Libertarian's Forum
Libertarian Forum to discuss politics and free market economics.
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7 Send TopicPrint
Very Hot Topic (More than 25 Replies) Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary? (Read 800 times)
ahhell
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 2137
Joined: Sep 21st, 2016
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #10 - Sep 6th, 2018 at 12:02pm
Print Post  
I have no idea what it should be other than not 100% and not 0% but probably a lot closer to 0.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
The Opposition
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8120
Joined: Apr 30th, 2014
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #11 - Sep 6th, 2018 at 1:44pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Sep 5th, 2018 at 3:22pm:
That question is scary for someone who insists that we have to pay “some” taxes to support the vital functions of government.   Asking them to set a limit forces them to either admit they think taxes should be unlimited or to name a percent figure for a limit they advocate. 


50%.

I think this is the logical answer because at 51% taxation, you've reached the point at which it is impossible for your expenditures to be protecting your property more than redistributing it to others.

And let me be clear that this 50% is single-dip, even if it's going to different levels of government. You don't get 50% of your income taxed away, buy a cat, and then have to pay sales tax on the cat. That's factually greater than 50% taxation.

So let me lay out how this would work. Let's say I make $10,000 a year. If I can come up with receipts to show I've paid $5000 in any taxes by October 2018, I get an immediate duty-free 2018 pass that's good for the rest of the year. If it somehow doesn't get issued until November, then it's good until February next year (though if you do this electronically and track sales tax the same way, on a special card, it could be very quick).
  

This moral relativism of yours is exactly what lets government take this freedom, then that freedom, until we have lost them all.
-SnarkySack
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36212
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #12 - Sep 6th, 2018 at 3:34pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Sep 6th, 2018 at 11:51am:
So, are you claiming that the limit can be set at 10%, because any number above that would indicate that the government plans to redistribute the money?


No, I was just giving an example so you might have a chance of understanding how the Constitutional limits (which allow anything to be taxed at any rate) would actually work if we used them. Congress could legally levy a tax at 100% of all profits, interest, rents, dividends etc.... Can you understand why they wouldn't do that?

Congress could also lay a tax that made every wage and salary earner liable for a tax of $25,000/year... Can you see why they wouldn't do that?

The Constitutional limits on taxation limit Congress' ability to try to extract too much from the people of America by making it contingent on what the people can and will bear if the taxes are uniform and apportioned.

The majority of working people simply can't afford to pay many taxes, and the majority of businesses don't want to pay a very high percentage (which ruins the economy and their reasons for being in business), and businesses have influence in Washington City.

It's by playing the "tax them, not me" game that "progressives" got taxes so high.


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Snarky Sack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4393
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #13 - Sep 7th, 2018 at 3:16pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 6th, 2018 at 3:34pm:
The Constitutional limits on taxation limit Congress' ability to try to extract too much from the people of America



How much is too much?

Need numbers, not platitudes.

  

"I think I'll backtrack." - Jeff
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36212
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #14 - Sep 7th, 2018 at 4:49pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Sep 7th, 2018 at 3:16pm:
How much is too much?

Need numbers, not platitudes.

How much do you think is too much, and why?

Why do you think it has to be quantified with numbers?

The only number that's really important is how much Congress authorizes to be spent.

That can be reduced by orders of magnitude by following the Constitution...

But you hate the Constitution.

Edit: Does anybody know how much Congress has and will authorize to be spent this fiscal year?

Has Congress (or will Congress) make an accounting of it to us so that we know where all of our hard earned money is going to go?

Why not? Who in Congress is responsible for such a lawless travesty of justice?


  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
AlayneLeung
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 716
Joined: Mar 20th, 2015
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #15 - Oct 22nd, 2018 at 11:44am
Print Post  
Let's take a look at "tax" word, we can theorize "tax" word is perhaps an acronym that stands for:

taking
amount(s)
xenophobically

; and United States "Constitutional" Amendment XVI specficially says, "The Congress shall have power to lay and collect taxes on incomes, from whatever source derived, without apportionment among the several States, and without regard to any census or enumeration."

