Who does the money you have legally earned belong to? (solution, economic)
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.
it's actually not a simple question at all. The nature of money, what it is, its role in society as a method of exchange of work and storage of wealth, and its future in a society rapidly moving towards automation and obsolescence of labor, are very complex topics.
Then of course you have the more philosophical study of the individual versus society, and the evolution of our societal obligations as population grows, technology improves, and resources are depleted.
But yeah, let's just pretend it's a simple question for a poll
the obsolescence of labor and the coming automation is already creeping in...
i can draw a parallel here: consider the 19th century viewpoint of warfare as the supreme embodiment of human expression ...the advent of atomic weapons has had an effect on that viewpoint
in the age of oil and now technology human labor has been increased exponentially...in our current system we simply do not need everybody to work...what then???
TRICK QUESTION.
Money, by definition, excludes notes, like federal reserve notes (dollar bills). Since FRNs are IOUs, they 'belong' to the issuer (government). That is why it's a federal offense to destroy FRNs.
The money we earn or produce belongs to the individual that earned it, period. The government is established to provide services that we, the taxpayers, both want and are willing to fund. Period. That is their job-and only one. It is up to us as individuals to be sure that OUR desires are understood and acted upon.
Right, so, in other words, unless you are a small vacation resort or an oil rich monarchy, you need taxes. You can debate the merits of income versus sales taxes, but every modern government needs taxes.
If you do happen to be a small vacation resort, then of course you can just tax tourism. And if you are a state-run oil rich monarchy, then the state owns the oil and is good to go. Presumably everyone knows these aren't reasonable options for the US right?
Nope, it shows that it's possible to run a society without taxation. As you simply cannot fathom how, doesn't make it the only or best option. So you are incorrect that every modern government needs taxes. You can levy fees or do a myriad of other methods to generate revenue for common services without resorting to extorting your citizens.
The Caymans isn't merely a vacation resort, in fact tourism probably accounts for less than 10% GDP, nor is Bermuda, Bermuda is resident to over $2B of Google's international profits, and runs a very lucrative re-export of pharmaceuticals and medical devices industry.
See how that works, no tax, people drop large amounts of currency into your banking system.
the obsolescence of labor and the coming automation is already creeping in...
i can draw a parallel here: consider the 19th century viewpoint of warfare as the supreme embodiment of human expression ...the advent of atomic weapons has had an effect on that viewpoint
in the age of oil and now technology human labor has been increased exponentially...in our current system we simply do not need everybody to work...what then???
The sad thing is that we should be on the eve of a new golden age in leisure, arts, and humanities.
Instead, we will likely continue to worship the ideals of bygone centuries thinking it's the only way to go and drive ourselves in to the dust trying to fight change.
The money we earn or produce belongs to the individual that earned it, period. The government is established to provide services that we, the taxpayers, both want and are willing to fund. Period. That is their job-and only one. It is up to us as individuals to be sure that OUR desires are understood and acted upon.
What are you basing this opinion on? Certainly not the US Constitution.
Do you recognize this:
We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
Nope, it shows that it's possible to run a society without taxation. As you simply cannot fathom how, doesn't make it the only or best option. So you are incorrect that every modern government needs taxes. You can levy fees or do a myriad of other methods to generate revenue for common services without resorting to extorting your citizens.
The Caymans isn't merely a vacation resort, in fact tourism probably accounts for less than 10% GDP, nor is Bermuda, Bermuda is resident to over $2B of Google's international profits, and runs a very lucrative re-export of pharmaceuticals and medical devices industry.
See how that works, no tax, people drop large amounts of currency into your banking system.
Common man, really? You're going to argue that running a country like the Caymans is a real option?
As with any general statement, there is always an exception. Finding an outlier does not invalidate the best fit curve through the rest of the datapoints.
But yes, there are other ways for a government to generate income. They could offer safe haven to foreign companies to shelter their money from their own governments. They could nationalize a resource or means of production and sell its output as a government run service. They could impose tariffs on international trade. They could charge exorbitant fees an taxes on foreign visitors. Heck I suppose they could wage cyber-war and steal money from other countries over the internet.
It should be obvious that all these options either dont generate enough or have dire secondary consequences that render them unfeasible.
it's actually not a simple question at all. The nature of money, what it is, its role in society as a method of exchange of work and storage of wealth, and its future in a society rapidly moving towards automation and obsolescence of labor, are very complex topics.
Then of course you have the more philosophical study of the individual versus society, and the evolution of our societal obligations as population grows, technology improves, and resources are depleted.
But yeah, let's just pretend it's a simple question for a poll
it's actually not a simple question at all. The nature of money, what it is, its role in society as a method of exchange of work and storage of wealth, and its future in a society rapidly moving towards automation and obsolescence of labor, are very complex topics.
Then of course you have the more philosophical study of the individual versus society, and the evolution of our societal obligations as population grows, technology improves, and resources are depleted.
But yeah, let's just pretend it's a simple question for a poll
This is an excellent post to a very stupid question.
There used to be a saying that possession is 9/10's of the law.
The gov. apparently operates 100 % on the one tenth. The democrats want to use that one tenth to capture 90 % of what is earned. That some pretty slick thinking.
The government levies taxes to pay its bills. The fact that we have a $22 trillion National Debt is proof not enough taxes have been collected.
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.
