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.
Lets let people opt out of taxes. But they have to declare who they are. And they don't get to participate in any government services. No police, no fire, and they can't use public roads without an electronic machine to charge the rate. Go ahead, get private security if you can afford it, but the cops won't come if you call 911.
I wonder what would happen to these people's homes when they went on vacation, hell if they go to work.
If you refuse to pay, you don't deserve the protection of the law.
I wouldn't mind paying taxes if our tax dollars didn't go towards two useless wars, bailing out banks, subsidizing tax breaks for people who don't need tax breaks, and subsidizing health insurance companies.
I'd GLADLY pay more in taxes provided we had universal health care, a better mass transit system, a stronger safety net, and higher education that was made more affordable.
And they're not the only ones (http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2010/03/26/1337021/billions-in-tax-benefits-for-banks.html - broken link).
From your article...
"Oh, yeah, this happens all the time," said Robert Willens, an expert on tax accounting who runs a New York firm with the same name. "Especially now, with companies suffering such severe losses."
"Oh, yeah, this happens all the time," said Robert Willens, an expert on tax accounting who runs a New York firm with the same name. "Especially now, with companies suffering such severe losses."
"President Obama falls into the latter camp. He has proposed increasing the income tax burden on families making more than $250,000 and individuals making more than $200,000, while offering new measures to reduce the tax bite for most Americans making less.
One of Obama's proposals is to extend the 2001 and 2003 Bush tax cuts for everyone except high-income tax filers, which was the group that derived the most benefit from those cuts."
Congratulations Informed, because you have proved the commie line to be false.
The article you cited puts Barry in line with one of the fathers of capitalist economic theory.
"A tax upon house-rents, therefore, would in general fall heaviest upon the rich; and in this sort of inequality there would not, perhaps, be anything very unreasonable. It is not very unreasonable that the rich should contribute to the public expense, not only in proportion to their revenue, but something more than in that proportion."
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.