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/amendments-11-27

the Constitution Article I Section 2 says "and excluding Indians not taxed, three fifths of all other Persons."

https://www.archives.gov/founding-docs/constitution-transcript

Yeah, I'd say that form of a tax code theoretically appears to be an acronym that means:

taking
amount(s)
xenophobically

; so let's repeal Amendment XVI by getting ratified a Constitutional Amendment that mandates much more simpler and much more fairer and much more just and much more kinder laws of (not tax code laws) but allowing government(s) to get obligatory investments for use by government(s). Basically, "tax" word is replaced and repealed in favor of "obligatory investments" that shall be no more than 30%, (and lower when possible via Congressional & Presidential legislation). I've got many good ideas for raising money for the United States of America Treasury for Congress to pay off debts that the United States owes.  I call such ideas "obligatory investments", but if United States Federal Government of America can't impose any or all of the following, then maybe state government(s) or local government(s) provide above obligatory investments legislative ideas of 1 through 15 below that my Green Party friend chip burcham and I agree on:

1.a. A $100k obligatory investment on each registered voter that refuses to vote for (Co)President(s) and for (Co) Vice President(s) in future national elections, and each of those $100k obligatory investments doesn't apply to any registered voter that is unable to vote because of him or her being in a nursing home, residential care facility, grouphome, mental institution, jail, prison, incarceration, not knowing where to vote or not being able to vote because of long waiting time(s), or he or she has been declared incapacitated by a judge or jury.

1.b. Each of those $100k would theoretically apply to any registered voter that doesn't care about voting because he or she adamantly refuses to vote because of him or her having disdainment for voting such as saying a comment to Election official(s) or IRS official(s) like "Voting sucks." or "Voting is a waste of time." or "I don't care to vote." or "F*** voting; it's s***", and other similar comments, or shutting or slamming a door on said official(s) because of having disdainment for voting or waving one or both middle finger(s) at said official(s). Basically if person(s) staunchly don't care to make any effort to vote, then why care if said person(s) each must be obligated to invest $100k in United States of America Treasury?

1.c. How about proportionally deducting from $100k amount(s) of money for mistakes that are of not typing or not speaking the entire United States Constitution and all Amendments of it correctly? $100k multiplied by perhaps an estimated 110 million people, that apparently adamantly don't care to vote in (Co)Presidential and (Co)Vice Presidential Election of at least 2,020, equals $11 trillion.

2, How about a 2% obligatory investment on any "lottery" ticket paid for every set of numbers or any number of a Choice(s) P.ck (not Quick Pick) option has been played. (This 2% sales tax is to reduce narcissism and egocentricnesses).

3. How about a 28% obligatory investment for Quick Picks "lottery" to fund government to reduce uneducatednesses and idioticnesses. If we don't have these salestaxes, then dictatorships and uneducatednesses and idioticnesses will prevail, and then United States and allied countries and neutral countries will have great difficulties surviving. Let's remember that paper used to make those tickets and ink or pencil graphite or pencil lead used to mark those tickets consumes resources that could be used for necessities like defense, law personnel, education, and others. And being paid multimillion dollars jackpots is huge money compared to those obligatory investments players provide.

4. I do favor abolition of tariffs because they cause governments on gaia to be at war with each other, but we must have the Consumer Products Safety Commission work with the Central Intelligence Agency and the Internal Revenue Service to develop fair proportional and just health and safety inspection fees of products entering the United States of America.

5. How about 30% obligatory investments of money won from gambling via internet in addition to all other obligatory investments income?

6. How about 8.8% obligatory investments of money from sales of the following weapons to United States Department of Defense: scalar, near fatal biological, near fatal chemical, gravitational, nuclear, and antimatter to fund the Department of Caring? (I recommend a Department of Caring because a Dept . of Peace is way too totalitarian).

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
AlayneLeung
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 716
Joined: Mar 20th, 2015
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #16 - Oct 22nd, 2018 at 11:46am
Print Post  
7. Either outlaw to prevent wildfire(s) or traffic accident(s) or obligate investments of some money from sales of e-cigarettes & cigars & chewing tobacco & recreational marijuana ($1.00 per 0.5 kilograms) & alcohol beverages ($1 per 0.5 liters) & plastic & paper shopping bags that are usually trashed.

8. 25 cents per one centimeter diameter cardboard or paperboard or styrofoam box that gets trashed such as a carryout pizza box/sandwich box & 5 cents per each plastic fork & plastic knife & plastic spoon & paper napkin & styrofoam plate & styrofoam cup & paper cup & paper plate can have a proportional fee obligatory investments.

