Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I dont recall anyone proposing that we do away with some type of funding mechanism to operate the government. That doesnt mean that we bend over and just allow the government to eliminate competition and increase costs, thereby making the need to raise more and more taxes, and thus more and more debt.
The very same segment of society who proposes that we expand all of these governmental services are the very same segment which will stand here and jump up and down demanding THEY get free stuff and not a dime in taxes because if someone proposes that the tax base needs to be expanded, we hear "you hate the poor"..
Well the **** needs to be paid for, and increasing the debt isnt the solution. Dont you care about the children who are forced to pay for all of this stuff as we pass on?
the poster that I quoted equated taking from someone to give something to another as "compulsory charity" but that is what taxes are. unless that poster is proposing getting rid of taxes we will always have this system. rather than talking about the supposed injustice of having my tax money go to society why not look at how we can all best benefit from the system and country we live in?
as for the rest of your post, I already commented that these aren't new expenses but a change in the way they will be paid for and to expand access.
the poster that I quoted equated taking from someone to give something to another as "compulsory charity" but that is what taxes are. unless that poster is proposing getting rid of taxes we will always have this system. rather than talking about the supposed injustice of having my tax money go to society why not look at how we can all best benefit from the system and country we live in?
as for the rest of your post, I already commented that these aren't new expenses but a change in the way they will be paid for and to expand access.
There is a huge difference between demanding "compulsory charity" in order to find the basic needs of society vs expanding these into what government shouldnt be involved in and thus increasing the demand for more "charity".
dah.. obamacare, takes over health "insurance" from states to federal manages, student loans, etc..
I anticipated that would be the first example given. obamacare hardly takes over health insurance. it changed the laws that insurance companies had to play by but how is that different from any other industry? the government has not taken over any company or industry and has not decreased competition among the existing companies.
There is a huge difference between demanding "compulsory charity" in order to find the basic needs of society vs expanding these into what government shouldnt be involved in and thus increasing the demand for more "charity".
agreed and this is the core issue: who determines what is necessary and what is excessive? we will have some form of taxes and it is best if we the people determine how we'd like to use those but we will never get rid of taxes.
I anticipated that would be the first example given. obamacare hardly takes over health insurance. it changed the laws that insurance companies had to play by but how is that different from any other industry? the government has not taken over any company or industry and has not decreased competition among the existing companies.
ok lacking "taking over", what has GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT EVER resulted in something being CHEAPER?
agreed and this is the core issue: who determines what is necessary and what is excessive? we will have some form of taxes and it is best if we the people determine how we'd like to use those but we will never get rid of taxes.
When government starts to mitigate or undermine what the private sector is already doing, its excessive.
ok lacking "taking over", what has GOVERNMENT INVOLVEMENT EVER resulted in something being CHEAPER?
roads, public education, and parks are all cheaper than their private sector counterparts. also would like to point out that I never said Sanders' policies would make anything cheaper but rather it would change the way we pay for existing expenses and make them more accessible.
Quote:
Originally Posted by pghquest
When government starts to mitigate or undermine what the private sector is already doing, its excessive.
and when the private sector imposes itself on the citizenship in a way that is harmful to both them and the country it is the job of the government to step in and protect those citizens.
taxes (compulsory charity by your definition) have always existed and aren't going to go away.
Actually, pursuant to the Declaration of Independence, no government instituted to SECURE RIGHTS can tax rights. All it can tax are privileges it grants.
" Any claim that this statute is a taxing statute would be immediately open to severe constitutional objections. If it could be said that the state had the POWER TO TAX A RIGHT, this would enable the state to DESTROY RIGHTS guaranteed by the constitutions through the use of oppressive taxation. The question herein, is one of the state taxing the right of travel by the ordinary modes of the day, and whether this is a legitimate object of state taxation. The views advanced herein are neither novel nor unsupported by authority. The question of the taxing power of the states has been repeatedly considered by the High Court. The right of the states to impede or embarrass the constitutional operations of the the U.S. Government or the Rights which the citizens hold under it, has been uniformly denied."
McCulloch v. Maryland 4 Wheat 316.
You might inquire into which revenue taxable privilege is subject to taxation.
‘When a court refers to an income tax being in the nature of an excise, it is merely stating that the tax is not on the property itself, but rather it is a fee for the PRIVILEGE of receiving gain from the property. The tax is based upon the amount of the gain, not the value of the property.’
- - - John R. Luckey, Legislative Attorney with the Library of Congress, ‘Frequently Asked Questions Concerning The Federal Income Tax’ (C.R.S. Report for Congress 92-303A (1992)).
‘The terms ‘excise tax’ and ‘PRIVILEGE TAX’ are synonymous. The two are often used interchangeably.’
- - - American Airways v. Wallace 57 F.2d 877, 880
‘Excises are taxes laid upon the manufacture, sale or consumption of commodities within the country, upon licenses to pursue certain occupation and upon corporate PRIVILEGES.’ ‘…the requirement to pay such taxes involves the exercise of a PRIVILEGE…’
- - - U.S. Supreme Court, Flint v. Stone Tracy Co., 220 U.S. 107
Last edited by jetgraphics; 10-08-2015 at 11:57 PM..
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
