with you. History has already proved it's unworkable. It's the reason governments arose in the first place. Deal with it.

 

[Hamish Campbell]

Even though it's failed time and time again, we just keep trying again? Yep. Makes sense to me! I seem to recall someone rather brilliant saying something about insanity...

I challenge you to produce one solid example where you can directly show that progressive taxation has ever failed itself or the nation that implemented it.

So we don't keep our representatives accountable. Got it.
No wonder we're in the state we're in.

I'm all for accountability, but I'm also not a single issue voter. I won't vote to toss him out because of that decision alone.

 

[TexUs]

I challenge you to produce one solid example where you can directly show that progressive taxation has ever failed itself or the nation that implemented it.

In case you haven't noticed, we've been in financial trouble for some time now... What more example do you need?
How about our Treasury Secretary cheating on his taxes, or hell: most of the Obama administration for that matter. That's not enough examples that our tax system is broke?

I'm all for accountability, but I'm also not a single issue voter. I won't vote to toss him out because of that decision alone.

You won't vote a guy out for the biggest spending and debt our country has ever seen?
Again... No freaking wonder our country is like it is.

 

[Parmenides]

I challenge you to produce one solid example where you can directly show that progressive taxation has ever failed itself or the nation that implemented it.

Bear in mind, I'd have to look it up, but there's some stat that lesser taxes prove to net the government more revenue than with higher taxes. The government rakes in lots of money when business grows fast with less tax.

I'm all for accountability, but I'm also not a single issue voter. I won't vote to toss him out because of that decision alone.

A single issue can be big enough. But it isn't a single issue. Our people are passing law after law with high spending. repeatedly. Now they don't even bother telling the public what's in their laws. We still don't even know what's in the financial overhaul bill.
You think a purposeful lack of transparency is a good thing? We should hold them accountable on that principle alone.

 

[Hamish Campbell]

In case you haven't noticed, we've been in financial trouble for some time now... What more example do you need?
How about our Treasury Secretary cheating on his taxes, or hell: most of the Obama administration for that matter. That's not enough examples that our tax system is broke?

So your criticism is not with our system of progressive taxation, just individuals lying to avoid it? Please describe a failure of a nation where the root cause was progressive taxation.

You won't vote a guy out for the biggest spending and debt our country has ever seen?
Again... No freaking wonder our country is like it is.

I support the spending, cutting it now would be the wrong thing to do.

 

[Hamish Campbell]

Bear in mind, I'd have to look it up, but there's some stat that lesser taxes prove to net the government more revenue than with higher taxes. The government rakes in lots of money when business grows fast with less tax.

You're thinking of the Laffer curve and it's not "lesser" taxes, but the optimal rate of taxation. Right now we are sliding off the back side of the curve and our economy is suffering because of it.

You think a purposeful lack of transparency is a good thing? We should hold them accountable on that principle alone.

I think it's a terrible thing, government should be as transparent as possible.

 

[TexUs]

So your criticism is not with our system of progressive taxation, just individuals lying to avoid it? Please describe a failure of a nation where the root cause was progressive taxation.

The ability of individuals to avoid taxation stems directly from the progressive tax itself.

 

[Hamish Campbell]

The ability of individuals to avoid taxation stems directly from the progressive tax itself.

What? That doesn't make any sense. Do you understand what a progressive tax structure is? Is that some half-baked attempt at saying "if there were no laws, we couldn't break them"?

 

[Parmenides]

Big Business always finds ways around tax. And government gets too good at taxing them, they can always move overseas as the nuclear option.

What happens is when we target big business, the small businesses (which we need to increase jobs) will be hurt. Not only will it hurt small business, but small business will be at a disadvantage. Where big business has the recources, lawyers, lobbyists, CPA's, political connections, and subsidies to avoid the full weight of tax. Small businesses are stuck paying the full tax without the workarounds and sweet deals. So now we are left with a situation where job growth stalls. And who gets hurt in the end? The little guy. The little guy is stuck with either a poor selection of jobs or no jobs at all. Big business grows more powerful while everyone else suffers. Small businesses is fighting too much financial uncertainty and quota regulations to hire anyone.

So if we flip the situation around and reduce tax, yes, big business benefits still, but it won't be as big of a deal as it is with small businesses. Small Business can now compete. All of the sudden we have tons of business opportunity. People start hiring like mad. Demand for workers goes up, spending goes up, soon we have more situations where the unskilled are trained at the job, rather than situations where jobs are only looking for people with 5+ years of very narrowly focused experience. The unskilled and the poor don't have to compete with 200 resumes. The crappy factory will have to offer more compensation to its workers because valuable workers keep finding better jobs elsewhere.

Low taxes HELP the little guy. That's something conservatives seem to often times forget to articulate.

 

[Parmenides]

edit......

"And government gets too good at taxing them"

changes to:

"And if government gets too good at taxing them"

 

[TexUs]

What? That doesn't make any sense. Do you understand what a progressive tax structure is? Is that some half-baked attempt at saying "if there were no laws, we couldn't break them"?

The more loopholes and tax breaks per class you introduce the greater the money is left on the table with taxes.

Again, all this is proven when Russia went to flat tax.

 

[itanium]

What? That doesn't make any sense. Do you understand what a progressive tax structure is? Is that some half-baked attempt at saying "if there were no laws, we couldn't break them"?

It absolutly makes sense, you use loopholes to reduce your taxable income. You reduce your taxable income and you fall into a lower bracket.

 

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

Government is not an uninvolved 3rd party.

Yes, it is. What you fail to grasp is that government is an uninvolved 3rd party. You seem to think that somehow my trade of my money for groceries involves the government; it doesn't. What you further fail to grasp is that this:

What you fail to grasp is that you are not some island on which your universe operates differently or independent of the rest of your fellow countrymen, or species for that matter.

is called a STRAWMAN.

When will you learn that fallacies kill arguments? And when will you learn that history has shown that governments have always failed.

 

[Knight_of_BAAWA]

Anyway I advocate a highly progressive income tax structure.

It's not your money. You don't have the right to demand the redistribution of it. It's not your money. You have no right to have it taken by a third party. It's not your money. You have no right to enslave others.

 

[Gorankar]

The argument some of you are making boils down to: "My taxes paid for something I would not have, therefore taxes are theft!" The anarchist in this thread is at least consistently crazy enough to say "All taxes are theft no matter what".

And you find that odd? I liken the way our current tax system came into being to racketeering. It should not surprise you that I consider how it is spent to be insult added to injury. If my taxes pay for something they should not have, and I liken the waste of my tax dollars to fraud or theft, that really should not surprise you either.