9. How about a flattax on pollution like $1 per 10 kilograms or $1 per 10 liters?

10. How about Federal Communications Commission personnel cooperate with Internal Revenue Service personnel to impose a $2.40 tax per minute (1 penny per 0.25 seconds) on every minute of every televised episode that depicts and talks about cheaters and paternity maternity tests because children, of such irresponsible parents, are likely being harassed and bullied at their schools, and that tax shall go to the Department of Education?

11. Heoow about a 10% national sales tax on any videogame or computergame that's player(s)' playing status can't be saved in forty-five consecutive minutes or less of playing said videogame or computergame because prolonged playing of such games can be bad for eyes of said player(s).

12. An obligatory investments on money from sales of thin (not lean) dolls because some girls and some boys and some women and some men model their bodies like thin dolls, and that can lead to anorexia or bulimia.

13. Counties and cities and towns can have fair and just health and safety inspection fees of of prostitution services and obligatory investsments of money from sales of or prohibting very violent fictional media products (such as Grand Theft Auto videogames and Dragonball Z episodes and lyrics) , that are in those jurisdictions.

14. We can also impose proportional fees on lethally designed "fictional" weapons (like BattleTech game system weapons) related electronic signals that go through Echeleon to cover the cost of investigating them to determine if those kinds of signals are threatening or not.

15. We can also raise fines to prevent more accidents and have a directly proportional multiplier applied to every subsequent fine equal to the person's first offense of that crime minus 1. So for example: if a person doesn't wear her or his seatbelt and is ticketed for first time not wearing seatbelt, then no fine, but second time is $10,000 multiplied by: 2-1=$10,000 total for that fine. Not wearing a seatbelt can cause any driver to lose control of his or her vehicle, and that can cause accidental death(s) or injuries of innocent person(s). Yes, police officers shall wear cameras to record bad behaviors.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Snarky Sack
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 4393
Location: Republic of Me
Joined: Sep 11th, 2017
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #17 - Oct 22nd, 2018 at 12:13pm
Print Post  
Jeff wrote on Sep 7th, 2018 at 4:49pm:
How much do you think is too much, and why?

Why do you think it has to be quantified with numbers?


Because the other option is that it is unlimited taxation.  Saying, "well, the government shouldn't tax too much," is no limit at all.  The government will simply tax as much as it wants to spend.  Then it will spend even more by deficit spending which is just a tax on future generations.

For you community-decided school tax idea, would you limit it or would it be unlimited?


Quote:
The only number that's really important is how much Congress authorizes to be spent.

That can be reduced by orders of magnitude by following the Constitution...

But you hate the Constitution.

Edit: Does anybody know how much Congress has and will authorize to be spent this fiscal year?

Has Congress (or will Congress) make an accounting of it to us so that we know where all of our hard earned money is going to go?

Why not? Who in Congress is responsible for such a lawless travesty of justice?




The only parts of the constitution I hate are the parts that dehumanize Blacks and Native Americans.  I don't hate the plan for government, but I do recognize that it didn't work.  That's reality. 
  

"I think I'll backtrack." - Jeff
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
SkyChief
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 8118
Location: California Coast
Joined: Aug 18th, 2014
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #18 - Oct 22nd, 2018 at 12:44pm
Print Post  
AlayneLeung wrote on Oct 22nd, 2018 at 11:44am:
...I recommend a Department of Caring....

     A Department of Caring?       OMG

  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Jeff
Libertarian Freedom Member
*****
Offline

Libertarian's Forum

Posts: 36212
Location: USA
Joined: Feb 26th, 2014
Re: Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Reply #19 - Oct 22nd, 2018 at 6:19pm
Print Post  
Snarky Sack wrote on Oct 22nd, 2018 at 12:13pm:
Because the other option is that it is unlimited taxation.
The Constitutional limits on the granted taxing power are very effective at keeping taxes very low, but only if they are used as they should be. But yes, you're right, ignoring those limits makes the power of taxation essentially unlimited and subject to being used as a political tool.
  
Back to top
 
IP Logged
 
Page Index Toggle Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 7
Send TopicPrint
 
Libertarian's ForumLibertarian's ForumFreedom Forum › Why is the Question, “Should Taxes be Limited?” So Scary?
Libertarian's Forum

Libertarian's Forum Information Rules, Agreement and Privacy Policy